Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1984/09/05 - Agenda Packet
CLCAA4 2,4t,�,� QTY OF e RANCHO CLICAMONGA LL `_ CITY � COUNCIL F V Z U > 1977 Lions Park Community Center 9161 Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga, California All items submitted for the City Council Agenda must be in writing. The deadline for submitting these items is 5:00 p.m. on the Wednesday prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's office receives all such items. •A. Pledge of Allegiance to Flag. B. Roll Call: Wright '� , Buquet _, Mikels Dahl —, and King. C. Approval of Minutes: August 14, 1984 August 15, 1984 A. Thursday, September 6, 1984, 7:00 p.m. - HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION, Lions Park Community Center. B. Wednesday, September 12, 1984, 7:00 p.m. - PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, Lions Park Community Center. C. Applications are being accepted for Advisory Commission through September 27, 1984: Potential of seven commission positions available - -three in Alta Loma, two in Cucamonga, and two in Etiwanda. D. Presentation of Service Awards. W City Council Agenda -2- September 5, 1984 - 3. CONSENT CALENDAR The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non - controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. A. Approval of Warrants, Register No's. 84 -09 -05 and Payroll ending 8/19/84 for the total amount of $610,140.53. B. Alcoholic Beverage Application No. AB 84 -21 for On -Sale Beer 6 Wine Eating Place License, Linda S. 6 Robert B. Hermes, 8798 19th Street. C. Alcoholic Beverage Application No. AB 84 -22 for Off -Sale Beer a Wine Eating Place License, Jasminderjit S Manjeet Grewal, 6075 Archibald Avenue. D. Release of Bonds: 0833 Highland Avenue - Single Family House; owner, Joe S Maria Dias. Release: Faithful Performance Bond $5,000.00 • (Road) RESOLUTION NO. 84 -230 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 9833 HIGHLAND AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORE E. Approval of acceptance of the Improvements of Bear Gulch Place, Arrow Route and Arrow Park Grading (20- 4532 - 8005). Accept: Maintenance Bond $ 8,749.00 Release: Faithful Performance Bond $87,490.50 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -231 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS OF BEAR GULCH PLACE, ARROW ROUTE AND ARROW PARK GRADING AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A Is NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 1 7 8 9 11 12 15 City Council Agenda -3- September 5, 1984 F. Approval of acceptance of Street Improvements for CUP 16 83 -04 at 6386 Sapphire. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -232 18 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR CUP 83 -04 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK G. Approval of award of contract for design services of 19 Amethyst Avenue Sidewalk Improvement (East side) between Base Line Road and Monte Vista Street to Wilson- Bryant s Associates for the amount of $6,500.00 plus 108 for contingencies. H. Approval of award of contract for design services for 31 the reconstruction of Ramona Avenue to Derbish, Guerra 6 Associates for an amount not to exceed $5,580.00 and will be funded by Gas Tax 206 and 207 funds. I. Approval of Subordination Agreement submitted by Kenco 46 Machine Inc. for DR 81 -33, located at 10234 4th Street. • RESOLUTION NO. 84 -233 49 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, APPROVING A SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT FROM KENCO MACHINE INC. AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN SAME J. Approval of Deferred Compensation Contract b 50 Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -234 55 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADOPTING AN EMPLOYEES' DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENTS RELATED TO SAID PLAN BY THE DEFERRED COMPENSATION ADMINISTRATOR K. Approval of Resolution proclaiming Rancho Cucamonga's 56 official belt buckle. u City Council Agenda -4- September 5, 1984 RESOLUTION NO. 84-235 56 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, PROCLAIMING RANCHO CUCAMONGA'S "OFFICIAL BELT BUCKLE L. set public hearing for October 17, 1984 for appeal of Planning Commission decision approving private open space credit to the A -M Company for Tract 12414. M. Set public hearing for October r ?, 1984 for approval of Environmental Assessment and Development District Amendments 84 -02 A, B, and C, 19th Street corridor land use amendments. N. Set public hearing for October, 1984 for approval of Environmental Assessment and eneral Plan Amendments 84 -02 A, B, and C, 19th Street corridor land use amendments. • A. CONSIDERATION OF MOBILE_ HOME PARR RENT ADJUSTMENT 58 ORDINANCE - The City Council will continue discussion of an ordinance providing for a maximum rent adjustment allowed annually in mobile home parks. Item continued from August 15, 1984 meeting. ORDINANCE NO. 231 (second reading) 60 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 8.10 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE, PROVIDING FOR AN ANNUAL MAXIMUM RENT ADJUSTMENT B. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON TH INCREASE OF MOBILE HOME PARR SPACE RENTS - The City Council will discuss an Ordinance imposing a moratorium on rent increases through December 19, 1984. ORDINANCE NO. 232 (urgency) 66 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON THE INCREASE OF MOBILE HOME PARK SPACE RENTS, AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF City Council Agenda -5- September 5, 1984 • 5 ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING 67 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -08 - R.J. INVESTMENTS - The development of a 126 unit apartment complex on 9.03 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8 -14 du /ac), located on the west side of Baker, south of Foothill - APN 207 - 580 -57, 58 and APN 207 - 571 -79. 68 REVIEW 84 -22 - DENT,= - The development of a 924 unit apartment complex to be built in 3 phases on approximately 58.3 acres of land on the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Haven in the MH Development District - APN 202 - 271 -59, 60. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 111 84-02 - Amendments to the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, Sections 17.02.110, 17.08.090, 17.08.050 and 17. 02.020, Title 17 of the Municipal Code, in relation to time extensions, public hearing notification, transition of density, neighborhood compatibility (site plan design, landscaping, open space, grading, • architecture), and preservation of viewshed. ORDINANCE NO. 233 (first reading) 125 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 16, SECTION 1.401.11.2 OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE, IN RELATION TO TENTATIVE MAP TIME EXTENSIONS. ORDINANCE NO. 234 (first reading) 126 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 17, SECTIONS 17.02.110, 17.08.090, 17.08.050, AND 17.02.020 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, IN RELATION TO TIME EXTENSIONS, PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION, TRANSITION OF DENSITY, NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY (SITE PLAN DESIGN, LANDSCAPING, OPEN SPACE, GRADING AND ARCHITECTURE), AND PRESERVATION OF VIEWSHED il City Council Agenda -6- September 5, 1984 • D. ENVIRONMENTAL_ ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 133 8.4 -03_ - An amendment to the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, Title 17 of the Municipal Code, amending Chapter 17.08 Residential Districts, regarding residential development standards and, in particular, amendments to the Low - Medium residential development standards. ORDINANCE NO. 235 (first reading) 149 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 84 -03, AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 17.08, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, REGARDING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS E. FORMATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO, 3 ALONG 156 BASE LINE ROAD FROM TEAR WAY TO EAST OF HERMOSA AVENUE - A public hearing to determine whether the public necessity, health, safety or welfare requires the formation of Underground Utility District No. 3 along Base Line Road from Teak Way to East of Hermosa Avenue. • RESOLUTION NO. 84 -236 164 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, FORMING UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 3 ALONG BASE LINE ROAD FROM TEAR WAY TO EAST OF HERMOSA AVENUE F. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR CUP 84 -06 - MA 167 ASSOCIATES - Review and consideration of a supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for development of a regional shopping center on 100 acres of land in the Victoria Planned Community to be located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, west of Interstate 15 - APN 227 - 201 -35 and APN 227- 211 -30. Item continued to September 19, 1984 meeting. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CUP 84 -06 - HFA ASSOCIATES 167 - Conceptual review of a master plan for the development of a regional shopping center on 100 acres of land in the Victoria Planned Community to be located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, west of Interstate 15 - APN 227 - 201 -35 and APN 227- 201 -30. Item continued to September 19, 1984 meeting. E City Council Agenda -8- September S, 1984 B. LOCATION OF WEST VALLEY O RT FACILITIES - The City 212 Council will consider urging the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors to utilize the Foothill Communities Law and Justice Center as the sole court facility in the West Valley'area exclusive of the Chino court facility. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -237 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, STRONGLY URGING THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO UTILIZE THE FOOTHILL COMMUNITIES LAW AND JUSTICE CENTER AS THE SOLE COURT FACILITY IN THE WEST VALLEY AREA EXCLUSIVE OF THE CHINO COURT FACILITY CLOSED TO EKSCUTIVE SESSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1984, 6:00 PM TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL RATTERS • f;7-- —_ - - ..'r.... -: n. .dLi_ .e. a .. ..I PAS + PAYEE :Ir ✓:.. ..F ndnHr rv1 F'n.d rl, . _— 541 FAeijA, ; ✓l :E :FJ \L :5._5 21 " X7.5 C„ xa _ r_,. ., !fn ✓L .L- 15 111: a 1 119t 151.!'f .]7 Rk_; a -_ - .. r..I n 1'. 1 : 7 . ,„rJ _:11 11 .. . . 585 PUBLIC �-ECS =l T 1E: A;S_._, ,u3 Li:AT I_'. , /EL`._ _% °T'. [C .,,, 14 ?6 Ii. 43; PU17E n,SAN - k'_i_l. :5:',1 iz .C( 451 P L 4 A,.TU.L11V, i1 n T,,Lii_:v `iA!F 1LcL F,W :5.v_ (7i .: F - - SAL A- 1. - - .. CT -. nc (: , ✓ .cd i.AA_L,, . .1 1 4C I.,A-I / "[r_ _ ,: I' -[ - it _� .1 -'. II i.7 . 474 RA NC m; E'd., IiAL - LE >•1= _`F i!Y[GeL °- 'S °' 1 ^GC 515 RAP1:: LATA, 1N:. cl S;v -S6 L S1 Cs „All 155:2 " 202 MEGJNTS Li THE Uni...f iALIF CLCA S(V;NAF .1i•0 f'aIR1i. IAI-1 1((,(( - iS2`A7Cka� ;C. =;C.. :, !L( to L.T.= .. "i._F ___ -- ^7.t 112 Rlli _ANa kA^``. '.1L6. 11.° INER 111m, 155., . s. S -� 276 RlVin. U oL[ rI III ,r PlE `n1 - ,1 HER Ii EP la[„ 51 i ERSIOE CON`TRUCTI04 LC FF °CRESS PAYPFNI A2 —" -- 144(7? 227.353.14 BINSGN F,HT IL I2ER ial. ::NC SAFE 144(S IC(.91 GE.s, CE3614 Fnt kEf UNC 1541; 12..,0 524 R06T, l_,L.zr 1., r' - . - _,r0. 21114 145:: 1,f CC .If 303 SAN., :._IA_ _ .1Ln ,Jk, Y I•.511 ' 1JTEGC 3TAFY _—kLUI :C, 7 ^: 2, Li ,5..(EFEn - ;TNE;. T7FRS 154:4 ?�(79(7.4f 440 SANCHEc , MAF6E k([ %LA- 34515 12.00 451 SCMnAAS j f LC[ "IF! i "_ 14416 21.'° - =35 SE -FL:, J'::Y ' "1: L'T:(" °:,7 .'. f IL 154f1 5t,% LT :L 1- r.: I- I551F 551 :hIrFE'•r I] [515 3, .1f SRIIPCET- PFrTCCFAPHERS 1 ' Y 1: CPL ^F PRINT 154;( ]1.2( 415 SLIMS fEY HCE nc1 14121 -2.71 36 BEA SMICERLE re- :'L TES [.:._ 154'] 51 .CO • f;7-- —_ - -- : "•:v Uc--- MG -1 w'6 FF.n!•t. 55E 5nlin S '•A 1: F i AI ,.p( -- -17 SIiGTME Rn [ „I IF: nf. id [` CC. - F22 F•44, E `_GF 1F1F Ii FYC +44'5 .I••r, F( aT SQUItIQ,N CP L:FI RN IA :[,. S['4 FA,Yah <rF - Er•E: -c 317 St,UII'[nN LAL if -R,iA i CC. lL'"61 It j n 11 I;• Ii[~� .19 aJLln.n _ _♦:A -F e•1 v 1,,:.. II I5'•. .(,f° 355 STANICN +.J6iFFI'Sr INC i..E a /Gl P'i uAIF,. LAL :44}1 11;.72 i16IIG.L -n; C =r.Y. NP I; ^Jt r +5/} c /nN b If .. 14�, 1.'.0.21 33C 5TA11 L'.L F£ FAT 1•• LI'r'C' r[L it •. 111 "'.a I•.FI I {:.. « + . ; 71 li . r 1 375 jAAh rA \r Fl: -r "+ !"..`iRP "T FV I:: 155'7 cgI rc Ei3 i«AN rLeli^ •4 - - �� .. {o \L 1443P �r •l.rC 551 I E p 1 %, TAL La I:.:r 1:, v!G:, (: rA 111,'r Fal -C' 1143, 14 . 1? ci4 :'rA_ [` a�5' 14:.,4• ICZ TIR- v_LRiI _aF._ .i °a. ] lI, '=FI %C 1455: IT.5( 1£1 CERI Cr th A�., f.,F iA 1I[.' F :'.1`.'_ MAI F F; At 14444 2' .2(: 4BS CITY GF Li LAi\: :!1 + t_VF _ 1444: 12L. 74 aTo ThL '.- ::L- '454r I[i.2' Ei 11 .PP.. 11 -- - STB -- CARL «ARREI : ' L ' - ';ii ; 477 WE ii GLSL 6IF._ 4454 T71.f2 , CI _< ;_ A- -�ln St/ 4;.75 �+IF,T E EYt Er,"INA 1L, C..AVT ERLY IUL;'•T I45'1 aI•(C s II :l Ti'" P,6AI1 - - -!r TPEF 365 0. «._.:.r- r„1'.l i`. ,•� IPEk ITEMS .<•1 }41.1( CX CCRP:RATIGN JLtY r'I Y +CI lh_ _ rTN R ITEP` :44”, ,2S1 .55 -� ecC :LPL - .FC1L: nEE CA: .I FFL!E: i4>c 4•.4( 1 "TAL .NrC -_ i�.- COPY__�a. OPLw N10M MR RACQ K wvwm e1mmm I., M AkOWk M.wy. C. a S a..", lCI `WQ BeLYfeShcLO sww.w., CIO, MIN ._...... w...., mss.= .Y11.� ~ I. tyms) a IKeNSf(S) fes No 7n -bele Beer � 41ne :.etiog _line SrreN rdw s.. s.DN p 06 n.r leauonca sfCEIR Nn. a'w.pII.W "O lom 'lOi7 Iu�iM11 s. NPNttA Of untGNrp) ram. I.rnin M& oa.: BZbf.zL, Linde b. s -Obart a. f. Trtr[(EI a TIUIIS.SCTIDW31 tK. TYR ter :ef. I'I.X 0l 4 Irw M eM1IPw 3 B .Yt:atiYrb i 4.N.n d Mwr -IMBw rJ Yawl 8798 1' th. Lt. O'Am�oCGUCneo a �l;'C_ = 91nD Toro S S, eInnis Unn..s. r. MI. lau a. N.n r.Y n.r smn...nk..s d a MsnYT 10. 1.... T^• ...r .i.I.M1d ..y M M Pr.Yin.^. N 1M Akdni. finial. Grand M w r.aYNnwn d a. D.P.an.n M. d.im N M. •.It 11. fyhn .'"fE5'• w.w a il..n Y w IO.n.n an..lnnm nAkP JMI M A.anN P.n d MI .Pllk.l�m. • M1I Xnl Ir wll ml .id.w w aaN w i< yuplieta d a li�. ww n M w l d .n kIt. r.Old n . In .M e.•am. G.nPW M. N. Serf W GUIMNP Cwnry ol .._.___-' mardln0 ._..__.DeN__B�!.?4_.._._.._._. 41 .nn �w .M • .inn 4w r M .M M Mn wnMry h .n� -V w +N..nN�.w n w w R. y.r�r ti Ow.�wn IL ♦INICAM y ♦Fr► If. STATE M CALIMMIA Can, N --- —'= �Y- _:C,r6giV- iE�.--------- .DeM1... �(. 4L?4 ............. nl �w . .M� N Y M hw -) ~ N. gMn.n n.,In •• �•M 'M w•.n� m�In .M.1.Mn ..�. o.iw.Y .w nnMn n- VwM nw h 0...nrni w~ ..M.� n Y. a..w -.n n+nn �w'•. n w ...+.m` il De NW MrW MIIw rM LYwt Fa D.S..fmIM f/w OWs A" aS.e m R.- A ok.. p I44"" /.Pr.. i y p--------------- .-------- .. ....------------------ .._cones "am .._..._... ..:_.__.,... /.__...._..._.....- ❑ekaawilw w...... .. _.l.Mw._------ ------- ............ osb w ....... _,._... -p TIC .................... .. Pwar.. w•w I 0 M.- Y" �- H4 6. ne C.n".l Ad �..Wl '�p �M.H� 'NP W-1 ..... .... - --- -- 'n. , � C..nl ------ ...... .. ..... OF CALHOIN'F . ........ . wl 1. ............ --- ... .... .... .......... 14 AlItICANT ------- ,,ON HERE ... " I", ...... ... — ... __- .......... ------ - -------- sr TRANS"Rol APVtICAnoN . ............ . . ..... 'IAIE OF CAHOINI. IS .... . . ..... ...m.µ.. ...... 11 lNo. ..... — — — — — — n. C-'n end chdv �-":; m -------------- F" A .... pod 0 ---------------- cou wt V� 'aW. 9012 s—.d 'ppI'Y[ T.n Mrmv OF A-K� 15' AP OW LK Ng(M RE ttP T,(Sl OF IPAHNC"O I 0 M.- Y" �- H4 6. ne C.n".l Ad �..Wl '�p �M.H� 'NP W-1 ..... .... - --- -- 'n. , � C..nl ------ ...... .. ..... OF CALHOIN'F . ........ . wl 1. ............ --- ... .... .... .......... 14 AlItICANT ------- ,,ON HERE ... " I", ...... ... — ... __- .......... ------ - -------- sr TRANS"Rol APVtICAnoN . ............ . . ..... 'IAIE OF CAHOINI. IS .... . . ..... ...m.µ.. ...... 11 lNo. ..... — — — — — — n. C-'n end chdv �-":; m -------------- F" A .... pod 0 ---------------- • • • DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: OWNER: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT September 5, 1984 City Council and City Manager GVGM04G` a a Z 1977 Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer Release of Bond and Notice of Completion for a Single Family Residence located at 9833 Highland Avenue Joe & Maria Dias 9833 Highland Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701 RELEASE: Faithful Performance Bond: $5,000.00 The construction of the public improvements for 9833 Highland Avenue have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and it is recommended that the work be accepted and that the City Engineer sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. Respe9gully submitted, LBH Attachments 4 n u RECORDING REQUESTED BY; CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which interest or estate is: JOE AND MARIA DIAS 2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 9320 -C Base Line Road, P. 0. Box 807, Rancho Cucamonga, • California 91730. 3. On the 5th day of September, 1984, there was completed on the hereinafter described real property the work of improvement set forth in the contract documents far: 9833 HIGHLAND AVENUE 4, The name of the original contractor for the work of improvement as a whole was: JOE AND MARIA DIAS S. The real property referred to herein is situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, California, and is described as follows: 9833 HIGHLAND AVFNUE The street address of said property is 9833 HIGHLAND AVENUE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation, Owner Date 1-10yd B. Hobbs, City Engineer /0 • RESOLUTION NO. 69- 65--O3CR ?y'a ?0 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 9833 HIGHLAND AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for 9833 Highland Avenue have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of September, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: J ATTEST: Beverly A. Authe et, City Clerk j as Jon 0. Mikels, Mayor E • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 5, 1984 = OLD 1977 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Dave Blevins, Senior Public Works Inspector SUBJECT: Acceptance of the Improvements of Bear Gulch Place, Arrow Route and Arrow Park Grading The Bear Gulch Place, Arrow Route and Arrow Park Grading (20- 4532 -8005) Improvement Project has been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. It is recommended that the Council approve the acceptance of the project, authorize the final payment and direct the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder and release performance surety and retention and accept the 10% maintenance bond for the required one -year maintenance period. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council accept as complete the Bear Gulch Place, Arrow Route and Arrow Park Grading (20- 4532 -8005) Improvements and pass the attached resolution authorizing the City Engineer to file the Notice of Completion and release performance bonds and retention and authorize final payment. Respe {tfully submit d, LBH:DBj as Attachments /2 r, LJ MAINTENANCE BOND Bond No. B 52 96 22(M) EXECUTED IN 4 COUNTERPARTS RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY • The P:rmhrn 0,7,d (or thie MEAD OFFICE. PHILADELPHIA. PENNSYLVANIA L`ond is inc:aCcd IS.a shArry 0o the Yenomanc c Gond.' KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that we VANCE CORPORATION P.O. Box 2112 Upland, CA 91786 as Prrr- ::)al, and RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY. ,, Pennsylvania corporation, as Surety, are ne'd and Inm'v pound junto CITY OP RANCHO CUCANOIIGA a; Clbliy,te. In the full and lust sum of EIGHT THOUSAND, SEVEN NONDRED FORTT -NII(E and NO /100 ---- -- Dollars IS 8.749.00- I. fnr the payment of which sum, well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, admimsira. tors, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents, WHEREAS, Ine said Prmapal entered into a contract with thti Obligati orted on or about June 26919il m IMPROVEMENTS OP DEAR GULCII PLACE, ARROW ROUTE AND ARROW PARK GRADDIG WHEREAS, said contract provides ;hat the Principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee R)r pre period of 0UE Year(s) after approval of the final estimate on said job, by the owner, against all Jsiecis in •.eorkmanshlp and materials which may become apparent during said period, and NOW,THEREFORE,THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that'fv0mn ONE year(s) O r" r, cf acproval of the said contractr the work done under the term; nf;ald c,h -ict shall dl<dbse pan. :.0 rk �nalshlp m the e.ecu;ion of said work, and Lhe carrying put of the terms of said cOntrar,t, or it shall avnN.v chat J :'echne materials warn furnished thereunder. then this obligation snail remain In full force and vlr tile, rnhorms10 this Instrument shall be void. Signed and sealed thrs 3rd day of August 19 94 . "I;ness VANCE CORPORATION Pnncmal ® ELIAW _ N URAJ�CE y'vIPANY By 9 ` f re ! . 1' aot Ancmey Irvhen BOB 23M ED. Tat 13 0 RECORDING REQUESTED BY: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. e. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which Interest or estate is: THE IMPROVEMENTS OF BEAR GULCH PLACE, ARROW ROUTE AND ARROW PARK GRADING (20- 4532 -8005) 2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 9320 -C Base Line Road- P. 0, Box 807, Rancho Cucamonga, • California 91730, 3. On the 7th day of August, 1984, there was completed on the hereinafter described real property the work of improvement set forth in the contract documents for: THE IMPROVEMENTS OF BEAR GULCH PLACE, ARROW ROUTE AND ARROW PARK GRADING (20- 4532 -8005) 4. The name of the original contractor for the work of improvement as a whole was: VANCE CORPORATION S. The real property referred to herein is situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, California, and is described as follows: NORTH SIDE OF ARROW ROUTE FROM 900 FEET . TO 1331 FEET. EAST OF VINEYARD AVENUE, BEAR GULCITPLACE FROM ARROW ROUTE 60 632 FEET a NORTH CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation, Owner Lloyd u s, Ity ngsneer toft" iy r�L 0 RESOLUTION 40. 09-GF B2ER' P -;� 21 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMDMGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS OF BEAR GULCH PLACE, ARROW ROUTE AND ARROW PARK GRADING AND AUTMORI2IHG THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Bear Gulch Place, Arrow Route and Arrow Park Grading (20- 4532 -8005) have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOM, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of September, 1984. AYES: HOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: ever y —A— et, Z, ty erk 3aa 1.5, ti on ke 5, aypr K] 9 .nmv nv n n w.nvn rt rr a AenMr n STAFF REPORT DATE: September 5, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Dave Blevins, Senior Public Works Inspector 197; SUBJECT: Acceptance of Street Improvements for CUP 83 -04 at 6386 Sapphire The Street Improvements for CUP 83 -04 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. It is recommended that the Council approve the acceptance of the project direct the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council accept as complete the Street Improvements for CUP 83 -04 pass the attached resolution authorizing the City Engineer to file the Notice of Completion. Respectfully subm' ted, J , LBH:D jaa Attachments Y. �a 197; SUBJECT: Acceptance of Street Improvements for CUP 83 -04 at 6386 Sapphire The Street Improvements for CUP 83 -04 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. It is recommended that the Council approve the acceptance of the project direct the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council accept as complete the Street Improvements for CUP 83 -04 pass the attached resolution authorizing the City Engineer to file the Notice of Completion. Respectfully subm' ted, J , LBH:D jaa Attachments 0 RECORDING REQUESTED BY CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. 0. 80x 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: I. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which interest or estate Is: CUP 83 -04 2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 9320 -C Base Line Road, P, 0, Box 807, Rancho Cucamonga, • California 91730. 3, On the 1st day of August, 1964, there was completed On the hereinafter described real property the work of Improvement set forth in the approved Improvement Plans for: CUP 83 -04 4. The name Of the Original Contractor for the work Of Improvement as a whole was: COGUN INDUSTRIES S. The real property referred to herein is situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, California, and is described as follows: IN SAPPHIRE STREET FROM CENTERLINE TO 33 FEET WEST OF CENTERLINE AND FROM ORANGE STREET 646 FEET NORTHERLY The street address of said property is 6386 SAPPHIRE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation, Owner Date 7—oyrg. Hobbs, City Engineer r 1 U RESOLUTION NO. 09- 05=D4CR- a y '-? 3 1- • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR CUP 83 -04 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for CUP 83 -04 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of September, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Authe et, City Clerk jaa /8 Jon D. Mikels, Mayor • • n U • DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT September 5, 1984 City Council and City Manager Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer Richard Cota, Assistant Civil Engineer 1977 Award of Contract for Design Services of Amethyst Avenue Sidewalk Improvements Between Baseline Road and Monte Vista Street. Attached is a tabulated summary of bid proposals received for the above subject design services. The Engineering Staff has anaylzed the bids and finds them correct and acceptable. The proposed design will include sidewalk, curb, gutter and cross - gutter improvements along the east side of Amethyst Avenue from Baseline Road to the Southern Pacific Railroad, north thereof, and from Monte Vista Street to 400+ feet south thereof. No sidewalk exists at these locations and pedestrian traffic is forced to cross lawns and walk along the edge of roadway pavement. The design services will be financed from Transportation Development Act (TOA) funds, commonly referred to as "SB 821 ", to be provided by the Southern California Association of Governments. The Engineering Staff has selected the firm of Wilson- Bryant & Associates as the lowest responsible bidder at $6,500.00. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council award the contract for design services on Amethyst Avenue Sidewalk Improvements to Wilson- Bryant & Associates and authorize execution of the attached "Agreement for Consultant Services" at the contract amount of $6,500.00 plus 10% for contingencies from the SB 821 fund and Systems Development fund. Resp tfully submi ted, UL Attac ments /5 CITY OF RANCHO C0CAM0NGA SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS PROJECT: AMETHYST AVENUE SIDEWALK DATE: August 16, 1984 LOCATION: Base Line Road to Monte Vista Street ACCOUNT: 26- 4637 -8178 WILSON- BRYANT DERVISH- GUERRA L. A. WAINSCOTT AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT 1. Preliminary Survey Services T17T 7 32;QOO:TiO TF4OO.DO 2. Utility Research and Coordination $ 404.00 S 380.00 $1,000.00 3. Prepare and Maintain Design Files $ 220.00 E 220.00 S 100.00 4. Construction Plans $2,558.00 $3,480.00 $2,200.00 S. Construction Quantities 6 Engineer's Estimate $ 416.00 $ 280.00 $ 400.00 0 6. Contract Specifications $ 736.00 $ 600.00 $1,000.00 7. Prepare Legal Descriptions $ 180.00 $ 460.00 $1,000.00 S. Attend Coordination 6 Review Meetings $ 192.00 S 540.00 S 800.00 9. Attend Pre - Construction Conference $ 384.00 --- -0 - - -- $ 500.00 and provide design coordination during construction 10. Prepare Design Schedule --- -0 - - -- --- -0 - - -- 5 100.00 (60 calendar days) (56 calendar days) TOTAL T 60G.w ;BOO 59,6Orw 1. Construction Survey (Supplemental) $1,900.00 $3,200.00 $2,000.00 Cuncract • AGREES ^EAT FOR CONS "L -ANT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 5 th day of UPTrMRrQ , 1984 , between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a Municipal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and 'WILSON - BRYANT & ASSOCIATE hereinafter referred to as "Consultant ". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City desires to prepare designs, construction plans, specifications and cost estimates for Amethyst Avenue Sidewalk project from Baseline Road to Monte Vista Street hereinafter referred to as "Project "; and WHEREAS, the Consultant has'the necessary skills and qualifications and licences required by law to perform the services required under this f• Agreement in connection with said Project; and WHEREAS, the City desires to retain the Consultant for services hereinafter described in connection with said Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 5th day of SEPTEMBER , 198 4, authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties that: 1. DEFINITIONS. As used in this Agreement, the following definitions shall be applicable: a. Consultant. Consultant shall mean WILSON- BRYANT & ASSOCIATES a California Partnershio located at 143 South Brea Bouleva•d Brea, California 92621 " - _ b. Cam. City shall mean the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a l., Municipal Corporation, located at 9320 Base Line Road, Suite C, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. _I -a / E c. City Council. City Council snail mean the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. d. Services. Services shall mean the services to be performed by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. e. Satisfactory. Satisfactory Shall mean satisfactory to the City Engineer of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES. Consultant agrees to perform for, and furnish to, the City the services described in Exhibit A, "Scope of Services" attached hereto. 3. T ?ME FOR PERFORMANCE. The Consulant agrees that it shall delingently and responsibly- pursue the performance of the services required of it by this Agreement and that said services shall be completed within 60 • i calendar days after execution of this Agreement in accordance with the Project Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B. If a delay beyond the control of the Consultant is encountered, a time extension may be mutually agreed upon in writing by the City and the Consultant. The Consultant shall present documentation satisfactory to the City to substantiate any request for a time extension. 4. PAYMENT. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, upon satisfactory completion of the services described in the "SCOPE OF SERVICES ", (Exhibit A) the Consultant shall. be compensated based upon the actual time spent on the Project at the Consultant's standard hourly rates attached hereto as Exhibit C, plus outsic'e services, but shall not exceed a total amount of S— 6 05no nn -2- 1'1- n �-A In the event cr .uu,oriz,t ion, in ., ;'•ng, by the City of chanoes from the wort as indica -, t.o+ibit A or ',,r utl+cr turit`.eri permission authorizing ad.litionel wor'< -lot 'nere�n, adJi«ior.al compensation shall be allowed for such ex'ra wor'c based upon the above hourly rates. The Consultant she!! :a-rt '.nvvu,s .J+•c'+ specify the area where work was C011lpleted and the associated time for com0'.etion to the City for approval. The Consultant agrees 'o invoice the City for services rendered not more omen than once a month. 'Work perform•_d at the request of the City, outside the limit scecif iod +n t_., Agreement, i5 to be designated as "Extra Work" on monthly invoices. flat 'performed 49 can.noction with an authorized written charge order will be so designated on said invoice. S. r� ^f gn PPgpr Till! -:ity shah! -provide the fo'.lowing items of • support to ',nu Cons'i'tant: a, proviJe a staff engineer to wor'< wiln the C.+sul ant for the pnrpote of giving advice and to prov;de coordination within the scope or this Agreement. It. Make ovallz% a and provic'e all existing data and information relevant to the prouosud Protect. c. Provide all right -of -way engineering and negotiations. d. Provide environmental documents and processing. e. Provide traffic index. f. Prov i•!e plans and spec i f i c, t i ons f^ -r Kidding. g. Prepare and mail final utility notice. 6. SiI ;PFNSIf p, T" +•l+';If.TlCul n;l IF AGRCEMEMT. The City • may, at any time, suspend, terminate or abandon this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant at least fifteen (115) days prior to .3_ :2,3 n u written notice. Upon rt -Z!pt of sail] nc Cce, t;;u Consa L'm;t shall immediately cease a:l work under this fgr�nnznt, 6. �„ notice prow ido5 otl+erw ise. Within thirty - Five (16) drls of .d ry icu or I „ .. �,. '.re, the City shall pay to the Consultant all earned and unpaid fee, anU vests based upon the rates attached iiareto os Exhibit C, plus outs do ,er•r•ces, but the swn so said shall not exceed a dollar flgUre whicli burs the same proportionate relationship to S 6, 500. `)J as the quantity of work Como latad by the ronsu I tan Sears to 100% of the work prescribed herein. if !.he City suspends, ternina tes or, abandons a portion of this Agreement such suspension, termination or, abandomnent shall not mare void or invalidate the remainder or this Agreement. 1, BREACH OF CC';T?ACr. If the Consultant defaults in the performance of any of the Lormi, or condition; of this Agreement, it shall have • ten (10) days after servlca %ti it of vrltten notice of such default in which to a.;re the default by rcndl-r!ng a satisfa,.:ory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default with!n such period of time, the City shall have the r4,-:ht, notwithstanding any other pi of this Agreement, to terminate chi; Agreement wiUm.:t further notice and without prejudice to any other rruedy to which ht may -le entitled at l.,w, in ecuity or under this Agreement. S. 0l49EgSH1P OF C0 ;9P^FvTS. 'Upon satisfactory completion of or in the event of terminatian, susu_,okin or aoandumnent - this Agreement, a'1 original document,, r!es i�•.n5, dr•,.vings and 11CLUS prepared in the Course of providing 'lie services to ;,e !,,rrormed purs,ioot 'o this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of • by the City without the permission of the Consultant. 4 ,-,,v L 9. I'lO EP EI16 EVT C ^NTRACTC3 The Cc se'.!ent is I'd 51,111 at all times remain as to the City a;.r'nel ly in::apen�ent contractor. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents sha11 have control over the conduct of the Consultant or any of the Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except as herein sec forth. ,.e C�nsu!..ant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. 10. LEGAL RESPONS[01LITIES. The Consul'ant shall keep itself informed of State and Federal lass and re;ulations.ahich in any manner affect those emololed by it or in any way affect the performdnce of its service pursuant to this Agreement., The ;;gn,ultant shall at al: times observe and comply with all such lmvs and renv1,t i nits. The City, its officers and • employees 0311 nut be fable al 'aw or in reuity aCCdS+,oned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this s_.tior. 11. ,ASS:Sn'�rNT. The Consultant sha +1 not assign tl;e performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any moneys due hereunder, withdut the prior written consent of t:ne City. 12. INSURANCE, The Consultant shall maintain general iiahility and workers compensation insurance coverage effective on the first day of work and in full force throughout the full term of this Aureement. The policy or policies shall be underwritten by insurers a6v.tad to operate in the State of California, on forms no less broad in the ,I. oe of coverage than standard forms. Entire limits of liabili'y must ba! certified but in no event shall limits he less than specified horeinbelew. Any aggregate limitation of liability shall LP suparate as to the risks arising out of the Subject matter of this proposal. -5- Coveraue WUrRers' Ca n7ens at ion S Cho. jp•.r's I. , SIOJ,'JO0. C0 Comprehensive Genera! Li abi!i tv/'CL 7 dren on s rve :vc,OCo.Co Auto Liability Comoinec single limit each or,curan•ce :r ree:;c >t�:, tn. _.,••,•il. ant _fees to ..:.uosit with the City, certificates of in•:ran,_e 'A sat l;ry t',o City that insurance reouirements of this Agreement have been ComoI h:d w L.h, and to 'uep sucn insurance in effect and too c,rtif'Cates Lhererore on deposit With the City during the entire term of this Agreement, 13. E11T!RE .AGk t'ZWNT. This ,.,regiment and any doaiments or instrument attached !iareta or r.!rerr_ -J to 'iore in integrate all terms and conditions mentioned her, in or uic iden'a! 'iereto and supersede all negotiations and pr iur w - I. IC •.n rus::2c: t„ t i< t,'e,_: III .IL tar hereof. :n the avant .;r cc it 1'ct .,.t,:een the r. ar,m„ conditions or provisions or this Agreement and „ry such 2c_up,,ent or instrument the terms and conditions of this Agreairent shall prevai'. I.N WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties FeretJ have cacsed this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY Orr RANCHO CUCAMONGA COAS'JL T,iNT ion D. Mikes, !•!ayor �:1ILSON- 3RY,1NT & AASSOCIAT ES Date: ° „L�w_ %Q.0 ATTEST: tlo: Oaneral Mananer Cate: Lmiren M. 'ddsscrmdIh L, i.1 cINN APPROVED AS TO FaRM, �..�- By Date; AUG 2 91994 City �tta nerr y -G- -, O 0 • • • �� EXHIBIT "A" Wilson - Bryant a Assoc August 14, 1984 Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer C1 T'! OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 9320 Baseline Road, Suite C Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91730 Attention: Richard Cota Re: Proposal - Professional Engineering For Amethyst Avenue Sidewalk Project (easterly side only) , From Base Line Road To Monte Vista Street Dear Mr. Cota: WILSON - BRYANT & ASSOCIATES will provide the engineering services on the above project, for the lump sum of $6,500.00 as described in the detailed description of work as follows: ITEM AMOUNT 1. Survey services to establish: $ 1,410.00 A. Centerline control and stationing B. Topography from street centerline to east • right -of -way. C. Cross sections at 50 maximum interval 2. Utility research and coordination including: 404,00 A. Research and obtain file copy of utility maps with- in the project limits B. Plotting of such facilities in plan view on the construction drawings C. Preparing and transmitting plan copies with utility notices (blank notice forms to be provided by City) to all utilities D. Monitoring response to such notices, making recom- mendations for mitigating conflicts E. Attending coordination meetings if required, regard- ing adjustments and relocations 3. Prepare and maintain design files for transmittal to the 220.00 City at the completion of the project workings (file listings attached). 4. Prepare "Complete Construction Plans "; in accordance with 2,558.00 City Standard Drawings including: A. Plans: 1. Topography from street centerline to east right - of -way 2. Right-of -Way limits 3. Tract and lot lines with numberings 4. Utility location plottings S. Construction limits and instructions Civil Engineering — Design — Environmental Surveys 143 S Brea Blvd Brea. CA 91621 (714) 990 - 0113 :2% Page 42 - continued 6. Center survey control B. And profiles of existing and proposed centerline and tops of curbs C. Cross section plottings showing existing and pro- • posed improvements D. Title sheet showing: 1. Title 2. Vicinity and location mappings and plan sheet indexing 3. Utility and drawing legends 4. Bench mark and basis of bearings S. Construction quantities 6. Standard signature and title blocks 5. Preoare detailed construction quantity and engineer's $ 416.00 cost estimate. 6. Prepare complete contract specifications using "boiler 736.00 plate" specifications provided by City including: 1. (boiler plate by City) notice inviting bids instructions to bidders contract proposal (by engineer) bidders information agreement bonds and insurance forms general conditions 2. "Special Conditions" (by engineer) 3. Standard plan reference listing and copies for inclusion in appendix (by engineer) • 7. Preoare legal descriptions for required right -of -way 180.00 acquisitions. 8. Attending coordination meetings with staff for design 192.00 review and project coordination. 9. Attend Pre - construction conference and provide design 384.00 coordination during construction -- We can accomplish the above services within sixty (60) days after we are given notice to proceed. A project time schedule is attached. Our firm has errors and omissions insurance which helps protect the City from any problems occuring from our designs. Attached is our proposal for construction survey for this project. This opportunity to be of service to you and your city is appreciated. Sincerely, WILSON - BRYANT & ASSOCIATES HAROLD A. WILSON. P.E. HAW:ph • enclosure Z$ l.;T,( OF JINC!"I . CC Il AC L': . 'I . Ll : LLB, FM,', USE LME ROAD '0 "'1':7 MTA ". RECT TV"E SCHEDULE - 60 C,00iWar _ WORK TTE'-1 E E K 2 3 4 6 7 9 Preliminary topography survey 0 1 Ci ty meetings and researcl utility notifications Preliminary la yout and �esi design Cost Estimate —FinaI L Sped f i ca t iun_; ML ---- City jReview__ Revisions Final submittal Pre-construction I'L As necessary LU meet. Cj ty nOeL!S Design coordination As f.... ✓r4,,. ESTIMATED ENGTNIERTNr MLNL _i OUItS _ Jr. Draftsman 72 hours Sr. Draftsman/Designer 34 hours Design Engineer 4? !iours EXHIBIT "B" 29 EXHIBIT "C" v 3M • Wilson -Brant 5 Assoc JANUARY 1984 FEE SCHEDULE Outside contracts, materials, and other services billed at cost plus 15< Our firm will also work on a retainer basis (from the ASCE curves): Salary times 2.0 to 3.0 plus direct non - salary costs (i.e. blueprints, drafting supplies, etc), Cost plus a fixed payment, or Fixed lump sum payment. • Civil Engineering — Design — Environmental surveys 143 5 Brea Blvd Brea. CA 91621 30 114 990 -0123 HOURLY RATE Junior Draftsman $ 22.00 Sub - Professional (Senior Drafting, etc.) 36.00 Designer, Senior Draftsman, Acquisition 38.00 Professional (Design, Field Supervision, etc.) 44.00 Registered Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor 48.00 Consultation - Principal or Professional Engineer requiring knowledge of Consulting • Engineer 61.00 Litigation - Portal to Portal 100.00 Clerical 20.00 2 -Man Survey Party 110.00 3 -Man Survey Party 130.00 Each additional man beyond a 3 -Man Survey Party 22.00 Electronic Survey Equipment 27.00 Construction Observation 38.00 Outside contracts, materials, and other services billed at cost plus 15< Our firm will also work on a retainer basis (from the ASCE curves): Salary times 2.0 to 3.0 plus direct non - salary costs (i.e. blueprints, drafting supplies, etc), Cost plus a fixed payment, or Fixed lump sum payment. • Civil Engineering — Design — Environmental surveys 143 5 Brea Blvd Brea. CA 91621 30 114 990 -0123 • • J ^T. nL n A XTO"n n1 TO A AX XTn.1 STAFF REPORTS y.� ¢ r A f 4t� Y 1977 DATE: September 5, 1984 " TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hobbs, City Engineer BY: Blame Frandsen, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Award of Contract for Design Services for the Reconstruction of Ramona Avenue On August 9, 1984 in response to a request for proposals three engineering firms submitted proposals for Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS &E) for the Reconstruction of Ramona Avenue from Base Line Road to the Pacific Electric Railroad. Engineering Design Firms Fee Proposal C. D. C. Engineering, Inc. $14,500.00 L. D. King Engineering /Planners $ 7,950.00 Derbish, Guerra & Associates S 5,580.00 Derbish, Guerra & Associates having successfully established itself in similar workings performed for the City, having submitted the low proposal, is hereby recommended to be awarded the Engineering Services Contract for the Reconstruction of Ramona Avenue from Base Line Road to the Pacific Electric Railroad for an amount not to exceed $5,580.00 and will be funded from Gas Tax 2106 and 2107 funds. Respectfully submitt , i LBH: .jaa Attachment 31 F- -I L-J lJ • RAMONA AVENUE ENGINEERING P.S.6E. PROPOSALS FEE COMPARISONS 3a FIRM /FEE NO. ITEM D.G. L.O.KING C.O.C. 1 Survey $1,254.00 $1,400.00 $1,730.00 2 Utility $ 420.00 S 600.00 $1,400.00 3 Design Files $1,114.00 5 600.00 4 Plans $2,500.00 $3,600.00 $8,400.00 5 Q's Est. $ 298.00 5 420.00 6 Specs S 490.00 $1,500.00 f 600.00 7 Pave. Eval. $ 156.00 -0- S 100.00 8 Meetings S 348.00 $ 750.00 9 Coordination N/C $ 500.00 $ 500.00 10 Print Plans Cost + $ 350.00 $Cost +15% TOTAL Comparison 35580..00 55,580.00 TrMTW $7,600.00 3IUa0 $14,500.00 Sup. Survey for Contruction 1 52,500.00 $2,770.00 $1,120.00 3a AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES • THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this of M_, between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a Municipal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and Derbish, Guerra & Associates hereinafter referred to as "Consultant ". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City desires to prepare designs, construction plans, specifications and cost estimates for the Reconstruction of Ramona Avenue from Base Line Road North to the Pacific Electric Railroad Crossing i 1250 Feet hereinafter referred to as "Project "; and WHEREAS, the Consultant has the necessary skills and qualifications and licences required by law to perform the services required under this Agreement in connection with said Project; and • WHEREAS, the City desires to retain the Consultant for services hereinafter described in connection with said Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of August, 1984, authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties that: 1. DEFINITIONS. As used in this Agreement, the following definitions shall be applicable: a. Consultant. Consultant shall mean Derbish, Guerra & Associates, a California Corporation located at 124 East "F" Street, Ontario, California 92764. b. City. City shall mean the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a . Municipal Corporation, located at 9320 Base Line Road, Suite C, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. -1- �3 c. City Council. City Council shall mean the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. d. Services. Services shall mean the services to be performed by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. e. Satisfactory. Satisfactory shall mean satisfactory to the City Engineer of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES. Consultant agrees to perform for, and furnish to, the City the services described in Exhibit A, "Scope of Services" attached hereto. 3. TIME FOR PERFORMANCE. The Consulant agrees that it shall delingently and responsibly pursue the performance of the services required of it by this Agreement and that said services shall be completed within 45 • calendar days after execution of this Agreement in accordance with the Project Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B. If a delay beyond the control of the Consultant is encountered, a time extension may be mutually agreed upon in writing by the City and the Consultant. The Consultant shall present documentation satisfactory to the City to substantiate any request for a time extension. 4. PAYMENT. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, upon satisfactory completion of the services described in the "SCOPE OF SERVICES ", (Exhibit A) the Consultant shall be compensated based upon the actual time spent on the Project at the Consultant's standard hourly rates attached hereto as Exhibit C, plus outside services, but shall not exceed a total amount of $5,580.00. 0 _2_ 3y 0 In the event of authorization, in writing, by the City of changes from the work as indicated in Exhibit A or for other written permission authorizing additional work not contemplated herein, additional compensation shall be allowed for such extra work based upon the Consultant's standard hourly rates (See Exhibit C). The Consultant shall submit invoices which specify the area where work was completed and the associated time for completion to the City for approval. The Consultant agrees to invoice the City for services rendered not more often than once a month. Work performed at the request of the City, outside the limit specified in this Agreement, is to be designated as "Extra Work" on monthly invoices. Work performed in connection with an authorized written change order will be so designated on said invoice. 5. CITY SUPPORT. The City shall provide the following items of . support to the Consultant: a. Provide a staff engineer to work with the Consultant for the purpose of giving advice and to provide coordination within the scope of this Agreement. b. Make available and provide all existing data and information relevant to the proposed Project. c. Provide traffic index. d. Provide plans and specifications for bidding. e. Prepare and mail final utility notice. 6. SUSPENSION, TERMINATION OR ABANDONMENT OF AGREEMENT. The City may, at any time, suspend, terminate or abandon this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant at least fifteen (15) days prior to • -3- 3s" n u written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. Within thirty -five (35) days of service of said notice, the City shall pay to the Consultant all earned and unpaid fees and costs based upon the rates attached hereto as Exhibit C, plus outside services, but the sum so paid shall not exceed a dollar figure which bears the same proportionate relationship to $5,580.00 as the quantity of work completed by the consultant bears to 100% of the work prescribed herein. If the City suspends, terminates or abandons a portion of this Agreement such suspension, termination or abandonment shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. 7. BREACH OF CONTRACT. If the Consultant defaults in the • performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of written notice of such default in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 8. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. Upon satisfactory completion of or in the event of termination, suspension or abandonment of, this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. -4- (o Entire limits of liability maintained must be certified but in no event shall limits be less than specified hereinbelow. Any aggregate limitation of liability shall be separate as to the risks arising out of the subject matter of this proposal. -5- 3i • 9. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of the Consultant or any of the Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except as herein set forth. The Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. 10. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, its officers and employees shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the . Consultant to comply with this section. 11. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any moneys due hereunder, without the prior written consent of the City. 12. INSURANCE. The Consultant shall maintain general liability and workers compensation insurance coverage effective on the first day of work and in full force throughout the full term of this Agreement. The policy or policies shall be underwritten by insurers admitted to operate in the State of California, on forms no less broad in the scope of coverage than standard forms. Entire limits of liability maintained must be certified but in no event shall limits be less than specified hereinbelow. Any aggregate limitation of liability shall be separate as to the risks arising out of the subject matter of this proposal. -5- 3i • Coverage Minimum Limit Workers' Compensation & Employer's Liability $100,000.00 Comprehensive General Liability /Comprehensive $500,000.00 Auto Liability Combined single limit each occurance If requested, the Consultant agrees to deposit with the City, certificates of insurance to satisfy the City that insurance requirements of this Agreement have been complied with, and to keep such insurance in effect and the certificates therefore on deposit with the City during the entire term of this Agreement. 13. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement and any documents or instrument attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto and supersede all • negotiations and prior writing in respect to the subject matter hereof. In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions or provisions of this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CONSULTANT Jon U. Mikels, Mayor Date; ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk APP. D AS TO FORM City or y 6_ 7 r C DERBISH Date: Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES AND FEES I. ENGINEER'S SERVICES The Project Manager for this project will be Ted Derbish. Upon review of the project mope, completion of preliminary survey data, prepare cross - sections and review the soils and pavement investigation, the Project Manager will submit a preliminary design report. With the approval of the design report by the City Engineer, the Project Manager will prepare 1" - 40' scale construction drawings, final cost estimates and contract specifi- cations complete for bidding purposes to the City of Rancho Cucamonga standards. The following services will be provided by the Design Engineer: L 1. Provide all preliminary survey data including topo within • back of curb to back of curb area on Ramona Avenue and cross - sections at 50 -foot stations (max.) plus intersecting streets and establish centerline control. 2. Utility research and coordinate all design work with other affected utilities or public agencies including: a. Research and obtain file copy of utility maps within the project limits. b. Plotting of such facilities in plan view on the construction drawings. c, Preparing and transmitting plan copies with utility notices (blank notice forms to be provided by City) to all utilities. d. Monitoring response to such notices, making re- commendations for mitigating conflicts. e. Attending coordination meetings if required, • regarding adjustments and relocations. sy Page 2 of 4 • EXHIBIT "A" (cout'd) 3. Prepare and maintain design files, as required, for trans- mittal at the completion of the project. 4. Prepare 1" • 40' scale plan and profile construction draw- ings on standard title block mylar complete for bidding purposes to the City of Rancho Cucamonga standards including: a. Plans: 1. Topography from back of curb to back of curb. 2. Bight -of -way limits. 3. Tract and lot lines with numberings. 4. Utility location plottings. 5. Construction limits and instructions. • b. Profiles of existing and proposed centerline and tops of curbs. c. Cross section plottings showing existing and pro- posed improvements. d. Title Sheet showing (no separate title sheet re- quired for this project): 1. Title 2. Vicinity and location mappings and plan sheet indexing 3. Utility and drawing legends 4. Bench mark and basis of bearings 5. Construction quantities 6. Standard signature and title blocks (this information to appear on Sheet 1 of drawings) E ,5. Prepare detailed construction quantities and Engineer's coat estimate. yC' Page 3 of 4 EXHIBIT "A" (cont'd) • 6. Prepare contract specifications complete for bidding purposes including: a. Notice Inviting Bids b. Instructions to Bidders c. Contract Proposal d. Bidders Information e. Agreement f. Bonds and Insurance forms g. General Conditions h. "Special Conditions" i. Standard Plan Reference listing and copies for inclusion in appendix. 7. Provide engineering evaluation and design for pavement re- • placement and resurfacing. 8. Attend coordination meetings with staff for design review and project coordination. 9. Attend pre - construction conference and provide design coor- dination during construction. II. ENGINEER'S FEES Based on review and investigation of the proposed project and the project scope, our estimated engineering fee of $5,580.00 (five thousand five hundred eighty dollars) is hereby submitted as a not- to- exceed figure. Actual costs will be obtained by multiplying the appropriate rate (as shown in the Standard Hourly Bates - "Exhibit C") by the number of hours worked on the project. The above stated not -to- exceed engineering fee was derived from estimated costs of the "Scope of Services" as stated in Section • I, Exhibit "A ", of this proposal, the itemized pricing for these services are as follows: W Page 4 of 4 • ERNIBIT "A" (cont'd) 1. Preliminary Survey Services $1254.00 2. Utility Research and Coordination $ 420.00 3. Prepare and Maintain Design Files $ 114.00 4. Construction Plans $2500.00 5. Construction Quantities 6 Engineer's Estimate $ 298.00 6. Contract Specifications $ 490.00 7. Pavement Evaluation d Design $ 156.00 B. Attend Coordination 6 Review Meetings $ 348.00 9. Attend pre - construction conference 6 provide No Charge design coordination during construction. • Estimated Engineering Fee $5580.00 • �/ 1 EXHIBIT "B" PROJECT SCHEDULE Weeks 0 1 2 3 4 5 Preliminary Survey Utility Investigation Utility Coordination Preliminary Design b Cost Estimates Final Design 6 Preparation of Construction Plans Final Construction Cost Estimates and Specifications • The above schedule does not include additional time required for City Staff Design Review and coordination meetings. • Y3 EXHIBIT "C" STANDARD HOURLY RATES 1/83 PRINCIPAL ENGINEER $ 72.00 per hour PROJECT MANAGER $ 64.00 per hour • DESIGNER $ 50.00 per hour DRAFTSMAN $ 43.00 per hour PREPARATION /RESEARCH $ 46.00 per hour 2 MAN SURVEY CREW $107.00 per hour 3 MAN SURVEY CREW $132.00 per hour CLERICAL $ 22.00 per hour INSPECTION /CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISION $ 37.00 per hour • Above rates include mileage, equipment and instruments, use of office space and materials and supplies. N4 OPTIONAL SERVICE 0 At the City of Rancho Cucamonga's option, the Design Engineer will provide the following service at the stated not -to- exceed fees: *1. Construction Staking - Provide Contractor with sufficient horizontal and vertical control stakes and cut sheets as necessary in order to complete the project according to the plans. Estimated not -to- exceed fee: $2500.00 *Estimated not -to- exceed figure is provided based on preliminary design information. Re- evaluation of this figure will be required at the completion of the final plans when the actual scope of work is deter- mined. • • q S • 9 STAFF REPORT v z�c1M �y 2 � F^ DATE: September 5, 1984 - 97 - 19 77 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Approval of Subordination Agreement submitted by Kenco Machine, Inc. for Project D.R. 81 -33 located at 10234 4th Street. The Real Property Improvement contract and lien agreement being held by the City for the above described project is for the future construction of a median island on 4th Street. In order to secure new financing for the project, the lender requires that the existing lien agreement be subordinate to a lien in favor of the lender. Kenco Machine, Inc. has submitted the attached Subordination Agreement for City Council approval. This agreement has been approved, as to form, by the City Attorney. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving said Subordination Agreement and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign same. Resp tfully submi ed, Lon; 8 0 d Attachments yb • SuborAgmt SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT NOTICE: THIS SUBORDINA7104 AGREEMENT RESULTS 11 YOUR SECURITY INTEREST- IN THE PROPERTY BECOMING SUBJECT TO AND LOWER PRIORITY THAN THE LIEN OF SOME OTHER OR LATER SECURITY INSTRUMENT. THI�.AGo Ea MENT, made this 1vth day of august ,19 84 by hire• Inc. Owner o th�and herein�r described an herelna ter re erred to as "Owner" and the City Of Rancho Cucamonga hereinafter referred to as "City ", owner and holder of the Certain Real Property and Lien Agreement hereinafter referred to as "Lien Agreement ". WITNESSETH City of Parent mtcanonya is the beneficiary under Chet miCtair. real THAT WHEREAS, B', �za em• cmtract and lien avreenent dated Y covering: Pa[celY Fn as per plat recorded in Book 52 of Parcel Baps Paged to- Records of GantBetnardiM countyr Glitomia maseructior to secure IMedian island ant l ofESatr which was reco rde In the is ial Records of said County; an WHEREAS, HERThree owner d for, executed t nd and nc�100» trust and note in the sum oat e0 „i. in 17 77 O—F. f • he r e in of ter re erred [ as '•Lendere pays e with interest and upon the t arms and conditions described therein, which deed of trust is to be recorded concurrently herewith; and WHEREAS, it is a condition precedent to making said loan that said deed of trust last above mentioned shall unconditonal ly be and remain at all times a lien or charge upon the land hereinbefore described, prior and superior to the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement; and WHEREAS, Lender is willing to make said loan provided the deed of trust securing the same is a Ii en or charge upon the above described property prior to superior to the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement and provided that City will specifically and unconditionally subordinate the Lien or charge of the Lien Agreement to the Iten or charge of the deed of trust in favor of Lender; and WHEREAS, It Is the mutual benefit of the parties hereto that Lender modify said loan to Owner; and City is •iI l ing that the deed of trust securing the same Shall constitute a lien or charge upon said land which is unconditionally prior to superior to the lien or Charge on the Lien Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits securing to the parties hereto and otter valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which consideration is hereby dcknowltdged, sou In a u to In�,Ce wider to modify the loan above referred to, it is hereby declared, understood and agreed as follows: (1) That said deed of trust securing said note in favor of Lender and any renews is or extensions • thereof, shall unconditionally be and remain at all times a lien or charge on the property therein described prior and super, 0r to the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement. u7 (2) That Lender would not make its loan above • described without this subordination agreement, (3) That this agreement shall be the whale and only agreement with regard to the subOrdnatiom of the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement to the lien or charge of the deed of trust in favor of Lender above referred to and shall supersede and cancel, but only insofar as would affect the priority between the deed of trust and Lien Agreement any prior agreements as to such subordination Including, but not limited to, those provisions, if any, contained in the Lien Agreement which provide for the subordination of the lien or charge thereof to another deed or deeds of trust or to another mortgage or mortgages. The City declares, agrees and acknowledges that: (a) He consents to and approves all provisions of the note and deed of trust in favor of Lender abOVe referred to by that certain modification agreement by and between Owner and Lender, dated (b) He Intentionally and unconditionally waives, relinquishes and subordinates the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement in favor of the lien or charge upon said land of the deed of trust in favor of Lender above referred to and understands that in reliance upon, and in consideration of this waiver, relinquishment and subordination specific loans and advances are being and will be . made and as a part and parcel thereof, spec ific monetary and Other obligations are being and will be entered into which would not be made or entered into but for said reliance upon this waiver, relinquishment and subordination; and (c) An endorsement has been pleced upon the Lien Agreement that said Lien Agreement has by this instrument been subordinated to the lien Or charge of the deed of trust in favor of Lender above referred to. NOTICE: THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT CONTAINS A PROVISION WHICH ALLOWS THE PERSON OBLIGATED OH YOUR REAL PROPERTY SECURITY TO OBTAIN A LOAN, A PORTION OF WHICH MAY BE EXPENDED FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN IMPROVEMENT OF THE LAND. F- OWNER DATE MAYOR ALL SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED • 2 y8 RESOLUTION NO. 49- 95-66M Sy-'` - '3 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, APPROVING A SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT FROM KENCO MACHINE, INC. AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN SAME WHEREAS, a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for the installation of a landscaped median island along 4th Street was approved by City Council on March 8, 1984 and recorded in San Bernardino County on May 25, 1982 Instrument No. 82- 102548; and WHEREAS, for the developer to secure financing for the project, the lender requires that the above - mentioned lien be subordinate to the lien in favor of the lender; and WHEREAS, the developer has submitted a Subordinate Agreement to that effect for the City's approval and execution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Subordinate Agreement be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Subordination Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk attest thereto. . PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of September, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Authe et, City Clerk jaa �/9 an 0. a s, ayor 0 • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM Date: August 23, 1984 To: City Council From: Finance Dire Subject: Deferred Compensation Plan .o CUG+AIO& Ff IZ � A At the July 5th, Council Meeting, the City Council approved an agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga, (copy attached) and Great Western Savings and Loan for purposes of a Deferred Compensation Plan. Tonight we bring before the City Council the necessary resolution to make the plan affective. Recommendation: Adopt attached Resolution as the vehicle for implementation of the Deferred Compensation Plan previously approved. 5C 19,7 • DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made as of this /_lL w'✓; l J` day of r�.�, -c ' + 1984, by and between WESTERN VINGS, A FED&A _ NNG3 --AND LOAM ASSOCIATION, hereinafter referred to as "GREAT WESTERN ", and the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereinafter referred to as "AGENCY ". WHEREAS, AGENCY, pursuant to Resolution No. dated has established a Deferred Compensation Plan, ereiF nailer referred to as "PLAN "; and WHEREAS, AGENCY desires to contract with GREAT WESTERN exclusively to perform certain services in the implementation and continuing operation of the PLAN; and WHEREAS, GREAT WESTERN desires to provide such services subject to the terms and conditions contained herein; NOW, THEREFORE, the AGENCY and GREAT WESTERN agree as follows: 1. TERM: This Agreement shall remain in full force and effect for tTwee (3) years and shall not be terminated prior to • that time except for "Cause" as that term is hereinafter defined. Thereafter, this Agreement shall continue in effect for successive periods of three (3) years each unless either party gives written notice to the other, not less than ninety (90) days prior to the end of any term, of its intention not to renew the Agreement. For the purpose of this Agreement, the term "Cause" shall be defined to mean the failure of either party to perform any of its obligations under this agreement. If this shall occur, the non-defaulting party shall give the defaulting party written notice, which shall specify the particulars of default. If such default is not cured within sixty (60) days, then the non - defaulting party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement for Cause by giving the defaulting party thirty (30) days written notice. Upon termination of this Agreement, the following shalt occur:. GREAT WESTERN shall issue reports to AGENCY detailing the status of PLAN assets no later than ten (10) business days after the end of the month in which termination occurs. S/ AGENCY may request withdrawal of funds on deposit. • GREAT WESTERN shall disburse such funds upon request of AGENCY in amounts not less than twenty (20%) percent of the balance of such funds per year for five (5) years. GREAT WESTERN may, at its discretion, disburse such funds at a rate in excess of such minimum. 2. ENROLLMENT SERVICES: GREAT WESTERN agrees to conduct the enrollment of all e igi le employees who elect to participate in the PLAN. GREAT WESTERN agrees to provide educational and promotional information for distribution to AGENCY's employees. AGENCY agrees to allow and facilitate periodic distribution of such information in conjunction with each employee's payroll. GREAT WESTERN agrees to conduct group presentations periodically for the AGENCY 's employees to explain the PLAN. GREAT WESTERN agrees to provide educational and promotional information regarding the PLAN to employees in attendance at such presentations. AGENCY agrees to facilitate the scheduling and provide facilities at which satisfactory attendance can be expected. GREAT WESTERN agrees to provide qualified personnel to be available periodically to discuss the PLAN with individual employees. GREAT WESTERN agrees that in performing the services • provided for hereunder that it will conduct itself at all times with due regard to rules and regulations of the Agency and further agrees not to commit any act that will unreasonably tend to degrade the AGENCY or bring it into public contempt or ridicule, or prejudice the maintenance of the good employee - employer relationship existing between the AGENCY and its employees. GREAT WESTERN agrees to retain qualified personnel on a continuing basis in order to perform the aforementioned services on a local level throughout the term of this Agreement. 3. DEFERRALS: GREAT WESTERN agrees to accept deposit input from the—KGE?aZ —on each payroll cycle in the form of either magnetic tape or listing. Each such listing or magnetic tape shall contain each participant's name, social security number, and the amount deferred. AGENCY agrees to perform the deductions to participating employee's payroll. GREAT WESTERN agrees to direct and coordinate the investment of funds in the investment vehicles herein prescribed. • `J t • 4. DISTRIBUTIONS: Upon receipt of written instructions approved y t e , GREAT WESTERN agrees to direct and coordinate the payment of benefits to participants and beneficiaries, withhold the appropriate federal and /or state taxes, remit aggregate withholdings to the appropriate taxing authorities as well as issue the net funds to the participant or beneficiary. In addition, GREAT WESTERN agrees to perform the necessary monthly, quarterly, and annual reporting on withholdings to the appropriate taxing authorities. GREAT WESTERN also agrees to issue the appropriate annual wage and tax statements to participants and beneficiaries receiving payments during a given year and to provide the AGENCY with a copy of this information. 5. RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTS: GREAT WESTERN agrees to furnish the AGENCY, monthly and quarterly, reports regarding the status of the PLAN containing, but not limited to, the following information: a. Each participant's name. b. Each participant's social security number. C. Each participant's sub - account number. d. Deposits credited to each participant's sub - account. e. Withdrawals debited to each participant's sub - account. f. Interest /Earnings credited to each participant's • sub- account. g. value of each participant's sub- account. h. Summary totals of the PLAN. GREAT WESTERN agrees to provide quarterly statements to participants in the PLAN. Each statement to a participant shall identify the detail transactions that have occurred to that sub- account for that period as well as the beginning and ending values of that participant's sub- account. GREAT WESTERN agrees to maintain the records necessary to produce the various required reports and that transactions will be performed in accordance with generally accepted accounting practices. GREAT WESTERN agrees that all records shall be the property of the AGENCY and that, in the event this contract is terminated for any reason, GREAT WESTERN will supply AGENCY these records with thirty (30) days subsequent to the termination date. AGENCY agrees that all computer tapes, discs, and programs shall be the property of GREAT WESTERN. GREAT WESTERN agrees that all information supplied to, and all work processed or completed by GREAT WESTERN will be held to be confidential and private and will not be disclosed to anyone other than the AGENCY or those persons, corporations or governmental agencies who have a lawful right to such ® information. 53 6. INVESTMENT VEHICLES: GREAT WESTERN agrees to provide the herein prescribed services for the AGENCY with the following • investment vehicles available within the PLAN. a. Great Western Savings (GWS) b. The Investment Company of America (ICA) c. Growth Fund of America (GFA) d. The Bond Fund of America (BFA) GREAT WESTERN may, from time to time, offer to perform the herein prescribed services for additional investment vehicles. Such investment vehicles shall be made available within the PLAN only upon the mutual agreement of all parties. The investment vehicle identified as Great Western Savings shall be savings accounts with GREAT WESTERN. Each such account shall be subject to the rules, regulations, and statutes to which GREAT WESTERN is subject, as promulgated by the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB), the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) and other such regulatory authorities. GREAT WESTERN agrees to accept PLAN funds for investment in the savings account option, bearing interest at a rate to be effective as of the first day of each calendar month, using whichever of the following methods result in the highest interest rate payable. • A. The rate of interest determined on the last business day of each calendar month for 90 -day money market rate accounts at GREAT WESTERN, with monthly compounding of interest. This rate will be guaranteed for the succeeding calendar month, regardless of any subsequent change in the rate of 90 -day money market rate accounts at GREAT WESTERN. The rate of interest in effect on the last business day of each calendar month equal to the 26 -week U.S. Government Treasury Bill Discount rate plus twenty -five (25) basis points, with monthly compounding of interest. This rate will be guaranteed for the succeeding calendar month, regardless of any subsequent change in the rate of 26 -week savings accounts at GREAT WESTERN. 10.00% per annum, compounded monthly for an annual effective yield of 10.62 %. EAJ sy GREAT WESTERN agrees to collateralize any amounts of the AGENCY's PLAN funds invested in the savings account option not subject to insurance of accounts by the FSLIC, adjusted monthly, with first deeds of trust on commercial, industrial, or residential property. The remaining outstanding principal balance of the collateral shall, in the aggregate, at all times equal or exceed 125% of the value of such uninsured funds. Funds invested in ICA, GFA, and 8FA by the AGENCY will utilize GWF Securities Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Great Western Financial Corporation, as the broker /dealer for such transactions. 7. TITLE AND OWNERSHIP: Title and ownership of all accounts established for t e PLAN shall be held in the name of the AGENCY's Deferred Compensation Plan. The AGENCY shall be sole custodian of and receive any passbooks, investment certificates or other evidence of ownership of the accounts established under this Agreement. GREAT WESTERN shall have no privity of contract with the participants of the PLAN. GREAT WESTERN agrees not to accept or honor any instructions that may be submitted by participants or to provide any information regarding account balances or transactions, without the permission of the AGENCY. B. FEES AND EXPENSES: Except as provided for in this Agreement or as required y law or regulations, GREAT WESTERN agrees that it will make no charges to the AGENCY or to participants in the PLAN for any obligation performed pursuant to this Agreement, GREAT WESTERN further agrees to pay the expenses incurred as a result of its providing the herein prescribed services. 9. CIRCUMSTANCES EXCUSING PERFORMANCE: The performance by the parties of this Agreement is subject tF force majeure and is excused by fires, power failures, strikes, acts of God, restrictions imposed by any government or governmental agency, or other delays beyond the delayed party's control or defaults by participants or employer. Failures of or defaults of participants, employers, or investment vehicles shall excuse performance by GREAT WESTERN thereby prevented. 10. INDEMNIFICATION: Notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary, GREAT WESTERN agrees that it shall be coley responsible to the AGENCY for any and all services performed by GREAT WESTERN or its employees under this Agreement. GREAT WESTERN shall be responsible for negligence committed by GREAT WESTERN or its employees. The AGENCY shall be responsible for any error committed by the AGENCY or its employees. GREAT WESTERN shall not be liable for investment performance, except . as expressly provided for within this Agreement. �4A 11. ASSIGNABILITY: No party to this Agreement shall assign • the same w t ou a express written consent of the other party thereto, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. Unless agreed to by the parties, no assignment shall relieve any party to this Agreement of any duties or liabilities hereunder. 12. PARTIES BOUND: This Agreement and the provisions —sFa—TT—Fe--Mn7Tng thereof upon the respective parties and shall inure to the benefit of the same and to their successors and assigns. 13. APPLICABLE LAW: This Agreement shall be construed in accordance w t t e aws operating within the State of California. 14. UNLAWFUL PROVISIONS: In the event any provision of this Agreement shall e held t egal or invalid for any reason, said illegality or invalidity shall not affect the remaining parts of the Agreement, but the same shall be construed and enforced as if said illegal or invalid provisions had never been inserted herein or therein. Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, no party to this Agreement will be required to perform or render any services hereunder, the performance or rendition of which would be in violation of any laws, rules, or regulations relating thereto. 15. AMENDMENTS: This Agreement may be amended at any time . during t e term ereof by the express written mutual consent of the parties. 16. NOTICES: All notices and demands to be given under this Agreement—Fy oneone party to another shall be given by certified mail, addressed to the party to be notified or upon whom a demand is being made, at the respective addresses set forth in this Agreement or such other place as either party may, from time to time, designate in writing. The date of service of a notice or demand shall be the receipt date on any certified mail receipt. • SYQ • If to GREAT WESTERN: If to AGENCY: GREAT WESTERN SAVINGS P.O. Box 1085 Northridge, CA 91328 Attn: Municipal Programs City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline, Suite C Ranch Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attn: Harry Empey IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year first above written. AGENCY / �,PPROVED A6 TO FORM: BY: "` GREAT WESTERN BY: SCOTT MONTGOWY VICE PRESID GREAT WESTEY SAVI GS SY C. • RESOLUTION NO. Cam' A RESOLUTION OF.. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADOPTING AN EMPLOYEES' DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENTS RELATED TO SAID PLAN BY THE DEFERRED COMPENSATION ADMINISTRATOR WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has in its employ employees who are and will be rendering valuable services to the City; and WHEREAS, said employees may desire to defer income until retirement for the purpose of deferring Federal and State income taxes on said income; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has considered the establishment of a Deferred Compensation Plan for the said employees and believes that the adoption of said plan will enhance the efficiency and morale of the employees and will be in the best interests of the City; and • WHEREAS, it is intended that said Plan shall be in accordance with Federal and State law and regulations; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it would be for the benefit and in the best interests of the City to approve the Deferred Compensation Plan with Great Western Savings and Loan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga that the City Council establishes said Deferred Compensation Plan for said employees of the City, and the same is hereby approved and adopted, to be effective August 14, 1984. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Harry J. Empey is hereby appointed to administer the Plan on behalf of the City and is authorized to execute Participation Agreements with eligible officers, officials and employees, and all other Documents and Agreements necessary to implement and administer the Plan. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of September, 1984. c L RESOLUTION NO. i � - m - A RESQ.0 CN OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO COCAM NGA, CALIFORNIA, PROCLAIMING RANCHO CUCAMONGA'S OFFICIAL BELT BUCELE WHEREAS, the Eiwanis Club of Rancho Cucamonga has presented to the citizens of Rancho Cucamonga a belt buckle for consideration as one of the City's official ornaments; and WHEREAS, the belt buckle admcwledges the three camunities of Alta Lana, Cucamonga, and Etiwanda, as well as presents the Rancho Cucamonga City name and the November 30, 1977 date of incorporation; and WHEREAS, the belt buckle further acknowledges Rancho Cucamorga's wine heritage, the beautiful mountain surroundings, and the proud spirit characteristic of our fine camunity; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this special buckle will serve as . an outstanding promotional ornament for the City of Rancho Wcamonga. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby proclaim this decorative ornament presented by the Riwanis Club as the official belt buckle of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of Septerber, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk n U f;o Jon D. Mikels, Mayor 71 • D MEMORANDUM'v 2 �� _ Z August 30, 1984 � _ _> TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Mark Lorimer,Administrative Analyst'` Su BJECT: Mobile Home Rent Adjustment Ordinance Ordinance No. 231 At its September 5 meeting, the City Council will consider second reading of Ordinance No. 231. Again, this ordinance calls for a maximum rent adjustment of 1008 Consumer Price Index plus any governmental imposed pass throughs. Since the August 15 meeting, both the tenants committee and the owner group have expressed concern as to the constitution- ality of the proposal. The question at this point is whether or not the ordinance would provide a rent increase for "emergency situtations" li.e. new roof, street modifi- cations(. In addressing this concern, the tenants committee has drafted an alternative document to Ordinance No. 231 as proposed. This revision would provide park owners with an annual rent increase of 1008 Consumer Price index. Additonally, this revision would create "Special Rent Review Board" (identical to the Board in the City of Carson) which would review requests for increases exceeding those increases convened by the C.P.I. (i.e. dramatic increases in utility charges, maintenance and operations, emergency improvements, property taxes, and capital improvements). The tenants committee believes that this ordinance would allow the park owners a mechanism for fair and reasonable rent increases, and that this ordinance would prove constitutional if challenged in court. An additional provision proposed by the tenants committee which is not part of the initial ordinance being considered for second reading is the provision of a rent "rollback" to August 5, 1981. A copy of the revision is attached (blue sheets). Lease Negotiations Since the August 15 meeting, the tenants committee, owner group and the Council subcommittee have been furiously negotiating the possibility of a 3 -5 year long term lease for all parks. Negotiations are still continuing,,yet the basic obstacle is that the tenants committee questions Mobile Home Ordinance Page 2 • the integrity of the park owners willingness to negotiate in "good faith." A copy of the lease is attched for review. Ordinance No. 232 -- Moratorium on Rent Increases Also at its September 5 meeting, the Council will consider the adoption of an urgency ordinance which would freeze rent increases until December 19, 1984. The intent of this proposed ordinance is to allow the park owners the time necessary to continue negotiating a long term lease with the tenants committee, and to allow the tenants committee the time necessary to refine their revisions of ordinance No. 231. Since the next park due for an increase is not until December 1, 1984, allowing both parties the needed time might seem appropriate. Adoption of Ordinance No. 232 would allow the parties to meet in order to continue talking about the long term lease and possibly reach agreement. During such negotiation, it is suggested that the City Council hear for first reading the ordinance revised by the tenants committee, so that should the two parties not reach agreement on a lease by November 1, then the ordinance may be considered for second reading and possible adoption thirty days before the moratorium is due to expire. • RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council conduct second reading of Ordinance No. 231, but continue this item to a later date. It is also recommended that the Council adopt urgency Ordinance No. 232 and allow both parties time necessary to properly pursue this issue. Further, it is recommended that the Council schedule first reading of the revised Ordinance No. 231 as presented by the tenants committee for the October 3rd Council meeting, thus allowing that committee time necessary to refine their proposal. Should you have any comments or questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me. • /ML • ORDN&NCE NO, 201 M OU14ANCE OF THE CITY OF R.1NC40 CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 9.10 OF THE WCHO LHCMONGA MNtCip1= CODE, PROVID14G FOR AN ANNUAL MAXIMUM RENT ADJUSTMENT The City Caner 11 of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does 11 Further, the City ',.until finds that decisions of a rent stabilleation board or similar decision making body !t not necessarily fulfill the intent of protecting mobile home residents from unreasonable space rent increases nor do chase decisions always provide owners with the opportunity for a just and reasonable income sufficient to operate a mobile home park. The City Council also finds that concern among residents and avnell of mobile home parks over rent increases and other park related situation can often be beat resolved between the two pastes, providing there estate the incentive for both parties to negotiate in good faith and reach agreement. The intent of this chapter, then, is ra protect mobile home perk residents from unreasonable space rent increases, while pray tiling an incentive to both park owners and residents to negotiate future rental contracts in good faith and to each agreement therefrom, LrJ ordain as follows: SECT M 1: Chapter 8.10 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Chapter 8.1 Nubile gmpa pork Amoral Nms1mge Nam AdJWSaeec: The Sections to be included will be a. follows: 9.10.010 Findings, Netter and Latent. 8.10.020 Definition. 9.10.030 Applicability 8.10.040 Mobile Home Park Registration 0.10.050 Mobile Home Park Tenant. Cmnitteee 8.10.060 Ran, adjustment 0.10.010 Reduction in Services 8,10.0 SO Enforcement 9.10.090 Retaliation 9.10.100 Severabtlicy 0.10.110 Review by City Council SECTION 8.10.010 FIN0I11CS, T Sg MD IffroT There eaists within the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the surrnundf'g • areas a serious shortage of mobile hone rental space, which has resulted to w vacancy rates and rising space rents. Further, because of the high cost of moving mobile homea, the potential for damage resulting therefrom, the requirements relating to the installation of mobile homes, tncluding perm Lce, landscaping, and site prep... clan, the tack of alternative home site% fsr mobile home residences and the substantial investment of mobile home owners in such homes, there exists a virtual monopoly in the rental of mobile hone park spaces. Meardingly, the city Council finds and declares that it is necessary to protect the residents of mobile homes `ram unreasonable space rent increases, while at the same time recognttes the need of mobile hone park owner% to receive a just and reasonable income sufficient to cover the costs of repairs, maintenance, insurance, employee services, additional amt nittca and other operations. 11 Further, the City ',.until finds that decisions of a rent stabilleation board or similar decision making body !t not necessarily fulfill the intent of protecting mobile home residents from unreasonable space rent increases nor do chase decisions always provide owners with the opportunity for a just and reasonable income sufficient to operate a mobile home park. The City Council also finds that concern among residents and avnell of mobile home parks over rent increases and other park related situation can often be beat resolved between the two pastes, providing there estate the incentive for both parties to negotiate in good faith and reach agreement. The intent of this chapter, then, is ra protect mobile home perk residents from unreasonable space rent increases, while pray tiling an incentive to both park owners and residents to negotiate future rental contracts in good faith and to each agreement therefrom, LrJ Ordinance No. 27l Page F S6 Ols S. 10.020 OVINITIM 1. "Committee" shaLl mean the mobile home park tenants committee created in each mobile home park and established by this ordinance. 2. "Concern" shall mean chat situation occurring within a mobile home park which is determined to disadvantage a majority of the park tenants or property. d. "Consumer Price Index" shall mean the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers (CPT -U) published for the Los Angeles -Lang Basch- Bnaheia area by the Department of Labor Statistics. 4. "Mobile Nome' shall mean a vehicle, ocher than a motor vehicle or recreational vehicle, designed or used for human habitation. 5. "Mobile Nome Park" shall mean any area of land within the Cicv of Rancho Cucamonga where two or more mobile home spaces are rented, or held out for rent, to accommodate mobile homes used for human habltaclon. 6. "Mobile Nome Space" shall mean the else within a mobile home park intended, designed, or used for the location or accommodation of a mobile home and any accessory structures or appurtenances attached thereto or used in conjunction therewith, or the location or accommodation of a recreational vehicle. 7. "Owner" shall mean the tuner 11 operator of a mobile home park or an agent or representative suthocired to act on said owner's or operator's behalf in connection with the maintenance or operation of such park. 8. "Rene" shall mean the consideration, Including servtc es, amenities, and benefits in connection with the use and occupancy of a mobile • home space, 9. "Tenant" shall mean any person entitled to ccmpy a mobile home dwelling unit pursuant to ownership thereof or rental or lease arrangement with the owner of the subject dwelling unit. BBCT101f 0.10.070 APPLICABILIl7 1. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply to any mobile home park and mobile home space within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Section 9.10.060 of this Ordinance shall not spply to tenancies covered by leases me contracts, at the affective dace of this chapter, which provide for more than a month -to -month tenancy, but only for the duration of such lease or contract. Upon the expication or ocher termination of any such lease or contract, all provisions of this chapter shall immediately be applicable to the tenancy. 9. None of the provisions of this Ordinance shall preclude a mobile home park tenant from entering into a wcicten lease or contract with the park owner. .I L IL / ordinance 40. DI Page ) S8Ci m 8.10.00 MUM 9ROS PARS RECISTRAifUm Within slaty (60) day. of the effective data of this cnapeeq all park owners subject to the provisions of this chapter shall be requited to file with the City Clerk a rent Registration Statement for each rental unit affected by this chapter. The City Clark shall devise such registration forms so a s to call for Info nation necessary to carry out the purposes and policies of this chapter, and shall mail such Eons to all mobile home park owners In the City in sufficient time as to allow such park owners to file their Registration 5tetesents within sixty (60) day. of adoption of this chapter. The City Clerk shall forward a certified copy of the registration statement to the tenants committee. All rental units shall be registered annually thereafter. 40 rent increases permitted under this chapter .hall be allowed to park ownere who have failed to properly regi uer all nubile home spaces. SSMIM 8.10.050 itgmggl 801. TEXAM C01SQ1R ES I. Crbtioa of Within slaty (60) day. of the effective dace of this chapter. each mobile home park within the City shall create, by special election of the park residents, a five - member tenants committee. The City Clerk shall all for and schedule such spatial election or each park at an appropriate ciao when such election may be held. Residentes hall notify the City Clerk as to their intent of special election, and submit a listing of committee nominees. Each park resident may cast up to five (5) votes, but shall not cast more than one ill vote fo[ each moo into. Those five nominees receiving the moat voles shall be elected to the tenants committee. • A representative of the Ctty shall be in attendance at the special election to conduct the election proceedings and to verify the election results v pon completion of the ballot caucus. The City representative shall not voce or Influence any voce. 2. Remees aid Mttas of: Except as otherwise provided by law, the tenants' co ®ittee shall have the following powers and duties: (a) fleet to discuss problems and concerns wtchi;, the mobile hone park and when necessary to recommend further action on such problems and tuacerns. (b) inform all tea ldent. of the park as to developments of proposed rent Increases and ocher park concerns. (c) 4egotlate with the park owner to order to resolve tenant concerns. tt shall be presumed that the intent f good faith negotiation as established under this chapter shall be practiced by the park owner and tenants committee in attempting to reach agreement and resolve tenant concerns, no park owner and tenants shall adhere to the provisions of the Mobile Rome Residency law. (d) Elect one of Us members to serve am Chairman, one to serve as vice-chat man, and one to serve a. secretary. The Chairman shall preside at all coo itcee meetings and shall exercise general suptrvisfon of the affairs and activities Of the committee. The vice - chairman shall aasuma the duties and powers of the chairman in the event of the chalnan's .been.*. The secretary shall record and maintain ell minutes of actions and meetings for the coo ittee. (e) Any action of the commlteet shall require affirmative votes of not less than a quorum, except that less than a quormm may adjourn a meeting stmt die or to a specified ciao and place. A quorum shall consist of a majority of the members not counting vaunt pm sltlons. Ordinance So. 231 Page 4 r 1 (f) The comittee shall prepare specific guidelines for the election of alternate co ®ittee members to .'ill vacancies, and the length of terms for all eoiml¢ee members and officers. SECIIM 8.10.060 1. Advaaeu Matiee of: Ac least slaty (50) days print to the effective data of a rental adjust...,, the park owner or representative shalt serve all mobile home residences, etcher personally or by mall, with notice of the proposed adjustment in accordance with State law. Said notice shall also include the recent consumer price index as established by the City Manager. Within three (8) days of notice to park tenants of a rent adjustment, the park owner or representative shall provide the City Clerk with the following Information: (a) The effective dace of the noticed adjustment. (b) identification of the tenants or mobile hone spat ee affected. (c) The amount of the rent prior to the effective date of the notice for each of those mobil^ home spaces. (d) The amount of the increase (I. dollars) for each of those mobile hove spaces. (e) The quantity and identity of tenants or spaces under lease 2. fattest or contract. rental she he noticed if permitted or • enforced more frequently tl than veadjustment than once very 365 days per mobile home park. pe ). PlamLum "Instable Adjuatmeab (a) Once each Year, park owners shall be pe coitted to charge rents in excess of that which they are lawfully chars ing during the previous year based upon the Consumer Price index as established by the City Manager. The first annual adjustment permitted hereunder will be based upon the percent change in the Cons mat Price Index from August 1983 to July 1984. (b) Monthly, beginning on the effective dace if this chapter the City Manager shall determine the most recent published co .tumor price index. no City Clerk shall record the latest published consumer Price Index and shall notify each park owner of such upon request. (c) Computation of rent Increases allowable under this sec tton shall be according to the following formula: Subtract the previous year's CPI index number from the most recent CPS index Mabee. The resulting figure Is the Index point difference. Divide the index point difference by the previous year's index figure. The resulting figure is the applicable percentage change in the Consumer Price Index for the year, expressed In decimal figures. M. Ittply such percentage change in the Consumer price Index by 1.00. The resulting figure Is the allowable percentage rent adjustment, expressed to decimal figures. • �Q 1 • ordinance 4o. 21l Page 5 .Additional rent, above chat established by the Consumer Pitce Index, ,hall be granted ce park ovners In the a ens of increaaea in came I. aeaesamenn or levlea (such am Increase, in ad valorem real property taxes) Imposed by local, scare or federal government enC Sties. Such additional adjustment. shall be computed on a p,Or,ta ,hare for each mobile home space. 4ultiply the base rent and the maximum allowable percentage rent adjustment provided hereunder, and add the prorate share of additional rent. The resulting figure, rounded off .o the nearest dollar, is the maximum all ... his rent which may be granted to park owners under this chapter. a. We gddmanemt Mlex md: H. general annual adjustment of rent will be permitted any park owner who: (a) Has continued to fail to comply with any provisions of this ordinance and /or orders or regulations issued hereunder, or (b) Has failed to bring the renal unit into compliance with the implied va rrancy of habitability, or (c) Has failed ten register all mobile hone spaces as provided under chic ordinance. 5lCI W 8.10.070 g800Cf1011 IN SMIa8 I. It is the responsibility of the park owner to provide and • maintain the physical Improvements Ind the common facilities of the Park in good working order and condition, and in doing so comply with the r,,ul, menu as sec Earth In the Mobile Nome Residency Law. r 1 2. NO park owner shall alloy reduction in elimation ' service In a mobile home park or to any tenant within any mobile hone park unless and until a proportionate share of the cost savings resulting from such reduction or elimination is passed on to the tenants In the f rm of a decrease in rent. Stmo8 8.101080 1MRC13mR I. My tenant or park owner aggrieved by the willful violation of any of the provisions of Chia chapter may sue thereon and recover actual damages therefor, plus a civil penalty as provided herein. Any park owner or representative who demands, accepts, receives or retains anv payment of space rent to excess of the maximum lawful ,pace rent, in violation of the provision of this chapter or any rule, regulation or order hereunder promulgated, shall be liable as hereinafter provided to the tenant from who such payments are demanded, accepted, received or retained, for damages as a civil penalty In an amount of five- hundred dollar. (5500.00) or three (1) times the amount by which the payment so demanded, accepted received or retained exceeds the maximum lawful space rent, whichever is the greater. The park owner is also liable to the tenant for any much payment- actually collected and refunded, if any, plus interest from the date received, reasonable attorney's fees, and coats as determined by the court. 2. Me fact of Any willful violation of this chapter may be used by the aggrieved tenant as a defense to say action for unlawful detainer based on non - payment of rent. The park Omer may time the fact of any willful violation of this chapter as a defense to recover any rent due under this chapter. L 7 ordlnance Yo. ]Jl Page 6 1. My willful violation of chle chapter shall be a misdemeanor and • shall be punishable by a fine of not vo On than floe- hundred dollars (5500.00) or by lmpriso meant in the County Jail for a period not seconding six (b) months or by both such fine and loprisoneent. Each continuing day of violation shall be deemed to be a separate violation. sema 5.10.0% MAL1ATION It is unlawful for the mnagsent or any -weer of any subtle home park to harass, evict, retailers against or otherwise discriminate against any retaliation against A person who has opposed any practice believed unlawful under this chapter, has informed law enforcement agencies of practice believed unlawful under this chapter, has asserted any rights under this chapter, or has petitioned, testified or attested in any proceeding under this chapter. SECna 8.10.100 SewpsJTLER if any provision or clause of this chapter or the application thereof to any person or clre umseance is held to be unconstitutional or to be otherwise invalidated by a final Judgement of any court of competent Jurisdiction, such Invalidity shall not affect other provisions or clauses or applications thereof which can be implemented without the Invalid provision or clause or application, and to this end, the provisions and clauses of this chapter are declared to be severable. SECYfa 8.10.110 RITIM IT Cln COO*(!lL The City Council shall review the provisions of this chapter three (3) ?ears after the dace of adoption thereof, and at any other time dcened • appropriate, in order to consider the effectiveness and net sal ty of the m provisions of this chapter, and the need to end such provisions as cu provide more effective regulation or to avoid unnecessary hardship. SECT2a 2! The Meynr shall sign this Ordinance and 'be City Clerk shall cause the ass to be published within fifteen (15) days after its paesagc at least once In The Oaily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published in the -icy of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cuummnga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of September, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Jan D. Mikels, Mayor Beverly A. Aurhelet, City Clerk l • ORDINANCE NO. a2 �- • AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON THE IN- CREASE OF MOBILE HOME PARK SPACE RENTS, AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Notwithstanding any other orovision of law, between the effective date of this Ordinance and December 19, 1984, no owner, manager or agent of a mobile home park shall increase, or give notice of the intent to increase, the rent of any mobile home park space tenant. SECTION 2: Any rent increase, or notice of intent to increase rents, which is imposed or is given in violation of the provisions of Section 1 of this Ordinance shall be void. SECTION 3: The City Council finds that this Ordinance is in the best interests of the public health, safety and welfare because it will avoid the possibility of unreasonable increases in mobile home park spare rents while a mobile home park rent control Ordinance, and alternatives thereto, are being considered by the City Council. • SECTION 4: This Ordinance is hereby declared to be an urgency measure, and it shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. SECTION 5: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15( days after its passage at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: 10 CITY CLERK G(' J 40 Per the attached letter, the applicant has withdrawn their appeal of the above- described project. The applicant is working with staff on preparing a revised project in response to the direction received from the Planning Commission and public input. Therefore, it is recommended that this item be pulled from the agenda. Respectfully submitted, City Planner RG:DC:jr Attachments: Letter from Applicant Withdrawing Appeal !v 7 MEMORANDUM DATE: September 5, 1984 19- TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - RJ INVESTMENTS - The development of a 126 unit apartment complex on 9.03 acres of land in the Medium Residential district (8 -14 du /ac) located on the west side of Baker, south of Foothill - APN 207 - 581 -57, 58; 207 -571- 79. Per the attached letter, the applicant has withdrawn their appeal of the above- described project. The applicant is working with staff on preparing a revised project in response to the direction received from the Planning Commission and public input. Therefore, it is recommended that this item be pulled from the agenda. Respectfully submitted, City Planner RG:DC:jr Attachments: Letter from Applicant Withdrawing Appeal !v 7 Angus' 31, 1984 )Pyor Jon. ti.kels Clty of Ranci:o Cucamonga 4310, Baseline Road, unit C Rancho Cucamonga, C.1 Re: hithd:'awal of Council Anneal of Development Review Application 84 -n3 Dcur 'layor ',Uels: After considerable deliberation with community leaders, City staff and our own proiezt team, R. J. Investments respectfully withdraws its City Council appeal of the „tanning Commission denial of Development Review Application 94 -Ofi, ,T „r with.trawal and our future intent, based on City staff direction, is -a c^.pie,iiately reprocess a new vesidential land use plan with a lower density townhouse product. Our development criteria will be based on Planning ' Cnm mission and staff direction to have lower densities adjacent to tine single family residences, eliminate the loop circulation road next to the Acacia town - ':o�es, oltminaty through traffic into the single family tract, lower the nverall density to the lo: end of the density range ar.d prey idea yes iJen.ial program of coy sale krsi ng. nc ;Mnrecin-C the City time expended on our behalf. l'er,' truly yours. inr•d, %Y. Strocier, AICP p re!oct Planning Consultant INS: re cc: City Council Rick Gomez Dan Coleman J C: ^ f' • • STAFF REPORT Y T � I 19 -- DATE: September 5, 1984 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO REQUIRE AN ENVIRONMEN AL I ACT REPORT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BENTSEN L NNHAV N APARTMENTS - A review of the environmental assessment Tor a proposed master plan for 936 apartment units located on approximately 58.3 acres on the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Haven Avenue in the Medium High development district - APN 202- 211 -59, 69. BACKGROUND: The applicant has appealed the Planning Commission's ecis3 ion to require a focused Environmental Impact Report for the above - described project. The Planning Commission, at its meeting of July 25, 1984, held a public hearing to make a determination whether a Negative Declaration should be issued or a focused Environmental Impact Report should be required for the proposed project. After considerable discussion and review of the environmental assessment prepared by the applicant's environmental consultant, public testimony, and staff report, the Planning Commission decision was to require a focused Environmental Impact Report to focus on the areas of land use, density, traffic /circulation, and to identify other land use alternatives. To understand the Planning Commission's decision, it is necessary to distinguish between an "Environmental Impact Report (EIR)" and the "Environmental Assessment" prepared by the applicant. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines define an EIR as "an informational document which will inform public agency decision- makers and the public generally of the significant environmental effect of a project, identify possible ways to mitigate any significant impacts, and describe reasonable alternatives to the project." The Environmental Assessment is a compilation of technical data and related information that the City staff and Planning Commission can then use to determine whether an "' or a Negative Declaration should be prepared. The Environmental Assessment is not an EIR Attached for your review and consideration is the Planning Commission staff report which fully outlines the policies and issues applicable in this case and minutes of the July 25, 1984 Planning Commission meeting. Also attached are the environmental assessment and master plan prepared by the applicant's consultant. i CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Appeal - OR 84 -22 /Bentsen September 5, 1984 Page 2 u RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council require the preparation of a focused Environmental Impact Report in the areas of land use, density, traffic /circulation, and to identify other land use alternatives. Respectfully submitted, Rick Gomez City Planner RG: DC: jr Attachments: Appeal Letter From Applicant Planning Commission Staff Report - July 25, 1984 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 1984 Lyrnhaven Environmental Assessment Lynnhaven District -Wide Master Plan • (o a 0 • i associates .JaGlaaersg City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga California 91730 3 August 1984 re: Environmental Assessment for Development Review Lynnhaven Community APN 202- 271 -59,69 Lan Bentsen Interests Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council: After due reflection and consideration it is our sincere belief that the Planning Commission erred in deciding to require an additional environmental assessment of the Lynnhaven Community development project on 25 July 1984. As the authorized representative of Lan Bentsen Interests I hereby make apneal to that decision of the Planning Commission. Tru � Donald G. King, Ph.D. Principal CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AOMINISTR, TION AUG 3 1984 AM PM 718191101111>2111215141516 4 �e 9375 Archibald Avnnue, Suite 212 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 (714)987.7077 rnrc''t1 - NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AUro r RANCHO CUCAMONGA r„ p CITY COUNCIL ',r!S,J!lll!it;iE!1!:C11!Jp115!6 The Rancho Cucamonga City Council will be holding public hearings at 7:30p.a. on September 5, at the Lions Park Community Building located at 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730, to consider the following described project(s): APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO REQUIRE A FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -27 - BENTSEN - The development of a 924 unit apartment complex to be built in 3 phases on approximately 58.3 acres of land located on the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Haven Avenue in the MH Development District - APN 202 - 271 -59, 60. Anyone having concerns or questions on any of the above items is welcome to contact the City Planning Division at (714) 989 -1851, or visit the office located at 9340 Base Line Road, Unit B. Also, anyone objecting to or in favor of the above, may appear in person at the above - described meeting or may submit their concerns in writing to the Planning Division, City of Rancho Cucamonga, Post Office Box 807, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, prior to said meeting. Rancho Cucamonga City Council Ruqust 24, 1984 • Date For Publication r /^/ 7- /(Qj�(,L ✓L�'fJ,Llt -° a �'^lN../ "e`.f/�fy UIN ^i -- CITY OF RANCHO CCCANIO \CA COS STAFF REPORT liz 197- DATE: July 25, 1984 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Frank Dreckman, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 94 -22 - BENT EN LYNNHAVEN APARTMENTS - A review of the environmental assessment for a proposed master plan for 936 apartment units located on approximately 58.3 acres on the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Haven Avenue in the Medium -High Development District - APN 202- 271 -59, 59. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Reauested: Environmental determination of the Initial tu3 -- B. Purpose: Environmental determination for the development of a 924 apartment unit Master Plan. C. Location: North side of Highland Avenue, 500 feet east of Haven Avenue. D. Parcel Size: 58.27 acres, gross; 45.42 acres, net. E. Project Density:_ 15.85 du /ac, gross; 20.37 du /ac, net. F. Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant parcel, zoned Medium High Reside G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant parcel, zoned Low Medium Residential. Northwest - Single family residential, zoned Low Medium Residential. South - Proposed Foothill Freeway corridor; single family residential, zoned Low and Low Medium Residential. East - Vacant parcel, zoned Medium Residential. West - Vacant parcel, zoned Neighborhood Commercial. H. General Plan Oesi nations: rolect Ite - t4ed rum High Residential, (Master Plan required), 14 -24 du /ac. North - Low Medium Residential, (4 -8 du /ac). I PLANNING CO ?1MISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and DR 34 -22 - 8entson July 25, 1984 Page 2 South - Low and Low Mediva Residential, (2 -4 and 4 -3 du /ad). East - Medium Residential (4 -14 du /ac). West - Neighborhood Commercial. Site Characteristics: As illustrated on Exhibit "A ", the Lynnnaven project site is predominantly vacant with the exception of various Eucalyptus windrows which transverse the site in an east/west fashion. Presently, the site is undeveloped with no structures or existing improvements. The site contains a variety of indigenous plant materials consisting of coastal sage scrub varieties. The site slopes at approximately an 8: grade, north to south. J. Project Description Master Plan: As illustrated an the site plan, Exhibit "A ", the applicant is proposing the development of a 924 unit apartment complex on 15.85 acres of land in the Medium High Residential District. The complex will consist of three phases of approximately 300 units each. Units will consist of one -, two- , and three - bedrooms contained in one -, two -, and three -story clusters. Total open space consists of 18.86 acres. Access to the project is via Lemon Avenue. Four access driveways have been provided which lead to an interior loop circulation system. Phase 1: Phase I consists of a total of 316 dwelling units with an overall density of 20.58 dwelling units per acre. Usable open space equates to 6.95 acres and 620 parking spaces have been provided. Dwellings will consist of one -, two -, and three - bedroom units located within one to three -story units. II. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: The following Environmental Analysis is designed to elaborate upon the potential environmental impacts listed on the Initial Environmental Study, Part II. The analysis includes a description of the environmental setting; identifies potential environmental impacts; includes applicant's proposed mitigation measures, along with to additional mitigation measures which may be appropriate as identified by Staff. The Planning Commission will have to determine whether a ?legative Declaration should be issued, or whether an Environmental Impact Report should be required, for the proposed project. 7� • • • PLANNING COMMIS5ION STAFF REPORT • Environmental Assessment and DR 84 -22 - Bentsen July 25, 1984 Page 3 A. Geology /Soils There are two potential sources of future ground rupture within the City, these being the potentially active Cucamonga and Red Hill faults, (Exhibit "B ".) The Alquist- Priolo Geologic Hazard Zones Act of 1973 requires that special study zones be established around potentially and recently active fault areas. The project site lies outside of both these special study zones. Soils within the project site area consist of the Tijunga- Soboba variety characterized by deep, well drained, and rapidly permeable soils. Development constraints related to soil characteristics appears minimal. The topography of the site, Exhibit "C ", is characterized by a relatively flat geologic plate tilted in a north /south direction. The drop in elevation across the site (1,350 feet) is 69 feet from north to south, producing an average slope of aproximately 6 %. • Impacts o Unavoidable adverse impacts related to seismic activity. Potential for a 6.5 - 7.5 magnitude event is possible along the Cucamonga and Red Hill faults. a Increased on -site erosion due to project grading, cuts, and fills. Proposed Mitigation Measures o Strict adherence to the Uniform Building Code Seismic Standards. o Strict adherence to the requirements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga grading standards. Additional Mitiaation Measures o Provide an erosion and dust control plan. o The site shall be graded in accordance with the City grading standards as they relate to the following topics: - Restrict slope to 8 feet in vertical height, per City standards. %` .1 A'i'lI'10 CO)4MISSTOt1 STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and OR 94 -22 - Bentson • July 25, 1984 Page 3 - Encourage 3:1 slopes to be used exclusively. The site should be designed to accommodate grading by providing a series of steps. - Contour grading principles should be utilized providing natural appearing slopes. o Retaining ,call should be provided to reduce slope impact. B. Hydrology Settina: As illustrated in Exhibit "D ", the project site will receive hydrologic flows from as far north as the Chaffey College campus. The applicant has provided two storm drain alternatives (Exhibit "E ") designed to accommodate drainage generated by a 25 year storm. The first alternative advocates providing a drainage pipe contiguous to the southerly property line, which would gather stormwater runoff and convey it to the south under Highland Avenue to the Deer Creek channel. The second alternative advocates providing a drainage pipe contiguous to the southerly property line, but conveying • stormwater runoff eastward, along Highland Avenue, to the Deer Creek channel. The project site does not fall within a 100 -year flood plain, which is that area of land subject to flood hazards from a storm whose intensity occurs on the average of once every 100 years (Exhibit "F "). Impacts o Increased residential development could accentuate the City's flooding problem by decreasing the amount of permeable ground surface and increasing the amount of water runoff. o Increased erosion due to on -site excavation, site clearance, utility trenching, etc. Proposed Mitigation Measures o The applicant has proposed tdo drainage system alternatives to accommodate on -site flows, and drainage generated off - site to the north. • PLANNING CTIMISSIOM STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and OR 34 -22 - Bentson July 25, 1994 Page 5 ,Additional Mitigation Measures o Provide additional open space designed to accommodate water percolation. o Provide an erosion control plan designed to mitigate on- site construction erosion. o Provide temporary on -site siltation basins designed to control erosion. C. Biota Setting: The oroject site is located within the coastal Sage crub Association characterized by perennial grasses and native plant materials. According to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report, development east of Haven Avenue, and north of Highland Avenue (project site) should be sensitive to the site. Builders are required to ensure that grading and construction practices minimize land alterations and removal of native vegetation. The Environmental Impact Report also • encourages preservation of existing Eucalyptus windrows (which occur on the site) whenever possible. Currently no .wildlife or plant species found within the Rancho Cucamonga area is on, or officially proposed, for addition to the Department of Interior's Endangered Species list. n Impacts o Loss of native plant materials. o Elimination of habitat (cover, feeding areas, open space) for small mammals such as rabbits and numerous birds that occupy the coastal scrub association, forcing migration. Proposed Mitigation Measures o Windrow preservation, wherever possible. Additional Mitigation '4easures o Provide windrow preservation plan. o Use native, indigenous plant materials wherever possible. PLAW41IG COMMISS:TI STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and DR 94 -22 - 3entson July 25, 1994 • Page 5 D. Traffic /Circulation Setting: The project site currently abuts Highland Avenue, which is a major east -west arterial. In the future, however, the proposed Foothill Freeway will traverse the southerly edge of the project site, separating Highland Avenue from the project site. Primary access to the site will be provided by Lemon :venue which will extend to the east with each phase of development, and then veer south under the proposed Foothill Freeway to ultimately connect to Highland Avenue, west of the Deer Creek channel (Exhibit G). Lemon Avenue is currently a collector street. The applicant proposes that Lemon avenue become a secondary highway with an 30 foot right-of-way. In addition, the applicant is proposing the inclusion of a left turn lane and traffic signal at Lemon and Haven Avenues (Exhibit H). The applicant has projected average daily traffic generated from the Lynnhaven development to be 5,110 average daily trips, with projected average daily trips for Lynnhaven, and the surrounding area of 15,910. Impacts o Increased traffic on Lemon Avenue east of Haven. is (Increased vehicle trips per day of up to 5,601 from the Lynnhaven project.) Proposed Mitigation Measures o Lemon Avenue to become a Secondary Highway designed to accommodate the increased traffic (80 ft. row, 64 ft. curb - to- curb). o Installation of a traffic signal at Haven and Highland Avenues. o Installation of a left turn only lane, an optional left turn /through lane, and a right turn only lane at Haven and Lemon Avenues. Additional Mitigation Measures o Provide the Lemon Avenue easterly loop (to Highland Avenue) with the first project phase. • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT . Environmental Assessment and OR 84 -22 - Bentson July 25, 1984 Page 7 E. Noise Settina /Impacts: As is evident, the proposed Lynnhaven will abut the proposed Foothill Freeway; a noise source which will create the most significant change in the noise environment of the City. As depicted on Exhibit "I ", future noise contours adjacent to the Foothill Freeway .gill reach a level of 65 Ldn. According to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report, it was assumed that noise mitigation (by CalTrans) would be included in the design of the freeway, reducing the noise levels by 10 dBA below what would occur without mitigation. However, even with the 10 dBA of attenuation, noise levels will increase at dwellings backing up to the freeway corridor by as much as 10 dBA, raising the average (Ldn) noise level to between 65 and 75 Ldn. (A 10 dBA increase is perceived as approximately a doubling in loudness.) As illustrated in Exhibit "J ", Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments, multi - family residential developments may be exposed comfortably to approximately 60 Ldn; noise levels between 60 -70 Ldn require new construction or development to be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Noise levels between 70 -75 Ldn are potentially unacceptable. If new construction or development does proceed in the 70 -75 Ldn noise contours, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Outdoor areas must be shielded. Proposed Mitigation Measures o Require an acoustical analysis showing how noise standards of 65 CNEL (exterior) and 45 CNEL (interior) can be met for dwellings located within 100 feet of arterial streets, and 400 feet of the proposed freeway corridor. o Use of glazing and wall materials to reduce noise (dBA). o Buffer the interior of the development by carports and three -story buildings. o Reduce construction hours between 6:00 and 8:00 p.m. Muffle mechanical equipment. Additional Mitigation Measures o An additional acoustical analysis shall be required prior to scheduling the project for subsequent Planning Commission approval. The analysis shall include: PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and OR 84 -22 - Bentson • July 25, 1984 Page 8 - A detailed future noise contour map of the site, illustrating noise contours generated by Lemon Avenue and the Foothill Freeway. - Dwellings shall be located outside the 60 Ldn future noise contours. Outdoor areas shall be shielded from potentially unacceptable noise levels. A 60 Ldn noise level shall be acceptable for exterior noise. - Providing berming and intensified landscaping adjacent to the Foothill Freeway corridor and Lemon Avenue. - Increasing the distance between noise source and the proposed buildings. - Placing non -noise sensitive land uses, such as parking lot, between noise sources and dwellings. - Using non -noise sensitive structures such as carports to shield noise- sensitive areas. - Orienting buildings to shield outdoor spaces from noise . sources. - Placing noise sensitive spaces (bedrooms) away from major noise sources. - Providing noise barriers or walls between noise sources and dwellings. - Providing construction methods such as sealed windows, thicker windows, double glazing, solid core doors, wall modifications, etc., to reduce interior noise. F. Services Utilities: Utilities will be provided to the project site by The Southern California Gas Company, General Telephone, the Chino Basin Municipal 'dater District, and the Cucamonga County Water District. Impacts: None. Police /Fire: Fire service is provided by the Foothill Fire District. Response times to the site are 5 minutes for Station No. 1, 9 minutes for Station No. 2, and 8 minutes for Station No. 3. Police facilities are provided by the County • Sheriff's Department. �a PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT • Environmental Assessment and OR 94 -22 - Bentsen July 25, 1984 Page 9 Imoacts: o The project is located adjacent to a fire hazard area. An additional 122 calls will occur annually due to the Lynnhaven development. o The proposed project dill add an additional 329 calls annually for police responses. Pr000sed Mitigation Measures o Fire resistant building design. o Removal of vegetative fuel due to site clearance. o Plant fire retardant olant materials. ?O o Adequate fire hydrant spacing, water flows, etc. o Cash contribution towards the Fire District's fire protection fund for new fire stations. • Additional Mitigation Measures o Further information is necessary to determine the need for additional fire and police personnel. Education: The Alta Loma School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District provide K -12 public education for this section of the community. Imoacts o The project will generate a total of 145 students to be absorbed into the Alta Loma and Chaffey School Districts. Proposed Mitigation Measures o School fees will be levied on each apartment unit. G. LAND USE Setting: As illustrated on the site plan, Exhibit "A", the Lynnnaven development is divided into three pages of approximately 15 acres. Each phase is designed to accommodate approximately 300 units and 6 acres of open space. Overall density for the entire project equates to 20.58 dwelling units per acre. However, the applicant has attempted to transition ?O PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and DR 94 -22 - Bentsen • July 25, 1984 Page 10 the density from lower density, 6.98 du /ac adjacent to Lemon Avenue, to 24 du /sc adjacent to the Foothill Freeway corridor (Exhibit "K "). According to the applicant, each phase will be distinguished from the other by different product types (floor plans and elevations), in addition to variation in architectural theme, unit design, materialE and siting. Each of the three phases will be separated into two distinct sites by a circulation spine which traverses the site in an east /west fashion. The northermost portion of the site will contain single story structures adjacent to Lemon Avenue, with lower density and larger oriented units. The southerly areas on the site are designed primarily with density levels of between 17 -31 dwelling units per acre (Exhibit Impacts o Neighborhood compatibility with existing and future single family structures, located north of the project site. 0 Increased traffic generation on Lemon Avenue. • Pr000sed Mitigation ''l- asures o Transition of density away from Lemon Avenue (7 du /ac adjacent to Lemon Avenue). a Single story units adjacent to Lemon Avenue. Additional Mitigation Measures o The Planning Commission may request various Master Plan alternatives designed to provide a greater transition of density; greater distinction of product types; inclusion of additional open space; alternative site configurations, etc. III. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission needs to determine the appropriateness of (1) issuing a Negative Declaration, or (2) requiring a focused Environmental Impact Report, Alternative 1: "le alive Declaration: Alternative 1 describes the issuance a a Negative Dec oration only if the Commission agrees that the initial environmental analysis is complete and that the mitigation measures proposed (which will become conditions of • f' PLANNI >IG COMMISSION STAFF REPORT • Environmental Assessment and DR 84 -22 - Bentson July 25, 1984 Page 11 project approval) adequately address and mitigate all environmental impacts. If this alternative is chosen, the Planning Commission shall direct staff to prepare the necessary environmental documentation for Planning Commission consideration prior to project approval. Alternative 2: Environmental Impact Report: Alternative 2 describes the requirement or an Environmenta Impact Report. If the Commission determines that the environmental assessment of the Initial Study has not fully addressed the issues and that further environmental information is needed prior to project review, then an Environmental Impact Report should be required and shall include and identify various project alternatives, growth inducements, and cumulative impacts, as well as additional analysis in those areas identified by the Planning Commission. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised for environmental review in The Tlaily Report newspaper. In addition, persons living within 500 feet of the project site have been notified by mail. In addition, the Deer Creek Homeowner's Association and members of the 19th Street Corridor group have also been notified. • R4,1: rti l� submitted, FO:ns Attachments • \C SV Ism I c:1.n or RANCHO CCC .NJO. GA PLANNING DVISION Wei "A i 9_7 } z 2.3 pa UQ Z Z } ITEM; - - -- TITLE EXHIBIT: SCE \LG ?y Figure V-3 GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS .. . ..... ... ..... ......... ----------- - . . . ...... ...... . ..... Ir lwv IT A EA I_ - -I— // gan+lc luzwos: .... ...... ......... NORTI I 0 CITY OF ITIAI: 0 RANCHO CUCA-NIONGA TITLE: PLANNING DlVjSjON EXHIBIT; 'N SCALE:� 0.5 '7r--77 40 40 A M!M CITY OF -ITBI: - RANCIJOC UC�-\,N IONGA TITLE: PLANNING Dl\'ISION, EXHIBIT: C, SCALE " � 10 U 2 2 WI-U >23 iq3u 2 z02 Jud Qo vvonvoovu� Q 0 © TRIBUTARY AREA � s v v I /tf Kl 1 /llK) I t!. /yam( �� - �."J"�i�Rlllll � 1 I�II�IIIIII�111�11111� I j • K) OJ.1G1 PROJECT � it SITE AREA 1, 1. vn ®` ZI Z, Pt.y "T t 1 63 ]]' a I 6t 7h'. IIIIIIIIIIII I�IIIH�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIilllllll� ,' ' l� NORTH CITY 0I: ITFNI RANCHO Ci;CAN1pNGA TITLE A 1L. — PLANNING DIVISION EXIiIDITz 1--) _SCALEt f? 11 LYNNHAVEN COMMUNITY a (� ` �•P� {i ! RANCHO CUCAMONOA, CA. L_=-- .3 --.r, ` -tw- •uwae�yeuuE -- ,.._ _.�'•• ea OSFO - F MA, fh"WAY ' � e OFF• ITH UTILITY 6 STORM ORAIN PLAN NORTH CITY OF ITEM; RANCHO CUCANIONGA TITLE -p—') 4 P� �iw� 7•w� • PLANNING DIVISIOQN E. \IIIRITFSC\LE: Ja 0 u 4 , NORTH CITY OF ITEM: RANCHO CL:GI'NIO \GA TITLE PLANNING DIVISION EM HIT: �_ SCALE: -- aJ W 7 z W Q z W z l LEMON F STREET qJ 1 a'F ✓ V \ORTH i L CITY OF ITEM: R.1 \Ci-i0 CUCA.NIO \(,A TITLC: L� ��-�^d�� ItM�. PLANNI \G DIVISION EXHIBIT: H' SCALC: — T FUTURE NOISE EXPOSURE CONTOURS Ldn METWC _._ NOISE CONTOUR �PROGOSED FOOTiML FREEWAY CONTOURS A591ME IOLR Ai TENOATION NORTH crry of ITG \h RANCHO CUCAMO\GA TITLE: z" PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: - SCALE :y 0 r:C6"ALLYAC<'c ;AOLE beU i n: i vcaslOC:Crv. bUaetl eCCn 1 < nY)IrUI c <v Pv:IJ'npy .n wvro C rl . rcl ept I wi!MVa my a.ec aI ro¢e niulCl'9n rl aV�Pmeni3,� W r I TIWIALL, Ar(•EPTA ^sV.e�tahmen7 fiovla be v.nllertek•n Umv � atl<a h a.iu hl Ov n rnbomer rt4v:rElm<n13 y4 meCe mE nenCC9 Mate o aVlnf.m f<a- \vf ES it <r +iEeh it 1*C a<5in. cnv<nli0nal =hnaIIVC- y:M. Cv) w CIOf <0 w 3 fna )ItSrr G OPH SYalfTa aeh OrEilipnn `�w:�lrOrmOna:u((Cl4VU1- C9a1 fnv�lon'n<rV w::: y><m M `P0 E!rT I ALLY I rIACCr PT-t f.m ca:an xr v100m<n1 ;nanid nn<rhrlr :Ie aiycnV<ogM. Re^!w cM IIIAI t m eamoomena Mey D.oa<a, n aa:ma shsn ar me ro ew<nen n mvu n< a ^e <a<aljou.:mma. eon i.m�<s mcM,c<o .n r < anion. 9=leohr ar<m a. mma Ee anI<m<a. rpRVpLIY I';ACf,EPTABIE +•a cevur lo r,k, llr E<anEpac4m. Canahvicem <oyrs ro mCk< fie ent c ce Dlable weola :e Dran:bnw< and Pe Id lb, e\aaol enr,ronn•.<nr wa�Id Mr ee �5cem. I 0 r:C6"ALLYAC<'c ;AOLE beU i n: i vcaslOC:Crv. bUaetl eCCn 1 < nY)IrUI c <v Pv:IJ'npy .n wvro C rl . rcl ept I wi!MVa my a.ec aI ro¢e niulCl'9n rl aV�Pmeni3,� W r I TIWIALL, Ar(•EPTA ^sV.e�tahmen7 fiovla be v.nllertek•n Umv � atl<a h a.iu hl Ov n rnbomer rt4v:rElm<n13 y4 meCe mE nenCC9 Mate o aVlnf.m f<a- \vf ES it <r +iEeh it 1*C a<5in. cnv<nli0nal =hnaIIVC- y:M. Cv) w CIOf <0 w 3 fna )ItSrr G OPH SYalfTa aeh OrEilipnn `�w:�lrOrmOna:u((Cl4VU1- C9a1 fnv�lon'n<rV w::: y><m M `P0 E!rT I ALLY I rIACCr PT-t f.m ca:an xr v100m<n1 ;nanid nn<rhrlr :Ie aiycnV<ogM. Re^!w cM IIIAI t m eamoomena Mey D.oa<a, n aa:ma shsn ar me ro ew<nen n mvu n< a ^e <a<aljou.:mma. eon i.m�<s mcM,c<o .n r < anion. 9=leohr ar<m mma Ee anI<m<a. rpRVpLIY I';ACf,EPTABIE on er c<,<Ibwrrol lly wa lo r,k, llr E<anEpac4m. Canahvicem <oyrs ro mCk< fie ent c ce Dlable weola :e Dran:bnw< and Pe Id lb, e\aaol enr,ronn•.<nr wa�Id Mr ee �5cem. Figure V -9 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMMUNITY NOISE ENVIRONMENTS \ORT1 I CITY or 11,r)IP RANC'ri0 CUC MONGA TITLEAICSS�/t�,� ,� PL,%;N\I \G DIVISION PV flmT: 14 SCALE: a� THIS DENSITY TRANSITION SHOWN FOR PHASE ONE. IT IS TYPICAL FOR ALL PHASES • this area to the north is zoned LM 4 to 8 Units per acre • center of center of drive center of open space spine LEMON AVENUE 2.25 acres net / 16 Units: 7.11 units per acre net 0 acres gross / 16 Units: 5.71 units per acre gross 2.84 acres / 40 Units: 14.0 Units per acre net 4.86 acres net / 90 Units: 18.51 Units per acre net 5.40 acres net / 170 Units: 31.48 Units per acre net 0.22 acres gross / 170 Units: 20.68 Units per acre gross TOTAL SITE i reserved for loothl8 freeway 15.35 acres net / 316 Units: 20.58 Units per acre net 18.72 acres gross / 316 Units: 16.88 Units per acre gross HIGHLAND AVENUE fk/rI 61+ r y ay DENSITY TRANSITIONS 19 0 V \'ORTH CI Y OF ITEM: • RANCHO CCCA-N10I, 1 TITLE:��n_woti ri PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: SCALE a Highland = Avenue V \'ORTH CI Y OF ITEM: • RANCHO CCCA-N10I, 1 TITLE:��n_woti ri PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: SCALE a DEVELOPMENT REVIEW • LYNNHAVEN PRCJZCT ==RENTS RANCHO CU'C:..MCNGA STATION BY CE ?CTY JCHN SC- 1 -ABACH 999 -55i: TRAFFIC: There will be an increased workload on the Traffic Unit. The unit will be receiving calls on traffic collisions and will be expected to enforce traffic laws within the project. Also the increased flow of _f_c outside the project will increase the enfcrcement load along with more accidents. CRlMrNAL ACTIVITY: With the influx of many new fam.iiies the crime rate will increase with it. It is recommended that proper security locks be installed on all doors and windows. Doors must have deadbolts with one inch throw bolts and free flowing cylinder guards installed. Windows must not be removable in a closed and locked position. The sliding portion of the windows and sliding glass doors must be on the inside tracks. Any child play areas must be located to allow good visibility • from surrounding homes. Any Community swi7mi ^.g pools must be clearly visible from homes and the street. 9 Any play areas or community pool areas must have sufficient lighting during darkness. Sidewalks should have at least five -foot candles of lighting during darkness. Any parking lots should have five -foot candles of lighting during darkness. If a laundry room is proposed, it must have large windows and should be located to allow visibility inside from the street. It must nave sufficient lighting inside and outside. Lighting in parks, pools, parking lots and laundry room areas should have liznt sensitive switcners. 94� CITY JUIL /H`C �Lt2.6� ttt -�e.t /�✓LJ.i -.r � Y- caZ Z - �^—� 16-1 al a4fe, C � 0 7 0 �,.. , 11.1 CI ^ 0l MEMORANDUM ^' DATE: duly 9, 1984 - ja--- TO: Tim Beadle, Senior Planner FROM: Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer � f' SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment for Lynnhaven Project The following are comments on the adequacy of the Environmental Assessment prepared by Donald King d Associates for the above project: TRAFFIC AND CIRCOLA.TION 1. The trip generation rate used for project traffic is the minimum acceptable for analysis. City staff will inflate the resultant traffic volumes for determination of project conditions, etc., so the calculations need not be repeated with more desirable rates at this --e. 2, The analysis of traffic impacts on Lemon Avenue were done using oniy the project traffic. Traffic generated by the area bebneen Lemon and canyon and the area east of the project area should also be included and distributed appropriately. It is felt by City staff that neit!:_r the master plan cross section of Lemon nor the Haven /Leman intersection will be adequate if the impact area mentioned above is developed at upoer end densities. Impacts and mitigation should be assessed using all traffic to determine if provisions for upgrading these facilities should now be made. 3. Temporary connections to Highland Avenue have been pr000sed for each phase as interim access. Such access points would be primary accesses because of the predominately southerly orientation of travel from the project area. The elimination of this access by freeway construction and /or the realignment of Highland Avenue to the south could thus cause a considerable problem for the City. There should be an assessment of the effects of the creation of a dependence upon these temporary accesses. HYDROLOGY The hydrologic assessment appears adequate, subject to confirmation of quantities at later stages of planning. The general assumption of the provision of an adequate storm drain system should also be further supported in any planning documents for the project. PAR:jaa a� F001thill L' re PROTECTION DIS'TRIC'T. Planner Cit.; of n° :.O laCamcnga P.0. 3cx ?C7 Ra. ^.n_':c Cucarcn-a, CA 91730 I-1 "'o P.O. Box x35 Ra %vx Cugamone_a, CA 91701 V Y:• :: 6 } 6 The :iron Haven Pr°P.e Proposed 936 units on F :igh'snd Avenue �u3J. Ccr.d it4ens as set ..rth b;r the Foothill Fire District for of Said prcje^t Lear ]r- ck ^an: In addition to the information and comments provided in the initial study of the 3nv` =entai lm act Retort, the following conditions shall a'_so • sr Them ragranh a on ge 57 item. 3 mv .10b ict, 3rd paragraph stall be ccrren--d to read as font's: it has 'been determined by the Fire District eject •.,11 .rave si :5..ificant imract and will generate approximately _.._- .icna_ emergency r_s_-.ses L, B. I. Leve'_oc ^rent, Inc. must negotiate with t *,e Fire District a fair and eouita'cie contribution toward the District's fire protection fund to mitigate damages. The standard fire d.strict impact formula will be used to determine the degree of contribution p^cportfanate to the need created. Correction number 2 appears on page 58, section 3.10c under mitigating measures, paragraph number 4. The figure 1,250 gallons per minute requirement shall be struck and corrected to read 2,000 gallons per minute at 20 pounds per square Inch for 2 hours. on page 58, section 3.10c mitigating measures, under n srngrap'n 5, the sentence reads: These measures have not yet been '_mple:-.ented. Th.s sentence shall be struck. New sentence shall read: Prier to recordation of ...._ ..:vt tract, the °ollcwing shall be acccmplis :ned. Item a re hydrant ,rac4n; ani :ire flow shall conform to dis;r'ct requirements Item b, L. 3. 1. Deveicnment, Inc. shall contribute proportionately based upon Proect i ^.pact to the tens - ruction of a fire station and facilities and to the oncoin4 eperatienal and manning needs of said station. Item c., L. B. I. Develorment, Inc. shall contribute • 6623 Amethyst 51., Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91701 9 4 Phone (714) 9871575 Wiu 6' > ! mss% J The :iron Haven Pr°P.e Proposed 936 units on F :igh'snd Avenue �u3J. Ccr.d it4ens as set ..rth b;r the Foothill Fire District for of Said prcje^t Lear ]r- ck ^an: In addition to the information and comments provided in the initial study of the 3nv` =entai lm act Retort, the following conditions shall a'_so • sr Them ragranh a on ge 57 item. 3 mv .10b ict, 3rd paragraph stall be ccrren--d to read as font's: it has 'been determined by the Fire District eject •.,11 .rave si :5..ificant imract and will generate approximately _.._- .icna_ emergency r_s_-.ses L, B. I. Leve'_oc ^rent, Inc. must negotiate with t *,e Fire District a fair and eouita'cie contribution toward the District's fire protection fund to mitigate damages. The standard fire d.strict impact formula will be used to determine the degree of contribution p^cportfanate to the need created. Correction number 2 appears on page 58, section 3.10c under mitigating measures, paragraph number 4. The figure 1,250 gallons per minute requirement shall be struck and corrected to read 2,000 gallons per minute at 20 pounds per square Inch for 2 hours. on page 58, section 3.10c mitigating measures, under n srngrap'n 5, the sentence reads: These measures have not yet been '_mple:-.ented. Th.s sentence shall be struck. New sentence shall read: Prier to recordation of ...._ ..:vt tract, the °ollcwing shall be acccmplis :ned. Item a re hydrant ,rac4n; ani :ire flow shall conform to dis;r'ct requirements Item b, L. 3. 1. Deveicnment, Inc. shall contribute proportionately based upon Proect i ^.pact to the tens - ruction of a fire station and facilities and to the oncoin4 eperatienal and manning needs of said station. Item c., L. B. I. Develorment, Inc. shall contribute • 6623 Amethyst 51., Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91701 9 4 Phone (714) 9871575 Fran: Crec '=an, Assistant Planner July 17, 198L ?age 2 trotortionately "cased soon .. _ .c t,.. ..__ ;aratus _.. ^.d ecci e.. to orcte nV said o - - _ • ^la. nglt o °. _re and _ s' _ .t r... _ ts�o: �`he ro,jeet •i life safety S =" ccn-,'Jrm to Joel -'zc u�`„i C. ^.S _.. 523P.d?rCa of the Fire District and the most recent adopted ed._.... of ^the Unif.... Fire Code. in cics'_ng, we lcdc forward to :Ceetine - __.. renre=_.rtat t :es of L B. Develor- ment, inc. and stand .ready to assist in doss :�_ . •• Withgoc.s 'S Sir„ W. 'caw�-sn Fire !.arshal, Ccr^nnity Cevelctnent cc: '. B. I. DevelCC ^e ^t, Inc. Yr. D.G. Kies, Associate Planners • JB /ng 0 /r, 0 Draft Excerpt - Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 1984 • PUBLIC HEARINGS B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -22 - BENTSEN LYNNHAVEN APARTMENTS - A review of the environmental assessment for a proposed master plan for 936 apartment units located on approximately 58.3 acres on the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Haven Avenue in the Medium -High Development District - APN 202 - 271 -59, 69. Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report and explained that the purpose of the hearing this evening was to make an environmental determination and not a decision on the project at this time. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Don King, 9375 Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission. Mr. King advised that the environmental document prepared and distributed prior to this meeting was the third such document to be prepared for this site. He further stated that the Commission has adequate environmental documentation to make a decision now without the requirement for additional environmental information. Mr. King stated that this project would generate school fees for school expansion and would also contribute towards the construction of a new fire station. He further stated the Sheriff's Department advised that this project would not create crime problems in this area and would not have a significant impact on the Sheriff's Department, Gordon Brickan, 1621 E. 17th, Santa Ana, California, representing the • applicant, addressed the Commission stating that traffic noise level studies were prepared for this site and that there are no problems associated with this project which cannot be mitigated. Herman Kemmel, 3300 Irvine Avenue, Newport Beach, California, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission stating that his firm had prepared traffic studies for the environmental document presented to the Commission. Mr. Kenmel reviewed the traffic impacts and mitigation measures. Peter Pfeiler, Pfeiler Engineering, 1749 Euclid, Ontario, California, representing the applicant addressed the Commission regarding the drainage and hydrology impacts and mitigation measures for the project. John Futscher, San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department, Rancho Cucamonga Substation, addressed the Commission to clarify Mr. King's statement regarding crime impacts. He stated that the fact that the 900 units were apartments would be not significant; however, 900 units would have an impact on law enforcement capabilities. The following individuals addressed the Commission in opposition to the project based on concerns regarding increased crime, impacts on schools, compatibility, traffic, Lemon access on Avenue, and drainage. • • Cathy Drees, Rancho Cucamonga Daryl Nicolay, 6245 Dakota, Rancho Cucamonga Mary Dodds, 6709 Mango, Rancho Cucamonga James Hill, Rancho Cucamonga John Gandra, 9633 Highland,-Rancho Cucamonga Craig Nelson, 10560 Lemon, Rancho Cucamonga Laura Nelson, 10560 Lemon, Rancho Cucamonga Mrs. Beckman, 1031 Liberty, Rancho Cucamonga Additionally, a petition was presented to the Commission which contained the names of over 200 individuals opposing the project. Don King responded to the concerns of the residents. He stated that those concerns expressed regarding apartments could not be addressed because apartments are provided in the General Plan for the City and this applicant is trying to design this project in a manner consistent with those goals. He advised that this project would mitigate traffic and drainage for the entire area. Additionally, the apartments are 82% adult units and would only generate approximately 40 school children, of which only about 25 would be K -8 grade students. He further stated that market studies show that there is a need for apartments in the City. Commissioner Chitiea asked if the thought had been given to working with the commercial group next to the project to provide a second access to the southwestern portion of the project. • Mr. King replied that this option had been explored; however, from the City's traffic standpoint this would not be desirable due to the location of the freeway on and off ramps. 11 Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer, clarified that the alternate presented to the City proposed an access point at the southerly access of the shopping center; however, an access point at the center access might be a good secondary access. Mr. King stated that this site is a neighborhood commercial center and to put a road through the center would make that particular site unusable as a neighborhood convenience center because there would not be adequate space for parking or good marketing. Chairman Stout closed the public hearing. Commissioner Barker stated that taking into consideration the surrounding properties including the recent change in the sphere of influence to the east he would feel more comfortable if the issues were looked at it in greater detail. He additionally stated that he would like to see other alternatives explored and discussed so that they could be compared and would recommend a focused Environmental Impact Report. /c Commissioner Rempel agreed with Commissioner Barker and stated that the traffic and circulation needed to be further explored. He additionally • requested that more definitive data be provided on how fire and police response times were arrived at and a comparison of these calls between single family housing and apartment units. Commissioner Chitiea stated that she would like to know whether the fire responses were keyed to exterior or interior fires. She further requested more information on the type of formula used to determine the number of students generated by this project. Commissioner Barker explained that there are standard formulas used by the school districts to determine the estimated number of students. Commissioner McNiel stated that his concerns were the same expressed by the other Commissioners in the that the density is excessive and that traffic is a problem. Chairman Stout stated that he could not make a decision on this project without the requirement for a focused Environmental Impact Report. Motion: Moved by Stout that an Environmental Impact Report be prepared for this project focusing on the issues of land use, traffic and circulation, and density and additionally should identify other land use alternatives. Motion seconded by Barker, carried unanimously. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL • NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried x + ♦ + w /r 2 • • DoC�o(�o�g associates • planners 29 August 1984 City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road, Suite C Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: Appeal of a Planning Commission Action of 25 July 1984 • Mr. Mayor, Members of the City Council: On July 25', 1984, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing on the Environmental Assessment for Development Review 84 -22 Lan Bentsen Interests, also known as Lynnhaven Community, APN 202- 271 - 59,69. Upon completion of the Public Hearing, Commissioner Stout moved "that an Environmental Impact Report be prepared for this project focusing on the issues of land use, traffic and circulation, density, and additionally, should identify other land use alternatives." That motion was seconded by Commissioner Barker and passed unanimously. It is our position that the Commission erred in making this requirement. We believe that the issues of concern by the Commission are either not environmental impact issues or have been exhaustively reported on already by three separate, recent environmental studies amounting to may thousands of dollars in detailed professional research. In fact, two of these previous studies specifically deal-, with alternative uses, densities, and circulation routed over and un the project site. Two of these same recent reports (prepared at City expense) found that the circulation routes proposed with a project density higher than proposed, would not have a significant impact on the environment. We believe that the existing review procedures provide adequate potential for the Planning Commission to respond to the precise • project proposed, and receive information on this precise project adequate to formulate an informed decision. �V City Council Page 2 In order to fully present our position that, in this particular instance the Planning Commission erred, I will address each of the five overall topics that the Commission found to be insufficiently documented, noting precisely where the relevant data is in fact located.* First the Commission found that additional environmental information needed to be prepared regarding the environmental consequences of land use. A wealth of environmental data is available relative to land use. In 1981, the City contracted with Sedway /Cooke, environmental planners, to prepare a complete Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan. That EIR was reviewed in depth by the City and certified as being complete. It discussed land use as an environmental topic for "subareas" of the City. one "subarea", called •Subarea CO included the project site. "Subarea C" included all land from Hermosa to Milliken and from Highland to the northerly City limits. The analysis of the subarea C land use impacts begins in detail on page 62. This analysis includes detailed breakdowns of data on each type of land use category, and amounts of vacant land. on page 69 of the Sedway /Cooke report the finding is made that • the rate of change from existing to proposed would be'a significant impact if development occurs too rapidly, thereby overtaxing the ability of the City and Special Districts to provide services. The report goes on to state that ..The Land Use Plan is, in part, a mitigation measure for many of the ' potential impacts associated with development. The Land Use Plan and policies can serve to mitigate incompatible uses with land capability. Primary measures to insure that the Land Use Plan is implemented are described in the General Plan and include zoning, specific plans, and planned unit developments. In instances where a variety of environmental considerations need to be looked at comprehensively, mandatory planned unit developments are required ". *Section 15063(b)(2) of the California Government Code states: "The lead agency shall prepare a negative declaration if the agency perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant impact on the environment." • • City Council Page 3 The report goes on to state that "To mitigate the issue of growth rate, the plan begins by defining its Community Development Goal, which calla for development consistent with the ability to serve the associated rise in the demand for public services'. The Sedway /Cooke report found, therefore, that land use would have a significant impact only if the rate of change exceeded the ability of the City and Special Districts to provide the requisite services. It notes that environmental considerations are mitigated by PUD and master plan requirements. The relevant land use questions then for an individual project are: 1. Are any services overtaxed by the project? 2. Is a master plan required? A detailed project Initial Study was prepared in the form of a complete Environmental Impact Report by D. G. Ring Associates in . June of 1984. This report analyzed all environmental topics listed in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The report was circulated in draft form to all service prpviding agencies, including the City and all Special Districts. Comments received were incorporated into the draft which was then submitted to the City on 1 June 1984. This report notes that the proposed project will not overtax any service providing agency's ability to serve. A Master Plan is also required covering all three phases of the project site. This plan is required to assure proper transition of densities on to and across the project site. The applicant was informed that the Master Plan would not be a discussion item and could not be presented during the environmental hearing. Two separate, professionally prepared, Environmental Impact Reports have been recently prepared, one by the City and One by the applicant. Both reports deal with land use as a topic. Both found that the land use proposed on the project site will not result in a significant impact upon the environment. The City, therefore, has adequate environmental information regarding land use. u City Council Page 4 Second, the Commission felt that traffic and circulation issues were not adequately addressed in the information available and they could not, therefore, make an informed decision. We believe, however, that a wealth of data and information is available for anyone who will but review it. A short summary of the data available seems appropriate, since not less than four separate traffic and circulation studies have occurred since 1980, which covered the project area: A. An Environmental Impact Report on traffic and circula- tion alternatives for the General Plan was required by the City and prepared by DRS Associates Transportation Engineers in 1980. This report considered the impacts of circulation and traffic from and to land uses throughout the City. The City was divided into discrete "Traffic Analysis Zones'. This proposed project was in Traffic Analysis Zone 75. The DKS study projected a volume of traffic on Haven . Avenue to be 30,000 average daily trips (page 38). This study projects 5,000 trips on Highland Avenue. These volumes of traffic were found to be acceptable and without significant impacts upon the environment. This report was certified by the City. This report assumed 1,260 multiple family units in the study area (page 86). An Environmental Impact Report on Land Use and Circula- tion Impacts of the General Plan was required by the City and prepared by Sedway /Cooke environmental planners in 1981. This study projected from 40 to 55,000 vehicle trips on Haven Avenue and up to 19,000 VTD on 19th Street (page 75). These volumes of traffic were found to be acceptable and without significant impacts upon the environment. That report was certified by the City. C. A detail traffic study was prepared by Herman Kimmel and Associates, transportation engineers for Lan Bentsen Interests in 1984. That study utilized overall data secured by actual counts and data from the City and prepared by Barton Aschman and Associates. This study projected up to 330000 VTD on Haven Avenue and up to 12,000 VTD on 19th Street. (East of Haven, 19th Street is to have a capacity of 43,000 VTD according to • Sedway /Cooke page 76.) The City staff requested that an additional area far beyond the project boundaries be assigned trips for trip generation purposes. /117 • City Council Page 5 . D. A detail study was prepared by Herman Kimmel and Associates, Transportation Engineers for Lan Bentsen Interests. This study assigned traffic generation from all lands south of Banyan to Highland and from Haven to the Deer Creek Channel to local streets to see what cumulative impacts there might be, even though not assignable totally to the proposed project. All impacts found, both direct and cumulative, have mitiga- tion measures proposed which will avoid any significant impact upon the environment. In summary, a wealth of data and information is available already. Recent prior City reports showing higher volumes of traffic than are now forecast were certified by the City as causing no significant impacts upon the environment. The proposed project would have a lesser affect than the cases already certified as having no significant impacts. • Third, the Planning Commission determined that sufficient environmental information relative to density was not available, so they could not determine whether the proposed project would have a significant impact upon the environment or not. We believe that adequate information regarding the environmental consequences of the density proposed is in fact available, and was originally submitted to the City on 1 June 1984. This information is contained in an Initial Study prepared in the form of an Environmental Impact Report by D. G. King and Associates, Planners and is also in a certified EIR by Sedway /Cooke, Environmental Planners. 0 According to the certified Sedway /Cooke EIR, the City used a total of 1,260 multiple family unite for its study of the project area and found that this density would not have significant environmental consequences. This project, with 324 units cannot have a significant impact by comparison. Even at total build -out of 924 units it is below the threshold density that the City has already determined would not have a significant impact on the environment. /G8 City Council • Page 6 Finally, the Commission determined that the applicant should pay for a consultant to prepare alternative land use studies for the project site. That requirement is beyond the authority of the Commission. Even if an additional Environmental Impact Report were appropriate (and one is not) the State Law (California Government Code, Section 15176(d)) states that: "Alternatives to the Proposed Action. Describe the range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the locations of the project which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project and evaluate the comparative merits of alternatives ". The alternatives available to the applicant are for multiple family housing. Because of land cost affected by adopted and published City policy, low density residential is not an alternative available. Because of City zoning law and the adopted General Plan, alternative land uses are not possible. The City has already studied alternative land uses in the recent preparation and adoption of the General Plan. Impacts of those • choices were studied in the Sedway /Cooke EIR. The City made its choice of land use and determined that this choice would not have an impact on the environment. The City should now recognize its past actions. The project has been documented adequately to show it will not have a significant impact on the environment. Mr. Mayor, Members of the City Council, in summary we have shown that the Commission erred. In this particular case, the applicant has already prepared a complete environmental analysis before even submitting the development proposal for City review. In order to accomodate the concerns and values of the community, three neighborhood meetings were held with the interested neighbors and property owners. Over 350 invitations were sent at the last meeting alone. The project was redesigned twice incorporating ideas and values of the community. The applicant has been candid, honest, and open to working with everyone to achieve a quality development that is totally in concert with adopted City Policy. The environmental questions have been answered. If design questions remain, then they should be addressed as they are for all other development review hearings. 11 /0� City Council • Page 7 • We sincerely request your considered review and action to set aside the determination of the Planning Commission, and to direct staff to set this item on the Design Review /Development Review calendar for September 1980. //Yol1u��rs truly, �� ft�'()Y�� �1 i a Donald G. Ring, Ph Principal 11,L) BACKGROUND: In response to the recent development activity along lgth Street, the City Council formed the 19th Street Corridor Subcommittee to study the issues of land use and density compatibility, increased • traffic, site planning, and architecture. As a result of the two Subcommittee meetings and input from the public, the Subcommittee made 12 recommendations which were reviewed by the Planning Commission on June 13, 1984, Based upon the Planning Commission direction from this meeting, staff prepared the attached report analyzing in detail the proposed recommendations and staff recommendations for amendments to the Development Code. The Planning Commission, at its meeting of August 8, 1984, conducted a public hearing to consider the proposed ordinance amendment and made minor modifications to the attached ordinance. For your convenience, the proposed amendments are highlighted in bold face and Planning Commission changes are italicized. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the attached ordinances. Rfpectf ubmitted, i City P anner RG:OC:jr Atachments: Planning Commission Staff Report - August 8, 1984 Planning Commission Resolution 84 -78 Planning Commission Resolution 84 -79 Ordinance Amending Title 17 Ordinance Amending Title 16 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 0cos,irrJ STAFF REPORT? �y.� • Y ;5 BIZ FATE: September 5, 1984 - I9i� • — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: August 8, 1984 C�;CASIo1c r ' �z 077 I TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Frank Dreckman, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 84-02 - ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENTS - 19TH STREET CORRIDOR - Amendments to the Rancho Cucamonga Development ode, Sections 17.02.110, 17.08.090, 17.08.050, and 17.02.020, Title 17 of the Municipal Code, in relation to time extensions, public hearing notification, transition of density, neighborhood compatibility (site plan design, landscaping, open space, grading, architecture), and preservation of viewshed. BACKGROUND: On June 13, 1984, the Planning Commission considered several Development Code amendments related to neighborhood compatibility, public notification requirements, and time extensions. Based on Planning Commission direction, staff has prepared the attached report designed to ultimately amend sections of the City's Development Code. It is intended that the Planning Commission review and discuss the proposed amendments in order to adopt the attached Resolution recommending to the City Council approval of the proposed amendments. I. Public Hearing Notifications Distance A. Notification Distance Limits o BACKGROUND: Current State laws require the City to send public hearing notices for all zoning related items by mail to all property owners withn 300 feet of an affected site. The Commission felt that certain infill projects should be required to notify surrounding residents beyond the current 300 -foot limit based on the nature of the project's development. However, to expand the notification area beyond the current limits for citywide projects may be unnecessary and costly. The Commission realized that flexibility is needed for the City to determine when expansion of the current notification limit is required and made the following recommendations: • I o Pro osed Amendment: Amendment to the Development Code by adding supplemental notification requirements to Section 17.02.110 - Public Hearings and Notification as follows: ITEM E PLANNING COMMISSIO 'AFF REPORT i Development Code Amm6dment 84 -02 Auqust 8, 1984 • Section 17.02.110 Public Hearings and Notification A. General 5. Apartments and /or multi - family projects of four (4) units or more. 0. Notice of Hearing 4. Supplemental Notice Requirements. Additional public notification beyond the standard 300 -foot boundary may be required for a development related project as determined by the City Planner in the following circumstances: (1) The proposed development is an infill project with a higher intensity land use than that of the exising neighborhood; or, (2) The proposed infill project requires a General Plan land use amendment; or, (3) The proposed infill project requires an EIR; or, (4) As determined to be necessary and desirable by the • City Planner based on the nature of the proposed project. In determining the boundaries of the expanded notification area, the following criteria shall be used: (1) The expanded area may be directly affected by the proposed project due to proposed or established circulation and drainage patterns, or access, view, grading, or other similar considerations; or (2) The expanded area is an integral part of the affected neighborhood or subdivision. If it is determined upon initial submittal that supplemental notification is necessary, the applicant shall be notified, within 30 days as part of the City's Notice of Complete Application, of expanded notification area to be included in the mailings, and shall be required to submit three (3) sets of gummed address labels based on the latest equalized tax assessors rolls for the expanded area. The application shall not be deemed complete until the labels have been submitted. 11 //3 \J PLANNING COMMISSION(- VF REPORT Development Code Am �idment 84 -02 August 8, 1984 B. Public Hearing Notification Signs BACKGROUND: Currently, the City requires notices of public hearing to be posted at project sites 10 days prior to the hearing date. The size of the public hearing notice board currently utilized by the City is 8 -1/2 inches by 14 inches. The City has received complaints that notices are too small or that they have either blown away or been removed from the posting site. The Planning Commission concurred that better announcements of the public hearings are needed and have reviewed an example of the City of Seattle's posting requirements and the size of their signs (V X 8'). The Commission supported the need to require more than one larger posting sign should the proposed sites be significant in area. /'y o Pro osed_Amendment: Amendment to the Development Code, Section 17.02.110 - Public Hearings and Notification by adding supplemental notification requirements as follows: 2. (b) Su lewental Notice R irexients. In addition to • Stan ar requirements, large 4-root by 8 -foot sign or signs may be required to be posted at the project site for development related projects in the following circumstances: (1) The proposed development is an infill project with a higher intensity land use than that of the existing neighborhood; or, (2) The proposed infill project requires a General Plan land use amendment; or, (3) The proposed infill project requires an EIR; or, (4) As determined to be necessary and desirable by the City Planner based on the nature of the proposed project. For large projects, the City Planner may determine that more than one sign is necessary. The purpose of the supplemental large sign notice requirement is to notify the community and the neighbors in the affected area early in the review process, allowing the applicant and the City the benefit of citizens' comments during the initial stages of project review. s /'y PLANNING COMMISSIO '4FF REPORT Development Code Ami..ument 84 -02 \ Auqust 8, 1984 • If it is determined upon initial submittal that a large, 4 -foot by 8 -foot notification sign(s) is necessary, the applicant shall be notified of required sign bonding fees and sign permit filing requirements within 30 days as part of the City's Notice of Complete Application. A SSW cash desposit is required to ensure compliance with the supplemental notification requirements including maintenance and removal of the large notification sign. The project application shall not be deemed complete until the large sign is installed and required cash deposit made. 2 (c) In order to implement the large signs as an effective form of public notification, the following rules and standards shall apply: (1) Si n Size and Specifications. All large sign(s) shall e our eel by eight feet (41x 81) in size and be constructed to the specifications of Figure 1. The specific project information text an the sign shall be provided by the Planning Division. (2) Location and Installation Standards. All large • sign(s) shall be nstalled according to the specifications of Figure 2. The location for the sign(s) on the project site shall be determined by the City Planner. (3) TTi_miin . All large notification sign(s) shall be installed by the applicant at the project site in accordance with the above criteria. Once the project application is deemed complete and all notification signs) installed per City standards, the project will be scheduled for Design and Development Review Committee meetings. (4) Sin Removal and Maintenance. All large sign(s) must De Kept adequately ma nta ned and remain in place until the final decision on the application has been made or the application is withdrawn. All large sign(s) shall be removed by the applicant within fourteen (14) days of the final decision or date of withdrawal. Failure to remove the sign within the prescribed period may result in forfeiture of the cash deposit and removal of the sign by the City. \J r • PLANNING COMMISSION( 'AFF REPORT Development Code Am .�dment 84 -02 August 8, 1984 II. NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY A. Grading o BACKGROUND: Current development standards, design guides, and absolute policies in the Development Code provide for compatibility with and sensitivity to the immediate environment and affected neighborhoods relative to architectural design, scale, height, setback, landscaping, etc. These standards are implemented through the Design /Development Review process. The Planning Commission concurred that greater emphasis should be placed on design guidelines and controls to implement the City's policy of providing compatible setbacks, architecture, and landscaping. However, they also felt that emphasis should be placed on reviewing grading plans to ensure that the grading of the site compliments the building setbacks, height, scale and architecture. One way to ensure for compatibility in setbacks, landscaping and architecture is not to put higher density adjacent to single family • districts. o PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: Amendment to the Development Code by adding language to ection 17.08.090 of the General Design Guidelines as follows: Section 17.08.090 General Desiqn Guidelines C. Site Plan Design I. x istin ite Conditions. Natural features should be used to an a vantage as design elements; such as mature vegetation, landforms, drainage courses, grading, rock outcroppings and views. Conversely, undesirable site figures should be minimized through proper site planning and building orientation. 5. Landscapino /Open Space. Landscaping and open spaces should 6e designed as an integral part of project design and enhance the building design, enhance public views and spaces and provide buffers and transitions where needed, with emphasis on complementing grading and softening slope banks. Landscaping should provide for solar access and shade to facilitate energy conservation. 9. Grading. Development should relate to the natural surroundings and minimize grading by following the natural • contours as much as possible. Graded slopes should be rounded and contoured to blend with the existing terrain. Split -level pads, built -up foundations, stepped footings, PLANNING COMMISSION -AFF REPORT �- Development Code Am isdment 84 -02 Auoust 8, 1984 • etc., can be used in areas of moderate to steep gradient. Above all, grading shall be designed to complement the project's orientation, scale, height, design and transitions with surrounding areas. 0. Building Design 2. Architecture. The architecture should consider compatibility with surrounding character, including harmonious building style, form, size, color, material and roof line. Individual dwelling units should be distinguishable from one another and have separate entrances. Shadow patterns created by architectural elements such as overhangs, projection or recession of stories, balconies, reveals, and awning contribute to a building's character while aiding in climate control. Further, changes in the roof level or planes provide architectural interest. The architectural concept should also complement the grading and topography of the site. In particular, Low - Medium density residential development should be designed with upgraded architecture through increased • delineation of surface treatment and architectural details. B. Density /Unit Size o BACKGROUND: This is a proposal to set minimum square footage requirements on proposed units adjacent to single family housing to help resolve the compatibility issues and to provide a proper transition of dwelling unit sizes between new units and existing single family homes. The Commission felt that projects adjacent to a single family district should provide compatible unit sizes (in square footage at locations immediately abutting existing single family lots). This proposal would provide a proper transition from a low density to a higher density. o PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Amendment to the Development Code by adding anguage to ection 17.08.050 of Absolute Policies as follows: Section 17.08.050 Absolute Policies B. Neighborhood Compatibility 1. The project is compatible with and sensitive to the • Immediate environment of the site and neighborhood relative to architectural design; scale, bulk, density and unit size; identity and neighborhood character; building orientation and setback; grading; and visual integrity. / 7 PLANNING COMMISSION WF REPORT Development Code Am2iidment 94 -02 August 8, 1984 Single Story Units o BACKGROUND: This is a proposal to require all attached projects to be single story when adjacent to single story, single family detached units to resolve concerns of single family residents regarding neighborhood compatibility, proper density transition, and privacy when dealing with infill developments. The Commission concurred that such a requirement would provide for compatibility with existing surrounding development and proper density transition. o PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Amendment to the Development Code by adding language ection 17.08.090 -D of the General Design Guidelines as follows: Section 17.08.090 0 Building Design Scale. The mass and scale of the building should be • proportionate to the site, open spaces, street locations and surrounding developments. Setbacks and overall heights should provide an element of openness and human scale. All attached projects adjacent to existing one -story single family developments shall be one story, unless the impact of two -story structures on the existing one -story neighborhood is fully mitigated with emphasis on privacy, views, and general compatibility. Multiple family product type (i.e., apartment, condominium, townhouse) is discouraged immediately adjacent to lower density single family areas. III. Time Extensions A. Tentative Maps o BACKGROUND: Our current Subdivision Ordinance has provisions that may require imposing new conditions on an approved or conditionally approved tentative map when they apply for an extension of time. Staff reviews these extension requests for compliance with the City's General Plan and Development Code since their initial approval date. There are two options that the Planning Commission could take regarding requests for extension; namely, approve or deny the extension request: (A) Approving the extension for ® a map approved prior to the adoption of the new Development Code would be consistent with Secion 11.02.020(7) which states that "Subdivision and development of property pursuant to a tentative or parcel map which has been approved pursuant to the provisions of earlier ordinances of / 9 PLANNING COMMISSION( AFF REPORT Development Code Amendment 84 -02 August 8, 1984 • the City, and which is in conflict with this ordinance, may be continued and completed in accord with the provisions of approval provided it is completed within the time limit in effect at the time of its approval and provided it complies with all other ordinances and laws in effect at the time of approval. Final tract maps may be approved pursuant to this section and building and other permits may be issued for any lots created pursuant to this section consistent with such approval;" (B) A denial of an extension would illustrate large discrepancies with the approved map and new regulations of the Development Code and the need for redesigning the proposal to bring it into conformance with current requirements. it is the City Attorney's opinion that the option of imposing new conditions to an approved tentative tract even with the applicant's consent may not be feasible because the new conditions are not enforceable based on recent court decisions. Yet another reason is that new conditions wou mean modifying an approved tract without a public hearing, which is illegal. The Commission agreed that a policy statement should be established to indicate the position of the City regarding requests for • tentative tract extensions. o PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The Planning Commission should recommend approval of the following language regarding absolute time extension findings and direct staff to incorporate these findings into the City's Subdivision Ordinance (Section 1.401.11.2): Section 1.401.11.2 (g) Findings The Commission shall grant a time extension for an approved tentative map if it can make all of the following findings: 1. The previously approved tentative map is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, Specific Plans, ordinances, plans, codes and policies; and, 2. The extension of the tentative map will not likely cause inconsistencies with the current General Plan, Specific Plans, ordinances, plans, codes and policies; and, 3. The extension of the tentative map is rat likely to cause public health and safety problems; and 4. The extension is within the time limits prescribed by • state law and local ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSIOW' -AFF REPORT Development Code Am�.dment 84 -02 August 8, 1984 n U Unless all of the above findings are made by the Commission, the requested extension shall be denied. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing to consider all public input on these amendments. If the Commission concurs with the Ordinance revisions as presented, adoption of the attached Resolution which recommends approval of the Ordinance revisions to the City Council would be appropriate. Re�p ectf,41y )ubmitted, M Gomez City Planner RG:FD:jr • j,J RESOLUTION NO. 84 -78 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING TENTATIVE MAP TIME EXTENSIONS WHEREAS, on the 13th day of June, 1984, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare an amendment to the City's Subdivision Ordinance related to tentative map time extensions; and WHEREAS, on the 8th day of August, 1984, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: 1. That the amendment is warranted in order to provide mandatory time extension findings; and, 2. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impact on the environment; and 3. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the policies of the General Plan. • SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this amendment will— not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration on August 8, 1984. BY ATTEST NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt a Subdivision Ordinance Amendment regarding tentative map time extension. 2. That a certified copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8th DAY OF AUGUST, 1984, SSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • r t- • I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 8th day of August, 1984, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, STOUT, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES: COR41SSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE • • /21 RESOLUTION NO. 04-79 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 84 -02, RELATED TO TIME EXTENSIONS, PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION, TRANSITION OF DENSITY, AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY. WHEREAS, on thr 13th day of June, 1984, the Planning Commission, directed staff to prepare an amendment to the Development Code related to time extensions, public hearing notification, transition of density, neighborhood compatibility, and preservation of viewshed; and, WHEREAS, on August 8, 1984, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: 1. That the amendment is warranted in order to: (a) promote public participation in public hearings and to expedite time extension, and notification procedures; and (b) to promote greater neighborhood compatibility through building design and site planning. 2. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impact on the environment. 3. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the policies of the General Plan. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that the amendment will not create a signficant adverse impact on the environment and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration on August 8, 1984. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Development Code Amendment 84 -02. 2. That a certified copy of the Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8th DAY OF AUGUST, 1984. PLAtn, h1MI SS.ON OF THE CITY OF P,ANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: "'I , • . Stout, hai rman /1: • ATTEST: 0 C I, Ricl Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 8th day of August, 1984 by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: McNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE /.2 U ,. ORDINANCE NO. 49- 9G -BEE6 :?33 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCA )TONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 16, SECTION 1.401.11.2 OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE, IN RELATION TO TENTATIVE MAP TIME EXTENSIONS The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECFION 1: The following section is hereby added to Section 1.401.2, Tentative Map Time Erteneions, to read as follows: Section 1.401.11.2(g) Findings The Commission may not grant a time extension for an approved tentative map unless it can make all of the following findings; 1. The previously approved tentative map is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, Specific Plans, ordinances, plans, codes and policies; and, 2. The extension of the tentative map will not muse • significant inconsistencies with the current General Plan, Specific Plans, ordinances, plans, codes and policies; and, 3. The extension of the tentative map is not likely to muse public health and safety problems; and 4. The extension is within the time limits prescribed by state law and local ordinance. Unless all of the above findings are made by the Commission, the requested extension shell be denied. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this ith day of September, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: on D. Mikels, mayor /di • ORDINANCE NO. 0- 05 -B4eO 21� AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 17, SECTIONS 17.02.110, 17.08.690, 17.08.050, AND 17.02.020 OF 'THE MUNICIPAL CODE, IN RELATION TO TIME EXTENSIONS, PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION, TRANSITION OF DENSITY, NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY (SITE PLAN DESIGN, LANDSCAPING, OPEN SPACE, GRADING AND ARCHITECTURE), AND PRESERVATION OF VIEWSHED. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The following sections are hereby added to Section 17.02.110 - Public Hearings and Notification, to read as follows: A. General 5. Apartments and/or multi - family projects of four (4) units or more. D. Notice of Hearing • 4. Supplemental Notice Requirements. Additional public notification beyond the standard 300 -foot boundary shall be required for a development related project as determined by the City Planner in of the following circumstances: (1) The proposed development is aresidential infHl project with a higher intensity land use than that of the euaing neighborhood; or, (2) The propoo d resiaentiatinfill project requires a General Plan land use amendment; or, (3) The proposedresidentialintdl project requires an EU4 or, (4) As determined to be necessary and desirable by the City Palmer based on the nature of the proposed project. In determining the boundaries of the expanded notification area, the following criteria shall be used: (1) The expanded area may be directly affected by the proposed project due to proposed or established circulation and drainage patterns, or seem, view, grading, or other similar considerations= or (2) The expended area is an integral part of the affected neighborhood or subdivision. /'�L If it is determined upon initial submittal that supplemental • notification is necessary, the applicant shall be notified, within 30 days as part of the City's Notice of Complete Application, of expanded notification area to be included in the mailings, and shall be required to submit three (3) sets of gummed address labels based on the latest equalized tax assessors rolls for the expanded area. The application shall not be deemed complete until the labels have been submitted. SECTION 2: The following sections are hereby added to Section 17.02.110 C - Notice of Filing, to read as follows: Standard Notice Requirement. At such time as an application for a project which requires a public hearing before the Planning Commission is deemed complete for processing, the City Planner cause notices to be posted conspicuously on the project site not more than 300 feet apart along project perimeter fronting on improved public streets. Each notice shall contain a general description of the project and a copy of any proposed subdivision map or site plan. Such notices shall have the following title in lettering not less than one (1) inch in height: "NOTICE OF FILING ", 2. Supplemental Notice Requirements. (a) ticabtut . In addition to standard requirements, large • 4- oot by 8- toot sign or signsshalibe required to be posted at the project site for development related projects in any one of the following circumstances: (1) The proposed development is an infill project with a higher intensity land use than that of the existing neighborhood; or, (2) The proposed infill project requires a General Plan land use amendment; or, (3) The proposed infill project requires an EIR; or, (4) As determined to be necessary and desirable by the City Planner based on the nature of the proposed project. For large projects, the City Planner may determine that more than one sign is necessary. The purpose of the supplemental large sign notice requirement is to notify the community and the neighbors in the affected area early in the review process, allowing the applicant and the City the benefit of citizens' comments during the initial stages of project review. N it is determined upon initial submittal that a large, 4-foot by 8 -foot notification sign(s) is necessary, the applicant shell be notified of • required sign bonding fees and sign permit filing requirements within 30 days as part of the City's Notice of Complete Application. A $500 cash deposit is required to ensure compliance with the supplemental / .1 7 notification requirements including maintenance and removal of the large notification sign. The project application shall not be deemed complete until the large sign is installed and required cash deposit made. (b) Silrn Criteria/Maintenenee. In order to implement the large signs as an effective form of public notification, the following rules and standards shall apply: (1) sign Size and Specifications. All large sign(s) shall be four �t try e,ghcTeet 4'X all in size and be constructed to the specifications of Figure 1. The specific project information text on the sign shell be provided by the Planning Division. (2) f.ocation and Installation Standards. All large sign(s) stall be installed according to the specifications of Figure 2. 71he location for the signs) on the project site shall be determined by the City Planner. (3) Timbg. All large notification sign(s) shall be installed by the applicant at the project site in accordance with the above criteria. Once the project application is deemed complete and all notification sign(s) installed per City • standards, the project will be scheduled for Design and Development Review Committee meetings. (4) Sign Removal and Maintenance. All large sign(s) must be kept adequately mainteutea and remain in place until the foal decision on the application has been made or the application is withdrawn. All large dgn(s) shall be removed by the applicant within fourteen (14) days of the final decision or date of withdrawal. Failure to remove the sign within the prescribed period may result in forfeiture of the cash deposit and removal of the sign by the City. SECTION 3: Language is hereby added to Section 17.00.090 - General Design Guidelines, to read as follows: Section 17.08.090 General Design Guidelines C. Site Plan Design 1. Exist�te Conditions. Natural features must be used to an advantage as design elements; such m mature vegetation, landforms, drainage courses, grading, rock outcroppings and views. Conversely, undesirable site figures muse be minimized through proper site planning and building orientation. � 5. Landscaping /Open Space. Landscaping and open spaces be designed as an integral part of project design and enhance the building design, enhance public views and spaces and provide buffers and transitions where needed, with emphasis on complementing grading and softening slope banks. Landscaping for solar access and shade to facilitate energy conservation. ` 9. Gradin . Development should relate to the natural surroundings - . and minimize grading by following the natural contours as much as possible. Graded slopes should be rounded and contoured to blend with the existing terrain. Split -level pads, built -up foundations, stepped footings, etc., can be used in areas of moderate to steep gradient. Above all, grading shall be designed to complement the project's orientation, scale, height, design and transitions with surrounding areas. D. Building Design 2. Architecture. The architecture . i'�consider compatibility with with surrounding character, including harmonious building style, form, size, color, material and roof line. Individual dwelling units should be distinguishable from one another and have separate entrances. Shadow patterns created by architectural elements such as overhangs, projection or recession of stories, • balconies, reveals, and awning contribute to a building's character while aiding in climate control. Further, changes in the roof level or planes provide architectural interest. The architectural concept should also complement the grading and topography of the site. In particular, Low - Medium density residential development should be designed with upgraded architecture through increased delineation of surfaee treatment and architectural details. SECTION 4: The following language is hereby added to Section 17.08.050 - Absolute Policies, to read as follows: Section 17.08.050 Absolute Policies B. Neighborhood Compatibility 1. The project is compatible with and sensitive to the immediate environment of the site and neighborhood relative to architectural design; scale, bulk, density and unit size; identity and neighborhood character; building orientation and setback; grading; and visual integrity. SECTION 5: The following language is hereby added to Section 17.08.090 D - Building Design, to read as follows: u ias • Section 17.08.090 D Building Design Scale. The mass and scale of the building must be proportionate to the site, open spaces, street locations and surrounding developments. Setbacks and overall heights should provide an element of openness and human scale. All attached projects adjacent to existing one-story single family developments shell be one story, unless the impact of twostory structures on the existing ate -story neighborhood is fully mitigated with emphasis on privacy, views, and general compatibility. Multiple family product type (i.e., apartment, condominium, townhouse) is discouraged immediately adjacent to lower density single family areas. SECTION 6: The City Council finds that Development Code Amendment 84- 02 is an implementation of the General Plan goals and policies and that the General Plan Environmental Impact Report adequately covers any potential significant adverse impacts. Further, the City Council finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required pursuant to Division 13, Chapter 6, Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code. Specifically, the City Council. A. No substantial changes are proposed in any goals or policies which would require major revisions to the EIR. B. No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the • circumstances under which the project is being undertaken. C. No new information on the project has become available. l,c PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this' 5th day of September, 1984. AYES: NOES: Un7.Y MA ATTEST: Jon D. Mikels, 'Mayor Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk n iJ /30 0 a 1NOTICE OF FILING TFile No.: Tract 198767° PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF 127 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES T Applicant: Public Hearing T Ace Developers w r For Information Contact City of Rancho Cucamonga PLANNING DIVISION 9320 Baseline Rd. (714) 989 -1851 FIGURE 1 DESIGN OF LARGE NOTIFICATION SIGN 0 r - FIGURE 2 EXAMPLE OF LARGE NOTIFICATION SIGN SPECIFICATIONS DETAIL SIGN SPECIFICATIONS WILL BE PROVIDED AT A LATER PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING �1 • • 1 11 O n \.nvn 1"0 A TT n111 n STAFF REPORT Z DATE: September 5, 1984 ia-' TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT An amendment to the Rancho Cucamonga Development C0 1, 17 of the Municipal Code, amending Chapter 17.08, Residential Districts, regarding residential development standards and, in particular, amendments to the Low Medium Residential development standards. BACKGROUND: During the past year, the City has seen an increase in applications for single family detached subdivisions in the Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) district, particularly in the 6 -8 du /ac optional density range. During the review of these projects, the Planning Commission and the general public have consistently raised concerns regarding neighborhood compatibility, transition of density, design quality, lot usability, and lack of variety. The Planning Commission directed staff to revise the residential development standards to address these critical issues. The attached staff report provides a detailed overview of the proposed amendments to the Development Code. At the Planning Commission meeting of August 8, 1984, the Planning staff presented a report and draft ordinance for amendments to the development standards. After discussion, the Planning Commission made minor wording changes to the draft ordinance and recommending that the City Council adopt the revised ordinance as attached. For your convenience, the proposed amendments are highlighted in bold face, and the changes made by the Planning Commission are italicized. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends issuance of a Negative ec aration and adoption of the attached Ordinance. Re pectfu ubmitted, c me Cit Planner !RG:DC:jr Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report - August 8, 1984 Planning Commission Resolution 84 -80 Planning Commission Resolution 84 -53A Ordinance 123 0 • E rimv nc n e vrvn nrn , \.�.w.n . STAFF REPORT DATE: August 3, 1984 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner )� 9 WT SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 84 -03 - An amendment to the Rancho Cucamonga Development Co_ Title 17 of the Municipal Code, amending Chapter 17.08, Residential Districts, regarding residential development standards and, in particular, amendments to the Low - Medium residential development standards. SUMMARY: The Planning Commission directed staff to revise the residential development standards, particularly in the Low - Medium Residential District, to address the following issues: (1) uniformity, (2) neighborhood compatibility, (3) transition of density, (4) lot usability, and (5) design quality. This report provides a detailed overview of the attached amendments to the Development Code. II. ANALYSIS: A. Basic Development Standards: The Basic Development Standards (Table 17.08.040-B) have been modified to reflect a change in setback measurement from the property line to the ultimate curb location to provide a common measurement standard for all setbacks. Therefore, the parkway width (formerly excluded) has been added to the setback, as shown in Exhibit "C ". To be consistent with the recently adopted policies limiting the use of private streets, the private street setbacks have been deleted. However, this would not preclude the use of private streets under the Basic Standards; rather, it eliminates the distinction between setbacks on public versus private streets -- setbacks would be the same, only the right -of -way or pavement width would vary. Staff recommends that private streets be used as an incentive to develop under the Optional Standards. This is discussed further at the end of this report. The setback for 2 -story multiple family dwellings (buildings containing 5 or more dwellings) has been increased from 50 feet to 100 feet where adjacent to a Very Low or Low Residential District. This revised standard is intended to address the difficult issue of providing proper transition of /3y ITEM F PLANNING COMMISSICr 'TAFF REPORT Environmental Assets .nent and Development Code Ameldk.c 24 -03 August 8, 1984 Page 2 r7 density and neighborhood compatibility with single family dwellings. Typically, the scale and bulk of multiple family buildings is significantly greater than adjacent single family houses and cannot be effectively screened or buffered through landscaping alone. 8. 0 tion al Oevelo ment Standards: The Optional Development tand ands Table .08.040-C) were also modified to measure setbacks from the curb face instead of the property line. Further, the setbacks were revised to emphasize the requirement for variable setbacks along the street to reduce uniformity. Corner side setbacks have been added to the Optional Standards to provide adequate building setbacks from the corner street side. This is a response to the multitude of applications for "smaller lot" subdivisions, particularly in the Low - Medium District under the 6 -8 du /ac Optional density range. Standards for setbacks on private streets have been retained should the Commission desire to permit private streets, in limited circumstances, as an incentive to develop under the Optional Standards. To encourage innovative site planning under the Optional Standards, the garage setbacks have been reduced to 10 feet for side entry garages only, see footnote "e". The intent is to provide streetscape variety as shown in Exhibit "D ". Front entry garages would still require the same setback as the . house. The requirements for a minimum driveway depth is discussed later. As with Basic Standards, 2 -story multiple family dwellings must be set back a minimum 100 feet from adjacent Very Low or Low Residential Districts. As recommended by the 19th Street Corridor Subcommittee, common open space has been increased in the Low - Medium District from 5% to 10% to provide recreation opportunities and facilities not available on individual lots. Regulations have also been added to clarify setbacks for zero lot line dwelling units, as shown in Exhibit "E". C. Site Development Criteria; To mitigate the concerns of neighborhood compatibility, To transition and design quality, it is recommended that new sections be added to the Site Development Criteria as follows: Section 11.08.040 Slope planting. Slope banks in excess of five (5) feet in vertical height and of 2 :1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and soften their appearance as follows: one 15- gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft, of slope area, one 1- gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. Slope banks in excess of eight . (8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope 3 s PLANNING COMMISSIC( TAFF REPORT ! Environmental Asse ament and Development Code Amend�Tr. „t 84 -03 August 8, 1984 Page 3 • shall also include one 5- gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area in addition to the plant material required above. 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. J. Usable Yard Area. For single family su di,J ons, a minimum 15 feet of flat, usable rear yard area shall be provided between the house and top or toe of non- retained slope banks or to the retaining wall in the case of retained cut or fill per City grading standard drawings. K. Visitor Parking. For projects with private streets or riveways, isitor Parking required by Section 17.12.040, shall be provided in off - street visitor parking bays within 150 feet of all dwelling units. L. tiara a Setbacks. Under the Optional Development Lando s, ale 17.08.o40_C, side entry garages may be located a minimum ten (10) feet from curb face on public • or private streets. M. Driveway Depth /Width. All lots within single family detached and semi - detached residential developments shall have driveways designed to Mcommodate the parking of two automobiles in a manner that does not obstruct sidewalks or streets. Driveways shall have a minimum depth of nineteen (19) feet and width of eighteen (18) feet. N. Street Standards. This section sets forth standards for t e esign an unction of public and private streets for residential development. 1. Streets shall have a uniform minimum right -of -:gay width of 60 feet, except as provided herein below. 2. Streets may have reduced rights -of -way down to a minimum 40 feet, subject to Design /Technical Review if the proposed project site demonstrates at least one of the following conditions: a. The project is a private gated community and provides private streets pursuant to Section 17.08.04043, or z' PLANNING COMMISSION -AFF REPORT ` Environmental Assessment and Development Code Amend irt...c 84 -03 August 8, 1984 Page 4 L I b. The project is located in a Very Low Residential or Hillside Residential District, or c. The project is attached condominium or townhouse development. 3. Private streets may be approved by the Planning Commission based upon the following criteria: a. The project is a gated community where no through traffic or access to abutting properties is required, b. Off- street visitor parking bays are provided as required by Sections 17.08.040 -K and 17.12.040, or c. Private streets and reduced widths are necessary to preserve significant natural features worthy of preservation (e.g., mature trees, streams, rock outcroppings), historic landmarks, or to minimize cut and fill grading in hillside areas, and no through traffic access to abutting properties is required. 0. Zero Lot Line. The dwelling unit may be placed on one • interior side property line with a zero (0) setback, and the dwelling unit setback on the other interior side property line shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet, excluding the connecting elements such as fences, walls, and trellises. Pools, decks, garden features, and other similar elements shall be permitted within the ten (10) foot setback area, provided, however, no structure, with the exception of fences or walls, shall be placed within easements required below. Where adjacent Zero Lot Line dwellings are not constructed against a comma lot line, the builder or developer must provide for a perpetual wall maintenance easement of five feet in width along the adjacent lot and parallel with such wall. D. Design Guidelines. The following sections are recommended to be added to the General Design Guidelines, Section 17.08.090, to mitigate concerns of neighborhood compatibility, transition of density, and design quality. • /2? 0 PLANNING COMMISSIOf -.AFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and Development Code Amendon_.,L 84 -03 August 8, 1984 Page 5 Section 17.08.090 -C 11. Transition of Density._ The site plan should consider compatibility with surrounding neighborhood through providing transition of lower edensiti particularly arble densities, open space buffer zones, increased setbacks and architectural compatibility are encouraged along common boundaries to provide proper transition of density. Clustering units can provide large open space areas as a buffer. 12. Street Design. Vary street pattern to reduce streetscape monotony. Curvilinear streets, cul-de -sacs, front yard landscaping, and single - loaded streets are encouraged to provide streetscape variety and visual interest, particularly in the Low - Medium District 13. House Plotting. Clustering houses around common open space, zero lot line, reverse plotting, angling house to the street, and side entry garages are encouraged to provide streetscape variety and visual interest, particularly in the Low- Medium District. • Section 17.08.090 -D 0 2. Architecture. The architecture should consider compatibility with surrounding character, including harmonious building style, form, size, color, material and roof line. Individual dwelling units should be distinguishable from one another and have separate entrances. Shadow patterns created by architectural elements such as overhangs, projection or recession of stories, balconies, reveals, and awnings contribute to a building's character while aiding in climate control. Further, changes in the roof level or planes provide architectural interest. In particular, Low - Medium density residential development should be designed with upgraded architecture through increased delineation of surface treatment and architectural details. 3, Scale. The mass and scale of the building should be proportionate to the site, open spaces, street locations and surrounding developments. Setbacks and overall heights should provide an element of openness and human scale. Multiple family product type (i.e., apartment, condominium, townhouse) is discouraged immediately adjacent to lower density single family areas. 1 3.° PLANNING COMMISSIO( TAFF REPORT Environmental Assesbinent and Development Code Amendm—t 84 -03 August 8, 1984 Page 6 • III. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The Development Code is considered part of the same project as the General Plan since it is the implementation of the General Plan goals and policies. Since these Development Code amendments are a related project to the General Plan, state environmental planning law allows the Planning Commission to determine that the Environmental Impact Report which was prepared for the General Plan is adequate in covering any potential significant adverse impacts that could be created as a result of these amendments. This finding can be made as long as the Planning Commission finds that the proposed amendments do not cause a substantial change in any of the goals or policies, or that no new additional information beyond which was presented in the General Plan EIR has become available that would alter the findings of the General Plan EIR. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the findings required pursuant to Division 13, Chapter 6, Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code that would not require a subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report. This finding is based upon the fact that the Development Code amendments are implementing the existing goals and policies of the General Plan which were fully analyzed with regard to environmental impacts during the General Plan EIR. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in The Daily Report newspaper. To date, no correspondence either for • or against the proposed amendments had been received. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing for consideration of the proposed amendments. Attached is a Resolution recommending approval of the proposed amendments to the Development Code to the City Council through adoption of the attached Ordinance. Also attached is a Resolution revising the policies for the design of public and private streets. 4Fpe9tKI y)submitted, City Planner RG:DC:ns Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Basic Development Standards (Table 17.08.040 -B) Exhibit "8" - Optional Development Standards (Table 17.08.040 -C) Exhibit "C" - Setback Section Exhibit "D" - Side Entry Garage Exhibit "E" - Zero Lot Line • Resolution 84 -53A Resolution Recommending Approval of DCA 84 -03 Ordinance 3 .�.ectmn t,.dd.J4U C B. BaLiL Deyeloom ent Standards. The following table, Table 17.08.040 -B sets forth minimum development standards for residential development projects filed up to the mid -point of the permitted density range. TABLE 17.08.04U -0 BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS rant - Rot Reopered5 n. L Les M MR H We Are.: 900,(,0 f00eittle 900,fth Minimum Net .verge 22.500 a,to0 61000 NIB N'R SIR 11inmum Net 20,000 T.SOp 5.000 Idiom N :R N/R NuvOS of OweWq Unibe Cp Id Up to Up to Up td ', to Up to Ipermltted per acre) 2 / 6 It t9 Y YSlumun DeeDUS Ulu° Siu 20i5 2015 ISIS 150154 ISO! SO 154'5d Single family attached dwe.un, only 900,(,0 f00eittle 900,fth Wt thruce tmn Minimum width soar;. 45., 45avg. e0 NIR NIB L regwred front eri v car,cs vvyd5 swW.cM) Mm. turner lot width 100 70 50 is NIB NIB Minimum depth ISO in 90 100 NIB N/R Minimum (muge 50 M 30 90 NIB NIB III front property une5 250 4140 502 50% 50'5 500 Mm. nag lot frcmaga 20 20 20 20 RIB 14/R r d front aooeny Lt.) Private Open space 20001..4,'9 1000 1N/R 200/150 225/250 150:100 [50/200 From, Yvdo�a Avg. Xavg. .2w8. Xq. [7.R N/e Upper Story Unit) VWy.S YYYSS VaryfS eurts Corner Side YVd 44,27 4x27 a ZL Wzr N/R NIB Interior side Yard 10115 5 lad ,4,'R NIB Rev Toed • Raw ]B 20 'a l5 . l0d NIR N/H Walreaie+-anFw Jew -Warm At interior 20i5 2015 ISIS 150154 ISO! SO 154'5d Site Boundary DweWng Unit/ Accessory Bldg,) RanOmtial RW Wits Sapvatictss: Fmnt to Front N/R N/H 25 50 30 00 Other N/R NIB to 15 IS Is R.,(I Unstrap. 33 05 35 111 40t SSE Lot Coeal 250 4140 502 50% 50'5 500 Ma.:mu„ al Opm Spade Required; Private Open space 20001..4,'9 1000 1N/R 200/150 225/250 150:100 [50/200 (Ground Fleml Upper Story Unit) Common Open Space' N,R NIB N,R ad% 202 200 rtdlnimu.m a) LSa01e Opel Spaces 552 402 402 250 152 Idea Prmnte s :rmmom Estludmg land naccessory for secondary street, end va,i.1c. o. Mme... ad from ulumete nllrM- strana.0 bIiiii titilb /G O/foll,'n {e Y%t?`M& c. Varuple front yvd6 Wowed ounumt to Section 17.06.060 -N d. Add 10 feet sort ed)ecmt to 5 L, L m LM dsv:et. e. Use than 19 feet fc*,5�&c0 of ndeweix requires automatic gernge B��0000r npehen, L Limit 1 slorY wmm�j'FSeat of VL or L Dimetfyr 9IU� %�C /yay /y I. Pen meter landscaping and interior West trees. h. A single family detached dweuing lea trnn 900 ,care feet will require the approval of • Bondltionai Use permit per Section 17.04.020. -78- Ili eje#I IT �A ' ...... I +tld,.a00R _......_.- .- ...... .... .._ ...._ �. �..... .. ..ease. _ .. ......... .. Aeguved pprnant [g SecUOn 1x.00.040 -P Bmtl yW WrOppuh,, Rpd'ved Pun.hrt to Section 17.09.040 -R Sacurn 1;.08.040 l C. Optional Develortment Standards. The following table, Table 17.08.040 -C sets E.eludmg land necmvy for lecondery ,treat, and arteriets. N measured from mnmale agg,+f+r+0 * a rb fieadm �,rb) %e or Prtva {6 S*W.). forth minimum development standards for residential development projects filed up to the maximum density permitted by the density range. Add 10 feet if edpcent to VL. L or LM dwricl. e. Lev than 11 feet from back of sidewalk requve, N thi gvage door openen. f. Perimeter landibaptog and imana street teen. g. TABLE 17.08.040 -C OPTIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS • p.rmit par Section 17.04.030. (X/11 = Not Regraded) L LIM M MH a CeydrO�E KffYlyd�i4 /ii M /�iMSMI lfSidg e«fr� a1g /P9t fl3Cd .Mwmum site ArO SAC SAC N/a N/R N; R mss/'N�B�T �gpss, We Area Variation regwred m single famay aGdi'Mtgns .4 R N, R mmimum xu Nwabs of DwelUry Unibe Up b Up to Up ch Up to Vp to wlitt.d per ecn, . a N 14 30 111rand. D.kiio g Unit Spea Smgle famdv «mtled dwe,Lngs only 000 ;ftS 900, ftf sloth. tg Lot Dtmapan. Mmtmum Width Ynlatlon mgwredmangle famap atndlWtmu N/R We (4 re'.Ded front ,.,back, Minimum Depth variation r.,.,ed in angle family aabWwt. Wit NM Satba.lsc Local Street •hob 4M4Sa e. iV!>— iNM- .SO}Og. a'."g"""i 42e wr) ?oavd 42av i N� 5 ¢2A�� . 47n�v9, t varn 5 � n A- ;V.kaa J .aR- —5- so Se $a iymR - +Per.,r�mrmrr wryi�rj /5av . wry 15 Career S;de Yard 1-1 10 d, 5e m/le NwSC lnferyr 5 ;de.7ard 5 /!ON 5h /0d,h NIR N19 • Al ow,pr 00 /s IS /S and /Sd :Od/Sd sgd /Sd site Ooundvy ( (On.wng Unit/ Acceuore Old,.) R ®dentw HmIN,t sepeeauav Front 10 Front 9S 35 N/a N/R N/R Other t0 to N/R 4111 N/R Height Wlnitatldrm 35 35 35. 40d 5v (Spnd SPn% Emgmrad: P'iw. Open Space 1000yN /R 300 /150 393450 159.•100 150/100 (Ground Note/ upper Story Unit) Common Do. 5paeea S% 1 46. 16 15% 35% 35% (mm,mum s, Usable Open space° 00% 4$% 40% 40% 40% (pnvne end common) ...... I +tld,.a00R _......_.- .- ...... .... .._ ...._ �. �..... .. ..ease. _ .. ......... .. Aeguved pprnant [g SecUOn 1x.00.040 -P Bmtl yW WrOppuh,, Rpd'ved Pun.hrt to Section 17.09.040 -R Erlerp Casfsntion N/R Requved pdramnt to section 17.99.040 -H b. E.eludmg land necmvy for lecondery ,treat, and arteriets. N measured from mnmale agg,+f+r+0 * a rb fieadm �,rb) %e or Prtva {6 S*W.). c. Refer to TOWS izoe.o}}dd��a for f VL or one, samack information WA Aaa;6, dwe,{rinJg• Ltmu to Or tnm A.0 D of VL or L Dulncl(x r d. Add 10 feet if edpcent to VL. L or LM dwricl. e. Lev than 11 feet from back of sidewalk requve, N thi gvage door openen. f. Perimeter landibaptog and imana street teen. g. A angle pm0y detached derailing lam tn. 900 square feet nlll l.gmre In. approval of • conditional ,Sc • p.rmit par Section 17.04.030. h. Zero 41L /'an dwel /,'g' 3 Perw71/r✓ �U k�fi'aK I X06, 0400. CeydrO�E KffYlyd�i4 /ii M /�iMSMI lfSidg e«fr� a1g /P9t fl3Cd fr Sech'a5A y7,o8.o'D -L. P `4' mss/'N�B�T 0 0 r �5efbaak MuSured frets orb ilkee NORTI -I CITYOF ITEJI: swals RANCID CL:CAN'IO�GA TITLE Ss � corms— PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT; jy SCALE: � iy>- ti "i J 04rage VV NORTH 0 CITY OF ITE,,I PA 04 -o' RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE ISM &"16""o PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT : - -- SCALE: r lY3 0 • I CASeMIeltt IAI s ;Je f o��os: Fc zide erraMa eax•reµ% NORTH CITY OP ITEJI: D A •03 Is RANCHO CLCAMONGA TITLE: LATr LAWS PLANNING DIVISION EXHI[iIT �_$O�LE uv t� • RESOLUTION NO. 84 -80 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 84- 03, AMENDING TITLE. 17 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 17.08, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, REGARDING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held duly advertised public hearings pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, such action is necessary to implement the General Plan pursuant to Section 65800 et. seq. of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission finds that the proposed Deve opment Code Amendment 84 -03 is an implementation of the General Plan goals and policies and that the General Plan Environmental Impact Report adequately covers any potential significant adverse impacts. Further, the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required pursuant to Division 13, Chapter 6, Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code. Specifically, the Planning Commission finds: • A. No substantial changes are proposed in any goals or policies which would require major revisions to the EIR. P] B. No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken. C. No new information on the project has become available. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt the attached Ordinance amending Title 17, Development Code, Chapter 17.08, of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. 2. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. /y Resolution No. \ t Page 2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1984. • COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY I, Rick iGomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 8th day of August, 1984, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, STOUT, CHITIEA, McNIEL, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE • RESOLUTION NO. 84 -53A A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SETTING FORTH ITS POLICY ON THE USE AND DESIGN OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE STREETS IN NEW DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission desires that a high quality of living be assured throughout the life of new development; and WHEREAS, the establishment of clear standards for circulation is a critical part of this assurance. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: 1. Streets shall have a uniform minimum right -of -way width of 60 feet, except as provided herein below. 2. Streets may have reduced rights -of -way down to a minimum 40 feet, subject to Design /Technical Review if the proposed project site demonstrates at least one of the following conditions: a. The project is a private gated community and provides • private streets streets pursuant to Section 11.08.040 -N3, or ( b. The project is located in a Very Low Residential or Hillside Residential District, or C. The project is attached condominium or townhouse development. I9 3. Private streets may be approved by the Planning Commission based upon the following criteria: a. The project is a gated community where no through traffic or access to abutting properties is required, b. Off- street visitor parking bays are provided as required by Sections 17,08,040 -K and 17.12.040, or c. Private street and reduced widths are necessary to preserve significant natural features worthy of preservation (.e.g., mature trees, streams, rock outcroppings), historic landmarks, or to minimize cut and fill grading in hillside areas, and no through traffic access to abutting properties is required. i 1 rf Resolution No. 84 -53A Page 2 4. That standard street widths be established as follows: Density Range Street Pavement Width Conditions Up to 2 du /ac 36 -foot standard; reduced Reduced width requires width may he allowed subject availability of sufficient to Design /Technical Review. visitor parking plus minimum on -site spaces as required by the Development Code. 2 -8 du /ac 36 -foot standard. On street parking allowed; minimum 20 feet between driveway aprons. 8 + du /ac 28 feet minimum. Parking subject to Code and Design /Technical Review to insure adequate visitor parking. • 5. That no private streets be allowed within industrial zoned areas / without prior approval of the Planning Commission. • APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1984. FOMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY ATTEST I ' Ricki Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 8th day of August, 1984, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT, BARKER„ CHITIEA, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE • /L ORDINANCE 4F9� �3l AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 84 -03, AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 17.08, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, REGARDING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The following sections are hereby added to Section 17.08.040 to read as follows: 1. Slope igh Planting. Slope banks in excess of five (5) feet in vertical D and of z:l or greater slope shaft be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and soften their appearance as follows: one 15 -gallon or larger sire tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, one 1- geiton or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope sires, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope band in excess of eight (8) feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered dusters to soften and vary slope plane. • Slope planting required by this section shell include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. .Maintenance by a Homeowner's Association may be required by the Planning Commission on a case- by-case basis. J. Usable Yard Area. For single family detached /semi - detached ubdsv sns�ions, a minimum 15 feet of flat, usable rear yard area shall be provided between the house end top or toe of non - retained slope banks or to the retaining wall in the case of retained cut or fill per City grading standard drawings. R. Visitor Parking. Far projects with private streets or driveways, Visitor Parking required by Section 17.12.040, shall be provided within 150 feet of all dwelling units in off - street visitor perking bays. L. �Ve�Set�back�. Under the Optional Development Standards, able3` 17.08.040 -C, side entry garages may be located a minimum ten (10) feet from curb face on public or private streets, except on corner lots where driveways shall be kept away from intersection. iy9 Ordinance No. Page 2 H. Driveway Depth/Width. All lots within single family detached • and semidetached residential developments shall have driveways designed to accommodate the parking of two automobiles in a manner that does not obstruct sidewalks or streets. Driveways shall have a minimum depth of nineteen (19) feet and width of eighteen (18) feet. N. Street Standards. This section sets forth standards for the designetion of public and private streets for residential development. 1. Streets shall have a uniform minimum right-of -way width of 60 feet, except as provided herein below. 2. Streets may have reduced rights -of -way down to a minimum 40 feet, subject to Design/Technical Review if the proposed project site demonstrates at least one of the following conditions: a. The project is a private gated community and provides private streets pursuant to Section 17.08.040 -N3, or b. The project is located in a Very Low Residential or Hillside Residential District, to preserve rural character, significant natural features worthy of cpreservation (e.g. mature trees, streams, reek • outcroppings), historical landmarks, or to mini- mize cut and fill grading in hillside areas, and J10 through traffic access to abutting properties is required; or C. The project is attached condominium or townhouse development. 3. Private streets may be approved by the Planning Commission based upon the following criteria: a. The project is a gated community where no through traffic or access to abutting properties is required, b. Off-street visitor parking bays are provided as required by Sections 17.08.040 -R and 17.12.040, or C. Private streets and reduced widths are necessary, to preserve rural character significant natural features worthy of preservation (e.g., mature trees, streams, rock outcroppings), historic landmarks, or to minimize cut and fill grading in hillside areas, and no through traffic access to abutting properties is required. • Ordinance No. Page 3 • 9. That standard street widths be established as follows: Density Range Street Pavement Width Conditions Up to 2 du/ac 36- oot steed Reduced width width may be allowed sub- requires ject to Design/Technical availability of Review sufficient visitor parking plus minimum on--site spaces as required by the Development Code. 2 -8 du/ac 36 -toot standard On street pm'bng allowed; minimun 20 feet between driveway aprons. 8 +du/ac 28 feet minimum Paring subject to • Code and Design/Techni cal Review to insure adequate visitor perking. O. Zero Lot Line. The dwelling unit may be placed on one interior side property line with a zero (0) setback, and the dwelling unit setback on the other interior side property line shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet, excluding the connecting elements such as fences, walls, and trellises. Pools, decks, garden features, and other similar elements shall be permitted within the ten (10) foot setback area, provided, however, no structure, with the exception of fences or wells, shall be placed within easements required below. Where adjacent Zero Lot Line dwellings are not constructed against a common lot line, the builder or developer must provide for a perpetual wall maintenance easement of five feet in width along the adjacent lot and parallel with such wall. SECTION 2: The following sections are hereby added to Section 17.08.090 -C to read as follows: It. Transition of Densit The site plan should consider compatib ty with surrounding neighborhood through providing Proper transition of density, particularly on in-fdl sites adjacent to lower densities. Comparable densities, open space buffer / / Ordinance No. Page 4 zones, increased setbacks and architectural compatibility are encouraged along common boundaries to provide proper • transition of density. Clustering units can provide large open space areas as a buffer. 12. Street Design. Vary street pattern to reduce streetscape monotony. Curvilinear streets, cul-de -sacs, front yard landscaping, and single - loaded streets are encouraged to provide streetscape variety and visual interest, particularly in the Low - Medium District. 13. House Plotting. Clustering houses around common open space, zero lot line, reverse plotting, angling house to the street, and side entry garages may be permitted if they provide streetseape variety and visual interest, particularly in the Low- Medium District. SECTION 3: The following sections of Section 17.08.090 -D are hereby amended to read as follows: 2. Architecture. The architecture should consider compatibility with surrounding character, including harmonious building style, form, size, color, material and roof line. Individual dwelling units should be distinguishable from one another and have separate entrances. Shadow patterns created by architectural elements such as overhangs, projection or recession of stories, balconies, reveals, and awnings contribute to a building's • character while aiding in climate control. Further, changes in the roof level or planes provide architectural interest. In particular, Low - Medium density residential development should be designed with upgraded architecture through increased delineation of surface treatment and architectural details. The architectural concept should also complement the grading and topography of the site. 3. Scale. The mass and scale of the building should be proportionate to the site, open spaces, street locations and surrounding developments. Setbacks and overall heights should provide an element of openness and human scale. Multiple family product type (i.e., apartment, condominium, townhouse) is discouraged immediately adjacent to lower density single family areas. All attached projects adjacent to existing one-story single family developments shall be one story, unless the impact of tw"tory structures on the existing one-story neighborhood is fully mitigated with emphasis on privacy, views, and general compatibility. SECTION 4: Table 17.08.040 -B, Basic Development Standards, is hereby amended to read as shown in the attached Exhibit "A ". SECTION 5: Table 17.08.040 -C, Optional Development Standards, is hereby amended to reed as shown in the attached Exhibit "B ". • /S } Ordinance No. Page 5 • SECTION 6: The City Council finds that Development Code Amendment 84- 03 is an implementation of the General Plan goals and policies and that the General Plan Environmental Impact Report adequately covers any potential significant adverse impacts. Further, the City Council finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required pursuant to Division 13, Chapter 6, Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code. Specifically, the City Council. A. No substantial changes are proposed in any goals or Policies which would require major revisions to the EIR. B. No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken. C. No new information on the project has become available. SECTION 7: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of September, 1984. AYES: NOES: • ABSENT: 1.s 3 Jon D. Mikels, Mayor B. Basic Develooment Standards. The foLlo5vin; table, Tauie 17.09.040 -3 sets forth minimum development standards for residential development projects filari up to the mid -point of the permitted density range. . TABLE 17.08.040 -8 BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (NM ="at RernwN) VL L LM N .Na ft Int Area: 4z 47 3z 37 Sltrnmum Net Avrege MIN 8.900 6.000 N!R "It NIR 19mmum Net Moto 7.200 5.000 I9.o99 VIR NR Numuee of DwelLmi, Uinta° UP w lD to CD to UP to UP UP to (permitted Ire sett, l0 /15 1 5 :1 19 WR Xtn:mum Dwe1Wq Unit late 30 ^.0 i5 104 4/R NB • Single !amity detached dweWO;a on!, wOgfih 900s9!'i ?00,n4' IShc5d ISdISd 15dr5d Wt Dimevsys '•Im:mum a :d!, 99evg. 55te;. i5evg. 90 9/R NUR m fm vary:lo varyo5 very a5 sa:edm:M meW Sim. 111e, lot width too to 50 BS N/R N:R Slmlirum depth ISO in 90 100 NIR NiR Slm.mum!ronlege 50 40 30 60 NIR NIR l y front PrODerty mm) Am. nag :ct fronteSe ..!tort omoe•. Ca Lee) 50 .0 20 JO 1/11 NiR Front to Front V/R via 25 30 30 5o ne.gm �+m:uuma m J6 JS 35' 40' S5` Lot Ca.eraq< 25� Ww. 50'5 500 50% sIs rd.nmum al Wm SDeee RegmM1d: Pnvate Open SPAea 20110INIR 1000 ;4!R 300.'150 225,550 1501190 150',00 (Ground Floor' UP,, Story Cmll Common Oeen Sp¢ee NIR NIR NIR ]o'S 30% 30M C'llnimum all Csiwie Open Spaces 057 Soul 407 25e IS% 16 )e (P- mll k Collar, Reematmn Area PeeWp \IR N4 R N R Hh ^aired her see. :7'.MJJ0 -•i IarN eouq d s R Rc;vrM Per Sec. 12.3 Aso F e. Eseludm ;land n<eraery L^r s.,ungary smash aid 9,trr,Cs. h. uii"sured from wl :meu a. e. a-erw,n-L . cells {.leash 11k//n or pr ;w {e reek. 1. veneote front yards Wowed oursuent to SerUOn IP, 99.060 -N d. Add to feel if Adjacent l0 VL. L or LDI d:emwl, f. LImR I sgorY wtlhm ai o! YL or L o.sv:et;jr dae / /'R9 �. g Perreeter IendseeDm4 and mtenor street Ir.. h. A single faintly detached dweWng lea than 900 Wliare feet will require the approval of a Cond "tmnel Use Permit Per 5eetmn 1244.030. -76- /Sy r ) '-4-19V COAMM -r A • 4z 47 3z 37 Front Yards•° 201". v ;. X-vg. A%vg. NIR 4 ;H var'!s varye5 varye5 vu5-5 Corner side Yard -56 27 i Z7 34 zz Y 27 NIR Wit /Mario, S; 'c Yard l0 /15 3119 5 lad NIR WR Rear Yard ..... 30 ^.0 i5 104 4/R NB • :WM.. -nl Atinterior S.:e Brunnery ]0 ;S 20 ;5 IS ;S IShc5d ISdISd 15dr5d fpw <Wn¢ clitl Front to Front V/R via 25 30 30 5o ne.gm �+m:uuma m J6 JS 35' 40' S5` Lot Ca.eraq< 25� Ww. 50'5 500 50% sIs rd.nmum al Wm SDeee RegmM1d: Pnvate Open SPAea 20110INIR 1000 ;4!R 300.'150 225,550 1501190 150',00 (Ground Floor' UP,, Story Cmll Common Oeen Sp¢ee NIR NIR NIR ]o'S 30% 30M C'llnimum all Csiwie Open Spaces 057 Soul 407 25e IS% 16 )e (P- mll k Collar, Reematmn Area PeeWp \IR N4 R N R Hh ^aired her see. :7'.MJJ0 -•i IarN eouq d s R Rc;vrM Per Sec. 12.3 Aso F e. Eseludm ;land n<eraery L^r s.,ungary smash aid 9,trr,Cs. h. uii"sured from wl :meu a. e. a-erw,n-L . cells {.leash 11k//n or pr ;w {e reek. 1. veneote front yards Wowed oursuent to SerUOn IP, 99.060 -N d. Add to feel if Adjacent l0 VL. L or LDI d:emwl, f. LImR I sgorY wtlhm ai o! YL or L o.sv:et;jr dae / /'R9 �. g Perreeter IendseeDm4 and mtenor street Ir.. h. A single faintly detached dweWng lea than 900 Wliare feet will require the approval of a Cond "tmnel Use Permit Per 5eetmn 1244.030. -76- /Sy r ) '-4-19V COAMM -r A • CC. Ootional Development Standards. The followin; table, Table iS.Ud.li a sets forth minimum development standards for residential development prnle2!s filed up to the maximum density permitted by the density range. • TABLE 17.08.040-0 OPTIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS nal I Not Ra4uuen) 4 Led .4 NN H .Hwmum site ATI SAG SAC V; R N; R to R 1, ^.ssl wt Ara V.ewti. 111uled:n sin ;.e' :amity mrsvtslom N R N.R N.. of Derelli Val Up to 1p to Up to Up to L'p to per- :N :m eerel a i 11 ]I ;a Hwmum Dwelwtq out sire s:n¢:e !ea :b delecnea :mv "oq!te 109CRa 50osnft; wt gmmmwm Minim —M:dln Vrt4UOn r,Uilld :n f:nSk f.mi3YSUltmvtatom N/R H!ft 1: a ant feu.cel "on", mtn V& - :.dw reaured in neck famity wY.ivts :em N/R ":A Sem.ln Deal S::-d, - —3"°'— -344? ¢941 Sa C - ap/!Y .dHiY 47ovw. 20wv9. 42wV4. 42 ava. 47AV4. ,itj, Vd1DL5 vary 155 wryt'S var -i5 ar :v.l. st,.t.. Q'm.WN 4a- ec a 5• Se Sa ivs-e�e"^� J 32wvy. /5wv Cerwar Sick Yard 176 (Og 5r ^eria'5 ;d.YArd 611,4 5k red +k :n At mien, WS Isis :F°: Id :odr5d 001I/54 5::. ecu-.cS,y � IDweGn; L'raV RaOeettW HuJJYq sepe... front to Front 35 35 N/R N1R Nis other to t0 Wit SiR N:R Height Lmtutioe, 35 35 35a 40c Sao ppee Sq.. Reymeeid: M i,... Open space 1000 10111, 300 /150 2:5 /150 1501100 UP too (Ground N.." Clip, St." Umt) Gdmmdn open 5p.ce8 Sna % 3S,e 354: JSb (minimum eS) Ue.ole open Splet. 60% 44% 404+ 40% 404 (priv.te and mmmool Reeeritan ASnSJF- lj WA Recurred nuent to eet,.n 17.09,040.3 tenme.nuq f Reomred ueSot to Secucn 11.00.040 -a PmnI YW WWapuq RMUVad pursuant to Section 17.09.040.E Fitton, fimfew.loo S' R Rllti,ad 'iarr:M< b 1149.040 -H F.xc u cmq lend n,cloaY for secon•JHV Netts M0 erter:n'.s. o. 41 -,,1 111 from ulemrte r,nl-n�mv. 116, feredn P +bG c or PN Val 6?Sn S. Refry to ec,c 17.09 fcc adf. :impel setfAce mfofmaoon. Limit 1-s:dry wtlnln idcel 4111. n L 0:slnat6r A.o/Ip/e {n� dry6//ikffi d. And to feet if adjacent to VL. I, of I.V ds/34s1J4 (/Jd�AMW Vpfwx'n•.�. en } e. Lev In.. IS feel from OecR of aeewn'u'�.av(r' a owmelii, ;iJega too, L rerlme4r lendsnpm( and ol,tmr street title. 8• A Single femtlY daecned dweWnq I+v tn.n 500 a4uge feel will reau:re Ina epplc permit per Section 17,04.030. lef llwe dNaligs Ct rMlt per 5edt/u+ I7O8.O4 y GOra a ufbactE .s /G e4let.wreN il"iJif e 7 ISS, a. e. (ne - P� 0 • 9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 5, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Richard Cota, Assistant Civil Engineer �. °Coca JOI y z 1977 I SUBJECT: Formation of Underground Utility District No, 3 Along Base Line Road from Teak Way to East of Hermosa Avenue At the regular meeting of August 15, 1984, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 84 -229 calling for a public hearing to determine whether public necessity, health, safety or welfare requires the formation of Underground Utility District No. 3 along Base Line Road from Teak Way to East of Hermosa Avenue. This report addresses a need for the formation of the above subject underground utility district to compliment the utility undergrounding requirements for Tract 11350 . The Southern California Edison Company (SCE) has indicated its intent to advance Rule 20A funds to Rancho Cucamonga to underground SCE's existing overhead distribution lines originating at their Archline Substation on the southeast corner of Base Line Road and Turner (Hermosa) Avenue. These distribution lines run westerly along the north side of Base Line Road. In order for SCE to legally utilize these funds, Rancho Cucamonga must form the subject underground district. Formation of UUD N3 would be in conformance with the City Council's adopted Resolution No. 81 -175 of November 4, 1981, establishing a list of six potential projects for implementation of an active underground program. Undergrounding of these distribution lines will coincide with the present reconstruction of Base Line Road. There are no existing overhead electrical service connections within the subject UUD d3 limits which would require underground conversions. However, all private property owners within the district limits have been notified, in compliance with the City's Municipal Code Title 13, of the proposed formation of UUD N3. continued....... /S. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Formation of Underground Utility District No. 3 September 5, 1984 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council adopt the attached resolution finding that the public necessity, health, safety and welfare requires the formation of Underground Utility District No, 3 along Base Line Road from Teak 'day to east of Hermosa Avenue. Resp ctfully submitted, VIBHI Attachments _n • • • 13.04.010 • Title 13 PUBLIC SERVICES Chapters: 13.04 Underground Utility Dist r_cts 1308 Stores Drainage Plan Sections; 13.04.010 13.04.020 13.04.030 13.04.040 13.04.050 13.04.060 13.04.070 • 13.04.080 '_3.04.090 13.03.100 13.04.110 13.04.120 Chapter 13.04 UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICTS Definitions. Public hearing by council. Underground utility districts designated by resolution. Unlawful acts. Exception -- Emergency or unusual circumstances. Other exceptions. Notice to property owners and utili- com- panies. Responsibility of utility companies. Responsibility of property owners. Responsibility of city. Extension of time. Violation-- Penait.. 13.04.010 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter the fcliowing woras and phrases shall have the meanings set out below: A. "Commission" means the Public Utilities COrMlIsslpn of the state. B. "Person" means and includes individuals, firms, corporations, partnerships, and their agents and employees. C. "Poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures" means poles, towers, sucports, wires, conductors, guys, stubs, platforms, crossarms, braces, transformers, insulators, cutouts, switches, co=unlCation circuits, annliances, attachments and apourten..ances located a'000ecrc u :d with a district and used or useful in supplying electr_c, co- �a:nication or similar or associated ser•rce. D. "Underground utility distrz or "distr. cp" neans that area in the city wit.-.I.. 'whig.'. pp -es, O'ierhead 'dlres, and associated overhead str'uc Clre_s are prohibited as such area is descri'ced in a resoluticn adopted rarauant to the provi- sions of Section 3 of this crdi -ance. 153 _r 13.04.020 -- 13.04.030 E. "utility" includes all persons or em s supt_y_ng electric, communication or similar or assec_aced e by means of electrical materials or devices. Ord. 11 Ql, 1973). 13.04.020 Public hearing by council. The council ma•: from time to tine tail public hearings to ascertain whether the public necessity', health, safety or welfare requires the removal of poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures within designated areas of the city and the underground installation of wires and facilities for succls;- ing electric, communication, or similar or associated service. The ci clerk shall notify all affected property owners as shown or. the last equalized assessment roll and utilities concerned by mail of the time and place of such hearings at least ten days prior to the date thereof. Each such hearing shall be open to the public and may be continued from time to time. At each such hearing all persons interested shall be given an opportunity to be heard. The decision of the council shall he final and conclusive. (Ord. 11 y2, 1913). 13.04.030 Underground utility districts desicnated by resolution. A. If, after any such public hearing the council Inds that the public necessity, health, safety or welfare requires such removal and such underground installation within a designated area, the council shall, by resolution, declare such designated area an underground utility district anal . order such removal and underground installation.. S. The council shall also make one or more of the following findings: 1. That such un.dergrcundi.n.c will avoid or eliminate an unusually heavy concentration of overhead electric fac_11- ties; 2. The street or road t- of-way is extensi•yely used by the general public and carries a heavy volume of pedestrian or vehicular traffic; 3. The street or road right -of -way passes through a civic area or public recreation area or an area of unusual. scenic interest to the general public. C. such resolution shall include a description of t area conprising such district and shall fix the time within which such removal and underground installation shall be accomplished and within which affected property owners must be ready to receive underground service. A reasonable time shall be allowed for such re. ^„oval and underground installation., having due regard for the availability of funds, labor, materials and equipment necessary for such removal and . - the installation of such underground facilities as may one occasioned thereby. (Ord. 11 53, :973). • 154 , � P 4.040-- c3.04.JEJ 13. 04.040 Unlawful acts. ;whenever the council creates an underground utility du tr -ot and orders tae removal of poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures therein as provided in Section 13.04.030, it shall be unlawful for anv person or utility to erect, construct, place, keep, maintain, continue, emplov or overate poles, overhead wires and associated over'. ^.ead structures in the district after the date w-en said overhead facilities are recuired to be removed by such resolution, except as the overhead facilities may be recuired to furnish service to an owner or occupant of pro- perty prior to the performance by such owner or occupant of the underground work necessary for such, owner or occupant to continue to receive utility service as provided in Section 13.04.090, and for such reasonable time required to remove the facilities after said work has -been performed, and except as otherwise provided in this chapter. (Ord. 11 94, 1979). 13.04.050 Excevtion-- Emeroencv or unusual circumstances. Notwithstanding the provisions or this chapter, overneac facilities may be installed and maintained for a period, not to exceed ten days, without authority of the city engineer in order to provide emergency service. The city enclneer may crane special permissicn, on such terms as deemed appro- priate, in cases of unusual circumstances, without discrimin- ation as to any person or utility, to erect, construct, install, maintain, use or overate poles, overhead wires and • associated overhead structures. (Ord. 11 55, 1979). 13.74.060 evtl- - in any resolution adopted -_-.._ to Sectle¢�:i.04.]33, ache fcllowinc are exempted unless - specifically included in tie resolution: A. Any municipal facilities or eauiom.ent install =_d under the supervision and to t-_ satisfactica of the city engineer; H. poles, or electrcliers use- exclusively for street lighting; C. Overhead :wires (exc'_cs i� :e of s cport_ng structures crossing any portion of a distract '.wit :run c over.ead wires have been prohibited, or ccnr.ecting to buildings cn the perimeter of a district, when suc . ". wires originate in an area from which poles, over ^ead wires and associated O'Je r: ^.23d structures are not prohibiter; D. poles, overhead wires and asscc_atad overhead structures used -`or tie transmissisn of electric ever?:: at nominal voltages in excess of t..___. _. tho=,:sand f-._ - undred volts: E Overhead wires attac'ned to t..e exterior surface of a bur by 'leans of bra .,_:._. ' e"';-a d- ing frhm^one lCcaticnon -- ...._ n.I..- _ _ a..- _cer�- ccatl3n cn t.e same bulldilg or to anad :acenL b111. =1nc wit'-Out cressl= any public street; 0 155 J `� 13.04.070--13.% *.090 Antennae, associated ecuipment and supporting s =tr•_a- _,.res, used by a utilitY for rurni5hi7c communication aer' :ice51 G. 7zulcment appurte nant to underground - acilities, such as surface moue *_ed transformers, pedestal.mouated tern -na'_ boxes and .. meter cabinets, and concealed ducts; H. Tannorary toles, overhead wires and associated overhead s.ructaresased or to be used in conjunction wit: ^. construction project. (Ord. 11 56, 1978). 13.04.070 Notice to oroner -; owners and utility com- ta.^.ies. A. Wit -in ten days acter the .ective date o� a resolution adopted pursuant to Section 13.04.030, the city clerk shall notiPv all affected utilities and all persons owning real property within the district created by said resolution of the adoption thereof. The city clerk shall ther notify such affected property owners of the necessity t -at, _f they or any person occuovi. ^.c such property desire to cntiaue to receive electric, communication, or similar or assoc_atea service, thev or such occupant shall provide all necessary facility changes on their premises so as to receive such service from the lines of the supplying utility or utilities at a new location. H. Notification by the city clerk shall be made by mailing a copy of the resolution adopted pursuant to Section 13.04.030, together with a copy of the ordinance codified in this chapter, to affected property owners as such are shown . on the last equalized assessment roll and to the affectea lt..._t -es. (Ord. 11 57, 1973). 13.^4.090 2esve. ^s'_� :1ity _nies. r- ,.._ _ ccns_rccc.cn _ necessary to urevide uti L•' service twit a d45tr_ct created by any resolution adcpted rsuant to Section 13.04.030, t:-= succlvinc utilvtv shall zurnisn that oerticn of the ctndu4ts, conductors and asso- iated equipment required to be ed b_: under _ applicable es, regulations andyt3r'__`5 �n .a.._'dit : ^, tle c ommission.��(Ord. 11 S3, 1978). 13.04.090 Respo.^.sibilrty o^ _precer`_c W - A. _Iver person owning, operating, leasing, , occapyincor re. ^.t :;tc a hu -1ding or structure within a district shall construct and provide that portion c: the service connection or. his orooer -; between the facili' es referred to in Section 13.04.08 and t a terniration faci17;ty on or within =_aid hui.ding or s tructn re being ser•fea. I` the ahove is net dCCgmpliSned any Corse. with:.`. t::B __ -e prcided - _ 4r, the resolution enacted oursua. ^,t to Se _ cn 13.04.030, t.-_ _ _ shall gi•;e notice n :✓rig_ _ to _scn ___tcssessizn cf such premises, a,, ^.d - ..o_ writ. to _-a owner thereof as shown on t.. last aquallced assessment roll, to provide the __...._red u. ^.c__= _sc :_:es ..__..zz .en days aft__ receipt or such notice. • 156 bbl 13.]4.;90 • B. The notice to pro•:ide _he required ,underground _` acilities may be gr;en either b nersonal service tv mall In case of service by mail on either of such persons' tae notice must be deposited in the United States mail in a sealed envelope with costace crepaid, addressed to the person in possession of such - premises at such ore -ises, and * -he notice must be addressed to the owner thereof as such owner's name appears, and must be addressed to such owner's last ;known address as the same a rrears on tie last equalized assessment roll, and when no address appears, to General Deliverv, City of Rancho Cucamonga. If notice is given by mail, such notice shall be deemed to have been received by the person to whcm. it has been sent within ;arty -eight hours after the railing- thereof. If notice is given by nail to either the owner or Occupant of such premises, the city engineer shall within forty -eight hours after the :nailing thereof, cause a Copy thereof, printed on a card not less than eight inches by ten inches in size, to be posted in a conspicuous place On the premises. C. The notice gi•:e, by t..a citp e.^.cineer to provide the eauired underground :ac_lities stall particularly spec-=; what work is required to be done, and shall state that if said work is not completed within thirty days after receipt of such notice, the city engineer will provide such required -derground facilities in which case the cost and expense t-c reof will be assessed against the property benefited and • beccme a lien upcn suc^ r der,.,. D. If pcn tne expi -_ o: thi- day period a required under =rcund __ilitias cave been` provided, _..e c-ty engineer snail fort wir :n croceed to do the work; prceided, however, if such premises are uaoc ^spied and no electric or communication ser•:ices are being furnished thereto, he city engineer may in lieu- of OrOvlding tte re_u' -red facilities, authorize the disconnection and removal of any and all overhead service •wires and asscciated facilities sup_p i7ing utility service to the p _ Upon cor..pletion of he work by the cis engineer, he shat• +'_e a written re ^ort Wit'" the city council setting fort: mne -act that tie recired underground facilities have been _p r8 ro•_ed and the cost thereof, together with a legal description of tae Property against which such cost is to be assessed. The council shall t:h.ereuron fix a time and place for hearing protests against tie assess- Gent of the cost o: such wank upon suc-1 pre -rises, w—_a time shall not be less than ten days tnereaftar, E. The city engineer shal' noon tae t_..._ for i:earicc s•.ic:: mratests :aviac been fixed, girel a notice W writ -_ to _ne person in ossessior. of such __ s s and a nog•__ in wri-tna .hereof to he Owner thereof, in _ -e manner V-ro•,,ided ... _ais ohapter fur t 1ng of - notice to orovidet required underground facilities, of ^,.he time and place _z' �.` ., .e council wiii pass per. -he ,repert and•will hear _ „tests U 157 /,- >- against Uie assessment. S-c" notice s all also set ;.,_:r. • the amount Of the propcsed assessment. ;. Gcon the date and hour set : ._ _ - ., _h core and tests, the cu. ^.cil stay_ ^ear and consider all protests, if here be any, and then orcceed�to affi —, modif•: or reject the assessment. c. if any assessment is not paid within five days aft =_r its con'_iration by the council, the amount of the assessment shall become a Lien u--cn the property against which the assessment is made b the city engineer, and the city enoineer is directed to turn over to the treasurer a notice of Tian or, each of the properties on which the assessment has not been paid, and the treasurer shall add the amount of the assessment to the next regular bill for taxes levied against the or =_raises upon which the assessment was not paid. The assessment shall be due and mavable at the same time as the property taxes are due and oavable, and if not paid when due and payaole, shall bear 'interest at the rate of six car- cent der annum, (Ord. 11 59, 19733). 13.04.100 Responsibility of c'_-v. The city shall remove at its own expense all city -owned ecuipment from. all coles recuired to be removed hereunder in ample time to enable the owner or user of such poles to remove the same within the t e e specified in the rsolution enacted pursuant to Sect_cn 13.04.030. (Ord. 11 510, 1978). • 1 ?.: 13 extension o' -a the event hat nay act __ _ _ ' this cnantar 'urs resolution ad"tad cant to Sect_cn 13.34.030 cannot be cerformed within the time On account of shortage�of materials, war, restrain_ 6y cubl c aut :-unties, stri:<es, labor disturbances, civi_ a- so- edience, or any other c -s- -ces beyond the control of t.. =actor, then the tins within which the act will be mpiishzd shall be extended for a _period equivalent to time of _he limitation.. (Ord 11 411, 1973). l' ;4.1 ?0 viciaticn-- penalty. It shall be unlajef.:1 nJI an%, _"_raC❑ tp violate any provision or to fail to wit;, any of the requirements of this chaster. any person violating any provision of this chapter or '_ailing to com.pl_, with any of its recuirements shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereon shay_ be punished by a fine net exceedlnc five hundred dollars or by _sca- -,ent not exceeding six ment -s, or by heth scc- - n a..'o mcr-scnment. Each s,c -.. person shall 'ne deemed - _ separ� offense aacn d= du__ __ -_, .,_ �.._._.. an,, vcJ�atic. of or the rove -_on5^ 4 _.._s _.`.aFt =_[• corm__- ccn hued or germ._ - by s. s...., and $..._1 to pun - ab_ as _ ro•. idea for in this (Ord. 11 51 ?, 158 1'a 3 • RESOLUTION NO. Z4-� S" - ' • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, FORMING UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 3 ALONG BASE LINE ROAD FROM TEAK 'WAY TO EAST OF HERMOSA AVENUE - WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on September 5, 1984, at the hour of 7:30 pm at the Lion's Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California to determine whether the public necessity, health, safety or welfare requires the formation of an underground utility district along Base Line Road from Teak Way to east of Hermosa Avenue; and WHEREAS, a notice of such hearing has been given to all affected property owners as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and to all utilities concerned in the manner and for the time required by law; and WHEREAS, such hearing has been duly and regularly held and all persons interested have been given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, formation of said underground utility district along Base Line Road is in conformance with the City Council's adopted Resolution No. 31- 175 of November 4, 1981, establishing a list of six potential projects for implementation of an active underground program. • NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AS FOLLOWS: 11 Section 1: It is hereby found and determined pursuant to Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 13.04 and the definitions contained therein that the public necessity, health, safety and welfare requires the formation of an underground utility district along Base Line Road from Teak Way to east of Hermosa Avenue in order to remove utility poles, overhead wires and associated structures and to underground utilities along said portion of Base Line Road. Said undergrounding will avoid or eliminate an unusually heavy concentration of overhead distribution facilities. Section 2: An underground utility district to be known as Undergroun Utt ity District No. 3 is hereby established in that area along Base Line Road from Teak Way to east of Hermosa Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California, more particularly described as follows: Those portions of Tract No. 8918, as per plat recorded in Book 122 of Maps, Pages 99 and 100; Tract No. 11350, as per amended plat recorded in Book 171, Pages 1 through 3; Portion of the East 112 of Section 35, Township 1 North, Range 7 'West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian per County Assessor's Map recorded in Book 202, Page 20; Tract No. 9449, as per plat recorded in Book 136, Pages 99 and 100; Portion of the North 1/2 of Lot 5 of Cucamonga Fruitlands as per plat recorded in Book 4, Page 9; %aY Portion of the North 112 of Lot 4 of Cucamonga Fruitlands as per plat recorded in Book 4, Page 9; all records of the County • Recorder of San Bernardino County, State of California, lying within a strip of land 120.00 feet wide, the centerline of which is described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the centerlines of Base Line Road and Teak Way as per the above said Nap of Tract No. 8918; thence easterly along said centerline of Base Line Road a distance of 1080 + feet to a point an the centerline of Base Line Road distant thereon South 890 54, 11" East, 254+ feet from the intersection of the centerlines of Base Line Road and Hermosa Avenue as per the above said Map of Tract No. 11350. The sidelines of said 120.00 foot wide strip of land are parallel to and measured at right angles from the above described centerline of Base Line Road, and shall be prolonged or shortened so as to begin from a line perpendicular to and passing through said Beginning Point at the intersection of the centerlines of Base Line Road and Teak Way and terminate at a line perpendicular to and passing through said ending point on the centerline of Base Line Road east of Hermosa Avenue. NOTE: That certain map entitled "Underground Utility District No. 3 ", which is on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, is attached hereto and made a part of this description of the Base • Line Road Underground Utility District No. 3. Section 3: All poles, overhead wires and associate overhead structures shall be removed and underground installation made in said underground utility district within the following times and conditions: a. Underground installation by Utility Companies and property owners and reconnections no later than March 1, 1985. b. Removal of poles, overhead wires and other associated structures no later than June 1, 1985. C. That the following exceptions in said Underground Utility District No. 3 be and are hereby authorized: 1. The installation of a new telephone pole at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Teak Way. Removal of said pole shall be required upon the formation of a future underground district on Base Line Road ,vest of Teak 'Way. 2. The undergrounding of utilities from 130 lineal feet east of the centerline of Teak Way to the centerline of Hermosa Avenue will be performed as part of the development requirements for Tract No. 11350. It is understood that the workings for undergrounding to be performed by District d3 and for Tract No. • 11350 shall proceed concurrently. 1�r • 3. Franchise responsibilities of the utility companies for relocation of their existing facilities within the public right - of -way east of the centerline of Hermosa Avenue shall not be circumvented by virtue of adoption of this resolution. Section 4: The City Clerk is hereby directed to mail a copy hereof uF and a copycipal Code Section 13.04 to all affected property owners as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and to all affected utilities within ten (10) days after adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of September, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: • Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk jaa 0 Jon 0. ,dike s, Mayor 0 • y MEMORANDUM ryy` vvQ9 DATE: September 5,1984 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -06 ASSOCIATES - Conceptual review of a master pan for the developmentt of a regional shopping center on 100 acres of land in the Victoria Planned Community, to be located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, west of Interstate 15 - APN 227 - 201 -35; 227- 221 -30. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 34-06 - HFA ASSOCIATES - Review and consideration of a supp ementa Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for development of a regional shopping center on 100 acres of land in the Victoria Planned Community to be located on the north side of Foothill, west of Interstate 15 - APN 227- 201 -35; 227 - 211 -30. The applicant has requested a continuance in order to prepare a revised site plan per the Planning Commission's recommendations. The Commission recommended that the lake be the form - giving element for the site planning of the mall. Therefore, it is recommended that the hearing for the EIR and Conditional Use Permit be continued to the September 19, 1984 agenda. R �pectfu submitted, R Vjyn Ci RG:DC:jr 7 6'% 9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 5, 1984 TO: Members of City Council FROM: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Manager 4ovv%. � SUBJECT: REQUEST FROM R.G. OARTMOLOMEUS DR CITY COUNCIL To CONSIDER WAIVING DMINADE AND PAWL FEES ON RESIDENTIAL DWELLING ADDITION RSl The City has received a request by Mr. Ron Bartholomeusz to reduce the fees for park dedication and flood control which are required as a condition of the planned addition for the applicant's residence. The basis upon which the request is submitted concerns the manner in which the drainage fees and park dedication fees are computed. The city ordinance provides that we compute the fee on the entire parcel, not just the portion of the property which will be affected by the additional construction. Mr. Bartholomeusz does not agree with that city policy and is requesting a change from the City Council. Specifically, the systems fee is exempt for all residential additions, however, the flood control fee must be paid. The city ordinance provides that if the room addition is less than 650 square feet, the parcel is exempt from flood control fees. If, however, the room addition is more than 650 square feet, but less than 50% of the existing structure, the resident is required to pay for only the land which the room addition will cover. If the room addition exceeds 50% of the existing structure the fee is computed on the whole parcel. This latter method of calculation would be used to determine the fees for Mr. Bartholomeusz' project. It is significant to note that the applicant, Mr. Bartholomeusz, currently lives in a home consisting of 1900 square feet. The proposed room addition is approximately 1200 square feet which far exceeds the 50% criteria established for the collection of flood control fees. The ordinance requiring park dedication fees in lieu of dedication of land contains no provisions for exemptions for any room additions. The fee will therefore be computed by the Building Department at the time of permit issuance for the room addition. /(. e IIA City Council Agenda R.G. BARTHOLOMEUSZ September 5, 1984 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the request for an amendment in the city's existing Fee Ordinance be denied. The existing fee structure in the view of staff is adequate and provides for fair and equitable treatment by new residents and by those who have previously lived in the City. At the time the fee structure was enacted the intent of the ordinance was to make certain that existing homeowners paid a fair share for flood control and drainage. The only means for making certain of this obligation is to require that at the time additional construction is approved, the fees most paid. LMW /kep //<9 • J • EE0 -'I 0 CIiY ADMINCSTRCTIONGNGA JUL 271984 MA 4 16 To the City Manager of the 919 10 01111v2131415 Mr. R..,.uartholomeusz City of Rancho Cucamonga. It 5999 Napa ave P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 CA 91701 Dear Sir The below subjects were previously discussed with you and Counsel woman V. Wright. it is upon her recommendation that 1 am otticaii- ly requesting that the following subjects be heard in the nearest available City Counsel meeting. Citv Crdinance 75 -B section 13.08 Per this ordinance, I will be sub iected to the payment of a Drainage Fee to the amount of $2025.00 because I want to add a 1200 sq.ft addition to my home. This fee is calculated on a base of 540.50 per 1 1100th of an acre. I happened to have the forsight of purchasing a 1/2 acre lot, and now want to expand my home inorder to provide room for my family. 2. I am further being accessed a Park Fee, again base upon the size of the addition. No consideration has been given to the fact that people like me are already residents of this City, and thereby contributing to the beautificaton on our City. Nor has it been given any thought that by such an expantion of this nature will also result in increased revenue for this City without any other cost to the City. I feel, and I can with confidence say that other residends have ex- pressed the same thoughts, that those on the City Counsel are not consirned about the families residing within this City. I hope that I am wrong and that the Counsel will in good faith discusse this matter, and that we can comeup with a fair solution to this problem. If not, than our City will loose some fine families since the cost of expansion will be to large. I appreciate all the help that you have rendered me, and hope that you will place this on the agenda of the Counsel. I will await your reply to let me know when the counsel shall address this mat- ter. • �S�i c e r e . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 5, 1984 TO: Mayor, Members of the City Council and City Manager FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: BARTMOLOMEUSZ LETTER REGARDING FEES Mr. Bartholomeusz has plans ready for issuance of an approximately 1200 sq. ft. addition to a residence having a total floor area of approximately 1900 sq. ft. The fees associated with this addition are as follows: Building permit fee $ 274.00 Drainage fee (.46 acre) 1,863.00 Beautification fee 242.00 Total $2,379.00 The following are the rules regarding special impact fees in Rancho Cucamonga for residential property: • Drainage Fee: ($4050 /ac) 1. If the addition is less than 650 sq. ft.: no fee. 2. If the addition exceeds 50% of the existing floor area: the fee applies to the entire parcel. 3. If the addition is more than 650 sq. ft. but less than 50% of the existing floor area: the fee applies only to the new addition. Beautification Fee: ($0.20 /sq. ft. or $200, whichever is greater) 1. If the addition is less than 650 sq. ft.: no fee. Systems development fee: (1% of building permit valuation) 1. If the addition does not constitute another dwelling unit under the building code: no fee, Since Mr. Bartholomeusz' building addition exceeds 650 sq. ft. and also exceeds 50% of the existing floor area, he is charged the full drainage fee and the beautification fee. The addition is exempt from the systems development fee. Staff Report - Bartholomeusz September 5, 1984 Page Two • From time to time the City Council is asked to respond to the issue of development fees and why "existing" residents or those wishing to build only one house must also pay fees. The following is a review of the reasons and philosophy of these regulations by the City Council. Each fee as adopted by the City Council was designed to address a specific problem area, i.e., drainage, systems improvement, etc. Since these problem areas exist even without "new development" occurring, the City Council could not equitably distinguish between "development" by a single homeowner and that done by someone who builds more. Many of the problem areas we have today are the result of deficits from pre -City development and,as such, preexisting homeowners "escaped" the cost they would have had to pay (through the cost of their home purchase) if, for example, the appropriate storm drains or street rights -of -way) were originally required by the County. But yet existing residents contribute to our current problems. Thus, new development not only must put in all needed infrastructure but must also contribute fees that are put to use in the preexisting areas. The greatest complaints developers have had is that fees are used to benefit those who do not contribute to the solution. So difficult decisions had to be made re- • garding the sensitive issue of equity. Therefore, beyond a certain threshhold of building, existing residents are also required to pay fees when they build. The City Council debated extensively the philosophy and equity of the fee exactions and concluded that while no system is totally equitable, all those participating in the development process, whether a room ad- dition, a single home, or a number of homes, must contribute to the future solutions. The Council gave recognition to "minor" development such as certain size additions and home projects by not requiring fees on the total improved lot or structure unless the construction exceeded a certain threshhold as described above, But the Council felt that once these threshholds were exceeded, the full fees would be required as with any other development. To summarize, the City Council established "development" fees and not "developer" fees and in doing so attempted to maintain as equitable a system as possible. Thus anyone "developing" in the City must pay his fair share and these funds are utilized to fund city -wide improvements. Any modification to these fee ordinances would be a change of City policy. Res ectfu y submitted, JACK LAM, AICP • Community Development Director JL:jk 7 ;L 0 • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 5, 1984 TO: City Council and'City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer SUBJECT: Base Line Road Closure Request The William Lyon Co. has requested that they be issued a closure permit on Base Line Road in the vicinity of Day Creek for the purposes of constructing a culvert under Base Line Road at Day Creek Blvd. The closure would be for a period of 45 days. The alternative to full closure of the street would be construction of a temporary detour around the work site for the duration of the construction. In consideration of this request, the Council must weigh the cost of detour construction against the user cost involved in detour to Highland Avenue and Foothill Boulevard and enforcement problems involving maintainance of the closure. RECORERDATIDN It is recommended that the clousre request be denied and a temporary detour required. Res g tfull submi tw LBH:jaa 173 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA OC,,, AMOQ% MEMORANDUM 'y m I. Date: August 30, 1964 To: City Council and City Manager 19:7 -- From: Bill Holley, Director, Community Services Department Subject: Agenda Item 6 -C Bear Guleb Park: Plans, Specifications and request for Construction Authorization Bear Gulch Park, located on Arrow east of vineyard, is ready to be advertized for construction bide, pending Council approval of final plans and specifications. The site plan, previously approved by the Park Development Commission, the Planning Commission and the City Council, is 5.0 acres in size and includes an extensive playground and tot lot development, a youth soccer field, a nine station exercise trail, restrooms, shade shelter and picnic facilities, along with full landscaping improvements. Adding to the available amenities provided at this 'neighborhood facility' are the playfields of Bear Gulch Elementary School which were designed by Central School District in concert with the park to maximize public use of the •I complex. Playfields at the school include three baseball /softball diamonds, II two youth soccer fields, and a hard court area for basketball, four square, etc. The estimated cost of improvements for construction of Bear Gulch Park is $250,000 of which the State of California will provide $175,339 through the 1980 Bond Act and $47,952 from the Roberti- 2'berg Funds, leaving a City share from the Park Development Fund of $26,709. (Do not let this figure of $250,000 deceive you however. Phase I, which was a portion of the road improvements and site demolition and grading, cost the Park Development fund roughly $30,000 ... therefore, a more accurate figure to use when discussing 'overall' development Cost on this site is $280,000.) Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1. Approve the final plans and specifications for the Bear Gulch Park Development Project, and 2. Authorize the Community Services Department to advertise the Bear Gulch Park Development Project for construction bids. /I C/ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, MEMORANDUM Date: September 5, 1904 To: City Council and City Manager Prom: Bill Holley, Director, Community Services Department C}ucdAfo'vo Y - Ltd Iz ITT Subject: Agenda Item 6 -D "Unnamed" Park (Church east of Hermosa): plans, Specifications and Environmental Findings "Unnamed" Park is being developed by the Marlborough Development Corporation as a method of meeting their park dedication requirements for their townhome project on Archibald north of Foothill. The land has been dedicated and the design and engineering services have been completed per city direction. we are now ready to have the park built. The site plan, previously approved by the Park Development Commission, the Planning Commission and the City Council, is 6.5 acres in size and includes features such as a baseball /softball diamond, youth soccer field, playground and tot lot, picnic areas, restrooms, off street parking, and, full landscaping. • I The cost of improvements will be carried by Marlborough development Corporation, as was the cost associated with the land and design services. Development cost is estimated at $295,000. 0 The project has also been reviewed to determine its potential impact on the environment. That review, in the form of environmental assessment, indicated that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and submitted to Council with request for approval. Staff Recommendation That the City Council: 1. Approve the final plans and specification for the project: and 2. Approve a Negative Declaration for "Unnamed" Park project, indicating the project will have no significant effect on the environment. i%s CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NEGATIVE DECLARATION • 1. Brief Description of Project: Development of a 6.5+ acre park site to include a softball /soccer field, a dedicated soccer field, picnic facilities, parking, a restroom, 2 children's play apparatus areas, landscaping, irrigation, street frontage improvements will also be a part of the project. 2. Name and Address of Applicant: City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 3. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has determined that the above project will not have a significant effect upon the environment. An Environmental Impact Report will not be required. 4. Minutes of such decision and the Initial Study prepared by the City of Rancho Cucamonga are on file in the City Clerk's Office of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. S. This decision may be appealed to the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. . A written appeal and filing fee must be received by the City Clerk's Office no later than 5:00 p.m., fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the City Council's decision. 6. This Negative Declaration is subject to the implementation of mitigating measures (if any) as listed on the attachments. Mayor, City of Rancho Cucamonga Title • t _ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMCNGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PRCJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $87.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff-_ will prepare Par- II of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no sign_ ficant environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, Z) The project will have a significant environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further informa- tion concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: C4us?"t4 PCleIG APPLICANT' NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF CONCERNING THIS PROJECTen/ LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FECERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: APPL(GRA(t43U(LDIQk 46RA KI & PeOMMS. /'?7 I -1 PRCJECT DESCRIPTION J ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROEOSED BUILDINGS. IF ANY:AlOY. WII-1 _ /ALf- J<T/J= AralnAxn Jn DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL. SETT'NG OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPCGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) , A21:.NALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTtURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact ?KC, I -2 /'J B F_ IL . WILL THIS PROS °C°: • Y °S NO V 1. Create a substantial chance in ground contours? L/ 2. Create a substantial chance in existing noise or vibration? V 3. Create a substantial change i. t de mand for municipal serviges (police, ._r_, water, sewage, etc.)? d. Create changes in the existinc zoninc or general plan designations? S. Remove any existing trees? How many? V 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, fla =ables or explcsi•:es? - xplanation of any Y_S answers above i >!pORT?NT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERT3 ?IC 1TiCN: I hereby certi'_y that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required tc be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Development Review Committee. Date 8/24484 Signature Lt� �• 1 C^- S Title �Q G ✓� Y/b EC �&yrli 1-3 CITY OF RA.ICHO CUCAMONGA PART II - TNITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC KLIST DATE:_ S/l24t e4 APPLICANT: (Jo Y CF Yricr`L -I"�D CiiAL�Fl�-�= FIL c DATE: LOG NUMMR: PROJECT.: �ih IYLC{a YP'1:. -IG PT /g0 vl vl ITIV �rvIG1{.G4IWN GT Il♦VIe: G.,•- '7t� {lW�••{"�� —r �+'�v— •..�'• I. ENVIRO:aNE:aTAt T�sACIs (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on at :acted sheets). ICES )LkYAE NO 1. Soils and Geolo4v. Will the proposal have • significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? V b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? L d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any potential increase in Rind or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site conditons? _� ✓ f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? h. An increase in the rate of extraction and /or use of any mineral resource? 2. Hydro Io . Wlll•ehe proposal have significant results in: /g0 3 4 a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or number • of any species of plants? v b, &eduttion of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? !� �i YES `.tAYBF �o a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels? ,_"� • b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any body of water? e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? .. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? � Quantity? h. The reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? __ _ • i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? Air 2uality. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile �. or indirect sources? Stationary sources? b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture v or temperature? �- — Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or number • of any species of plants? v b, &eduttion of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? !� �i 'age � YES MAYBE NO - c. introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? d. Reduction in the patential for agricultural production? v' Sauna. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. introduction of new or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? !� d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? _._-_ ✓ 5. Poaulation. Will the proposal have significant results in: . a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- or rate of bution, density, diversity, growth the human population of an area? b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing'. 6. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in local or regional socio- economic characteristics, including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and pro Dart? V' values? b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project users? 7. Land Cse and Planning Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or !r• .planned land use of an area? • b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, policies. or adopted plans of any governmental entities? �— L C, An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive at non - consumptive M, racreational opportunities? I ?3ge - YES %ME NO S. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results in: • a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? li c. Effects on existing narking facilities, or demand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon, existing transporta- tion systems'. ✓ a. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and /or goods'. f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential water -borne, rail, mass transit or t/ air traffic? g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in; • a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and /or historical resources? ✓ 10. Health. Safetv, and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? !" b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? _ c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident? d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? V e. Increase in existing noise levels? __ `•' f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? __ L g. The creation of objectionable odors? �_ L • h. An increase in light or glare? 4.3 a /P Y YES MAYBE NO 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant • results in: a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? ✓ b. The creation Of an aesthetically offensive site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal I ave a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? b. Natural or packaged gas? � C. Communications systems? d. Water supply? ✓ e. Wastewater facilities? • f. Flood control structures? g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? I. Police protection? j. Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? '! 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? m. Other governmental services? 13. Energy and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: v a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? c. An increase in the demand for development of • new sources of energy? d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non - renewable forms of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are available? /P Y 11 12 13 YES MAYBE NO Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in: • a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive L-�' site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated ✓ or potential scenic corridors? _ Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? b. Natural or packaged gas? _, ✓ c. Communications systems? _ d. Water supply? e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures? _ facilities? ✓ • g. Solid waste ,_ __ h. Fire protection? i. Police protection? j. Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? '! 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? m. Other governmental services? Energy and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: v a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? __ ✓ C. An increase in the demand for development of new sources of energy? ✓ _� • d. An increase'or perpetuation of the consumption of non - renewable forme of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are available? / ?o' 'age c d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? v 11. DISCUSSION OF EVVMONMENTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions Lus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). "F, FAM0 i YES MAYBE NO e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or • scarce natural resource? v 14. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the-environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? _ b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals? (A short -term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long- term impacts will endure well into the future). C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an • individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects). !� d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? v 11. DISCUSSION OF EVVMONMENTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions Lus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). "F, FAM0 i Page 7 III. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: -1 I find the proposed project CO= NOT have a significant effect • il, Vim on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARMON will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project YAY have a significant effect on the envirnment, and an ENVIRON.M&MT I:SACT REPORT is required. Dace Signature Title E • n U oPL43 „ i *C* NicJ Windrows Park, the first park to be constructed in the Victoria Planned Community by the William Lyon Company, is ready to conatruct pending Council approval of the City directed preparation of plane and specifications, and, Council issuing a finding that this project will have no detrimental environmental impact. The site plan, previously approved by the Park Development Commission, the Planning Commission and the City Council, is 8.0 acres is size and includes two baseball /softball diamonds, a youth soccer field, play apparatus area, off street parking, restrosms, picnic areas, and, full landscape improvement, which includes the preservation of a section of Eucalyptus windrow. Adding to the available amenities will be the future playfield improvement of • an adjacent F.tiwanda District elementary school, unplanned at this time. Sports fields and hard court areas will likely be provided on this site. LA The cost of improvement, estimated to be $260,000, will be carried along with all planning and engineering costa by the Lyon Company. The project has also been reviewed to determine its potential impact on the environment. That review, in the form of environmental assessment, indicated that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and submitted to Council with request for approval. Staff Recommendation That the City Council Approve the final plans and specifications for the project; and, 2. Approve a Negative Declaration for the Victoria Windrow Park Project, indicating the project will have no significant effect on the environment. /F4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA C!J a— ok MEMORANDUM • September S, 1984 To; City Council and City Manager r I�Z Proms Bill Holley, Director, community Services Department 9;7 Subject: Agenda Item 6 -E Windrows Park: Plan, Specifications and Environmental Findings Windrows Park, the first park to be constructed in the Victoria Planned Community by the William Lyon Company, is ready to conatruct pending Council approval of the City directed preparation of plane and specifications, and, Council issuing a finding that this project will have no detrimental environmental impact. The site plan, previously approved by the Park Development Commission, the Planning Commission and the City Council, is 8.0 acres is size and includes two baseball /softball diamonds, a youth soccer field, play apparatus area, off street parking, restrosms, picnic areas, and, full landscape improvement, which includes the preservation of a section of Eucalyptus windrow. Adding to the available amenities will be the future playfield improvement of • an adjacent F.tiwanda District elementary school, unplanned at this time. Sports fields and hard court areas will likely be provided on this site. LA The cost of improvement, estimated to be $260,000, will be carried along with all planning and engineering costa by the Lyon Company. The project has also been reviewed to determine its potential impact on the environment. That review, in the form of environmental assessment, indicated that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and submitted to Council with request for approval. Staff Recommendation That the City Council Approve the final plans and specifications for the project; and, 2. Approve a Negative Declaration for the Victoria Windrow Park Project, indicating the project will have no significant effect on the environment. /F4 Windrows Park CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.MONGA NEGATIVE DECLARATION • 1. Brief Description of Project: Development of an 8. acre park site. Park improvements will include a softball/ soccer field, a Little League baseball field, restrooms, picnic facilities, a children's play area, walkways,, landscaping, irrigation and parking. The existing eucalyptus tree windrows will be preserved to further enhance the park development. 2. Name and Address of Applicant: City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 3. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has determined that the above project will not have a significant effect upon the environment. An Environmental Impact Report will not be required. 4. Minutes of such decision and the Initial Study prepared by the City of Rancho Cucamonga are on file in the City Clerk's Office of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. . S. This decision may be appealed to the City, Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. A written appeal and filing fee must be received by the City Clerk's Office no later than S:00 p.m., fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the City Council's decision. 6. This Negative Declaration is subject to the implementation of mitigating measures (if any) as listed on the attachments. DATED Mayor, City of Rancho Cucamonga Title /90 0 CITY OF RANCVO CUCAMONGA INITIAL. STUDY PART I - PROZSCT INpOR%IAT.ION S',i =«T - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessµent Review Fee: 587.00 pot all projects requiring environmental review, this for-: must be completed and submitted to the Developr..ent Review Committee through the department where the oroject application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Enviror= ental analysis staff will prepare Part I/ of the Initial Study. The Development Review Cz- .mittee will meet and take Action no later than -en (10) days be' -mre the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one c' three determinations: 1) The Project will! have no signi- ficant environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be 4_led, 2) The Project will have a significant envircrrental impact and an =nvircnmental Impact Report W'--'- be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further infprma- tion concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLS: I11 Ft-wS PARK APPLICAN ?'S NAME, ADDRESS, NA:-18, ADDRESS, T-- IZPHCN£ OF PERSON TO 3E CONTACT =O CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: CILK MIN)T-K.PARK PRraIEG"i !L-= C1r� u*fDFZ/ SAME AS AibY6� LOCATION OF PROJECT (S�4£T ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) LIST OTRER PSR.MITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL., REGIONAL. STATE AND F =CERAL AGENCIES &NO THE AG -eNC.' ISSUING SUCH PERMIT5:[g a ",.lLM,LE rP4I:I21tyC Awn'�D1CL�- fF��[i5 I -1 PROJECT DESCI:PT'_ON . ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA A-NO, SQUARE FCCT.XGE C? A.NO PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: _•({I—W FROJCL-f IS A}'°f+i ^XM SLY DESC7Z3E THE EVVZRCVME`TXi SETTING OF THE PRC.:ECT SITE i:1CCGDI`iG Z`IFC tiL4. _0N ON TOPOGrA0HY, ?L.:u`ITS (TREES) , ALNY CULTUR.L"., HZSTORICAL OR SCE`lIC .1S?ECTS, USE OF SURRCU:ICZVG ?ROPERTIES, AND THE 0ESCRZ ?TI0N CF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY Sric__<< -) : Is the prcject Part o: a larger project, one of a series o! c•- umtzlative actions, which althcugh individually smal_', may as a whole have signi_icant environmental imcact? No. I -2 r -1 L • W= TH:S PRCJE--: Y-S Nc V I '- create sta- ;al. a -ane -n contours? V' 2. create a s=ostanzia-' chance _n exist-4n= noise or vi- r a t _4 On ? 3. create a s.,b-statiai change in __de= fzr 'U_4C4=aj. Services (=Cl- M 4ce, -re, water, Uj 9 sewace, et=.)? t h Create chances in the ex:SZ4..; zcn Or I1 ' general- p- an de.-Znaziz 31 5. Remove an7 eX4st4:g trees? -low many?— 6, create the need for use Or distcsa-1 Or -, -ccent4a-'y hazardc--'s materials s=*- as toxic sl-'^Soances' f-=r-abl-as or ex=-Oslves? -=-'anaticn. Of an'! —YES answers above: f the project involves the construction of residential units, cc the form on the next page. czaT:-:c.%-:CN: I hersbY certi!7 that the statements --=4s�ed above and in the attached e. nresent the - - .. - this -7 evaluation data and information required f'O-- — initial evaLu - to the best of my ab-41-1-1 and that the facts, statements, and .;nzormation presented ar3 true and correct to the hest 04- my kncw1edge and belief. : further understand that additional ;—rmat43r. may be required to be submitted before an :dac'--Ite evaluation can be made by the Devei-opment Review CoMMIttOe- -are Oace 1 �,c?4 $ 1 q n a t Title 1-3 /' 7, • CI ^! OF 'RANCHO CL•C.*!CZ1GA ?.kX- iI - I :;i_:AL SMDv A? =� :_;:;_: �•� ,�c RBI >� �- ra�re°��. LOG :.L�sEa: CcR'ER CF *kE IME25EG.T P' 21J of VlcaaR P,uik ��6 g VILjCRIOc LGaP (N THE vtcci R1A PIJ,NNGP —MMUN rr'yc p (Etc Laaaticn Of ail "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attac S.ei shce-s). YES ILAY 9C _. Scils and iee'_ogv. ril- the proposal have . s_T&. za ^.t rasul's i... a. Dascab :e ground conditions or in changes is geologic elatansvps7 V• S. Disruptions, displacements, comoacticn or / burial of the soil.. _V c. C :..ar.ge in topography or ground sur'_ace contour inter+als7 ._ d. :he destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical feacares? e. Any potential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either an or of`_ site conditons? `V/ E. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? __ V G. Exposure of peoe Le or property to geologic / hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? _ h. An increase in the race of extraction and /or • use of any mineral resource'. 2. Hvdroloqv. Will the proposal have signif icanc results in: /y 4' c - YES YAY3S `10 a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral scream channels? _ • b. C anges in a'osor ?Gan -.aces, drainage pa__ =_r s, or z.-2 race and amount of surface water r;ao-? C. AL^ ^eracions to the course or `law of good watars? d. Change in the amount of surface water i- any Sad, of water'. e. 9EscSatge into sur'_ace waters, or any al :ara4an of sur °_ace water cuaLi C•:' �( .. ALt =era Goa of gt ouad::ater g. Change in the :uan___y of groundwaters, ei 'Set through d4--c= _ addic'_oas or with - dral:a -s, or through icercerence w, - -- an _ ac U4 =art Qua-,' y? % Qua: c "y? S. The reduction in the amount of water ather- aise available for ouSLit water su ?plies' • _. re of people or ?p to wa t=r ,s m .e Lacea hazards su-c' as fLaa ding or sei='nas' 3. Ai •• ^ itv. aim the proposal' have significant resu is ca: a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobi-e or indiract sources' �y„+ Statiana:/ sources' b. Oeteriara Can of ambient air quality andr'or iata_:farence with the attaiame -t of ap ?14caSte / air gv31it7 standards? ,_ V C. Alteration of local or regional c'_i"acic conditions, affacting air movement, moisture / or cer..peracure? FLa n. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or number / V of any species of plants? —_ • b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare / or endangered species of plants? -- Y c - I YfS MMBE NO c. 1,trod.ctlon of new or disruptive species of • plants into an area? d. Teductian In the potential for agricultural pr-d-1C-401? V Sauna. 1;4-' the proposal have significant results in: .. �e in the characcaris tics at species, a. C,_ jn� including diversity, distribution, or num =trs /I of soec4es of animals: V a. deduct ton Of the iu.-'be.s Of any unique, -,are 4es of anima-s'. or andangs:ed sped .es V 1n:_'duCS4= OZ lea or steaies 0z a-.j-.a-s Inzo an area. or t In a 'Dazr-*-r ovement at z 'S � t- :-.a m4grazor. a- m an-=a- V/ d. Ceter oration or removal 04 existing fis.-I Or w4' Il"e Inabirat? a -4 2n, [4;_ --e propcsal have s'&n4 -z_*_azc resu'�a ;n: a. 'di_- --a proposal alter, -zhe location, disc=i' • bc:4n_ de7si:'+, diversity, or 3r:w -are o :-.e ',man population of an area? b, .___ ...e proposal af-sem existing "Ous".9, or C .eats a demand far additional housing'. 5. Sotto- Zcnnemic -actors. will the proposal have sz;n";4zan: results In: A. C"-=ge in local or regional socio-economic CbatlCtarlStJC3, including economic or co—_er_4a_ diversity, tax race, and property vanes'. b. '4i7l project costs be equitably d1st-4bucad among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project uses'. 7. Lars :se and ?'annum Considerations. •;i11 the propcsai love s1;n1z1Ca"z Faeu�r�_,? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? c. An impact upon the quiaitj or quantity of existing consumptive or non-consumptive recreational opportunities? YES MAYBE NO 8. T :anspprtztion. Will the proposal have signif4can: results 5 In. • a. Ganerac on of substantial add':- m."eme't'. I/ on exisqzng streets, or demand for nel; street cons zruczion? I/ c. ---ets an ex4-sz`-.,, park-ing fac'I"es, or demand for ie-w oarking? d. Su-szantial impact uvom ex4st'ag t4o.. Systems? V a. A7.e-a,-cns -3 present patter of zion or movement of people and,or pods? V facts on Ares eat and A araz4ons to oz e--- potential -water - Sore, rail, mass transit or air :-af-ic? g .-raasas a t-a..-- hazards to rotor vehizles, bivc--szs or pedestrians' 9. C-,*---,-a- Rescurzes. Will the propose.' have S-;7.1f4zal: re"-:3 il: a. A d4scuraice to 'he imtagntr of arc aeolog4ca-', pa'e==o!ag-J=a-!, a-.d,'or historical resources? 10. Hea-r-, Safat-,, and Au' sanc- Factors. W,'-'-* the proposal lave significant results in: a. C.eacicn or all health hazard or potential health hazard ? V b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event or an accident' d. An increase is the number of individuals or species of vector or ?athencgenic ar;an4sm.s or ;he exposure of people to such organisms? e. Inc-ease in existing noise levels? f. E;qasure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? Z. The creation of objectionable odars? h. An increase in lighl, or glare? /G% YES HAM—V NQ Aes-oe:ics. Will the proposal have significant zs i. resu_ : results -I a. The abstraction or degradation of any sccnz vista or vie.' b. The creation of an aeschetiaa'_y -"2ns"Ie c. A conflict with the objecmJ-.'e of designated or noteq:Ial sceq4c corridors? protosal have a teed for new systems, or a'zera.-.s to the fcl'owir.t: a. C____ _t Do.er? b. Natural or packaged gas? C. Ca-=ut4:a-"ons S.!StenS7 I Water suzp'y? Nastewatar V, Co :ro� c :'4 z e s ? .-Cod to at. g. So_fd waste fdCiliti 25? h. 4, ?0"4ze -protection? 4. Sc-Cols? 'A. fscI"JtJeS? ?arks or other recreational I , Xa4ftmenance oz" public fac4l'i"es, iqc1-4diIg roads and '!cod control 6ac'!__es? M. Other governmental services? 13. Enerzv and Scarce Resources. Nil-' the proposal I resul:z in: have S4;nLf4canz a. I'se of substant4al or excessive fuel or energy' b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing scurcas of ener;y7 c. An increase in the demand for development of new sources Of energy? d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non-renewable fors of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are available? e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? 14. Mandczor: S'_ndinzs of Siz^.ificance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantca'_27 reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a ash or wildlife popuiaann to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminata a plant or ani�. l corcunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate atoaaat examples of the major periods c: Ca. _tarnia his to r: or prehistory? YES MATTE NO V • V b. Ices the project have the pocen:4 -al to achd eve snort -a=, to the disadvantage of long- ter_.• en•;iro _.e^.tal goals? (A short -term impact on the env`ro=e ^.c is one which occurs in a rala._;eiy brief, defiaitive period of time while long - term inpacts will endure_ well into the f_�ure). _ V c, Does the project have impacts whit` are iad4- i ua1 ;; l -' Ited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an ind_;iSual project are considerable when viewed • in connection with the ef'_eccs of past pro!ects, / and probable futura projects). 1/ d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects —/ on human beings, ei :ter directly or indirectly? __ ✓ II. DISCCSSiO:: 01 E:M1'IiON!S:1:AL °_BALL'A —CN (i.e., of at__ alive answers to cite above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). NcN� RF4'uR� I* G 1' .. , 111. DF-27UII:IA1:ON • On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the ?rovased ?roj act COULD NCT have a sign4 canz effect on the enpizanmenc, and a be p-epared I f'-d that a!-hough the proposed project could have a s*3a4"-'caqC i effect on the env4z"=ent, there i.'- not be a si3z4flca..t effect :act in -h4s case because the mi-'gatzon neasu.as descr'_bed an an attached sneer have 'Dean added to the project. A NESAT.:7- 3E ?R.ZPAR=-. I -ind the proposed project `1WY have a s43-.."-'-an: e"ec- on the =A= i env--,=enc, and an 4S rewired. Date • .9 -� I" C ?age 7 .a 3 � i q r p l � WNOROWS PAAI( a 0 LJ • M E M O R A N D U M TO: Members of the City Council FROM: Robert E. Dougherty, City Attorney DATE: August 28, 1984 RE: Change of Municipal Election Date Enclosed for Council consideration is an Ordinance which, if adopted, would change the general municipal election date to coin- cide with the day of the statewide general election. The authority for such an Ordinance is Government Code Section 36503.5, a copy of which is also attached. Also, see attached Govern- ment Code Section 36503.7 which would control the candidate filing • period in the event the Ordinance is adopted. If the City Council adopts the enclosed Ordinance, it must be submitted to the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors for approval. Under Government Code Section 36503.5, the Ordinance is not effective until approved by the Board of Supervisors. If the Ordinance is adopted by the City Council, and approved by the Board of Supervisors, then within thirty (30) days of such approval Government Code Section 36503.5(e) requires that the City Clerk mail a notice to all registered voters informing them of the change in the election date and also informing them that as the re- sult of the change in the election date, elected City office holders terms in office will be changed. I£ the election date is changed to coincide with the state- wide general election date, the election consolidation procedures commencing with Elections Code Section 23300 may be made applicable. RED:sjo Enclosures cc: .. siren M. Wasserman, City Manager § :11i:;1 I I GON 1.RlNfE1NT I ODE DIVISION :1. DFFR ENS PAI�T ". CIENEIZA!, m, "nil 1 inn, n ;tn,m' �n in iz zo . ...... .1'r tei i rilrnl "Inn, r In, :—1 ir in; 'if I l oni, I 1�j LF il ni . 1 .1 01 1r ........ i, in un• IL ill c, I tni, 1 1 11 L A J11 I T1.11 i in I r I �1. 1, Nnn it r -1 I in t, r, r v i I , I i if vi t,L 14 f .... ... J." I'll 11111 1 I'llin, .1 'dIri 11 14, II IIiIIIIIIIft I .......... 60% L it, MEN r ( f1m: i Omm. "d h, V6 2 1 71 (;I)% FTZN I ENT CODE if n .11 1 1, o z Z I In I n. InIll- I- in. :Cl In. Z In Z in' 7' I,111 If 1111-1 In I,—, I (',v I-o 4 Term u'm Ordin..I,: I,mlidm,d Ikdmn, §:3G503.5 -4 .,f 11, in 11 !1 _I�r 41:1 mInI 1.1 IlIlr 1 1% Ciil I:, -1,,l I. I :i I,l o-11 I in, J. -1313 ur.:zr PIC j-j 41 01, -11. 7 1 Win. 19. 20 J. 1-1� In, 1-0-1 -11 Ia f�t 11.1"It on�,hN A clwt,, , in, , I tnn,,, . . in . . . C—_ I. ,,n -11 1 1 1 1 -1 11 hr�I 1 1 I I I c I j I I I 0�111 -1 1 11 1, �Ilo -'VrILl ��l Il �1:il In Ar.1'111 - llol� I 1.1im, I 111 . ", Cd I L Ll :.: ` • I I nC t in 1 In : , !tl . ld 1, 111 In- ;.I rj, nlot pI-II,In, ate ll !I' ZnI I.11t:ll. or nn III 7-P% 7— :4. W'. It by I'll , nrl I .1 111 I I 01 I r, PlIt mIIIIL I t- n D.1 111 1111^1. I In IfIll ro 1 LI "d h, V6 2 1 71 (;I)% FTZN I ENT CODE if n .11 1 1, o z Z I In I n. InIll- I- in. :Cl In. Z In Z in' 7' I,111 If 1111-1 In I,—, I (',v I-o 4 Term u'm Ordin..I,: I,mlidm,d Ikdmn, §:3G503.5 -4 .,f 11, in 11 !1 _I�r 41:1 mInI 1.1 IlIlr 1 1% Ciil I:, -1,,l I. I :i I,l o-11 I in, J. -1313 ur.:zr PIC j-j 41 01, -11. 7 1 Win. 19. 20 J. 1-1� In, 1-0-1 -11 Ia f�t 11.1"It on�,hN A clwt,, , in, , I tnn,,, . . in . . . C—_ I. ,,n -11 1 1 1 1 -1 11 hr�I 1 1 I I I c I j I I I 0�111 -1 1 11 1, �Ilo -'VrILl ��l Il �1:il In Ar.1'111 - llol� I 1.1im, I 111 . ", Cd I L Ll :.: ` • I I nC t in 1 In : , !tl . ld 1, 111 In- ;.I rj, nlot pI-II,In, ate ll !I' ZnI I.11t:ll. or nn III 7-P% A, I It 01 I r, PlIt mIIIIL I t- n D.1 111 1111^1. :111n Ir., In IfIll 1�1 I, ',ni!, 4w, IAI, I In,, r'! Ill^. 1-31 1 LI 11, 1. o, I''v .I." illy , i "Os 1, !Lrrn,,f ,�. -, I ,,, :1-Ir to thO L,,qn::, .1, 1-111 AIIIIII11Z :h, p, o F". ll• In A:,,,, l Ifn I. I-n,.11- ri if N '31, A.,I, .o,t m Ic �Iit off CCS Un%tj r) A i nd I ate I, 1e U. ns by I Ument ll, — X 'e 11 - �' 'W- � I - ,� .' 1.)t '..) G0% ERNMENT CODE rirt 7 I iq l' 1 b nit, to ill r, 'I "Inz, 1 -.1' n ii tee it, "ji ln, z l.1,1 11, 1, lo,. r, Lr h"', nll OIII,nn P,l (.r Min, n. T F, 'u 1 i 3 Cjt% in Ciflil Cortunt, entral m.n ...... I rlrctmn in 1, n, w,.ld, slInirrIl election; ordinance t it' ..o. t it r I. '7r n ir lill I, r, in I f t § I ; . .APpnlnlnr , , I f. , v r , ; I " , . , , , , it, . n t . . . . . . .. . . . •. . I'll I ',,, Ir I'llt iins II ii—I•t ELECTIONS CODE 161':CTIOS9 CODE, y 26.1,1 IN DATES ry CHAPTER ?. STATEP'IDF. ELEfTI0Y5 4.. P oclamamtc F a;e d he f ern r h I 's a rr ! •rapnn r F e he e!ectl n 'fir wml year , y 111 t a1, • u 1 h\ G", r nr "d" n. _r r 1 the l rent , of the stain' ' !arch n( each nd16nomiemA _n_'I� 11 ti lay poor .0 tl.e auv,lon rth i .hJ : •etc the , me oft a r'oct, n and the nC ma. year :re illiaq Tr,nles of the prnc!amu!lnn :.. ^.:di I,c [ransm:nrri h}'the Gneernnr w [FC heunls ur .rh peas r. ,nr< n1, :FC ma n ties. rh F• CHAPTER 9. LOCAL F.LF:CTfII \'S r p "Iiol, feneraI mumripal election . • a t P111111d n SecUe" ja-W .36503.5, u,i b la f tn e G., ., Cde. J gener , ., na •,.• h\'t m „ T. m 1 r 'c.n -lo r•t .. �• Id36. p 1161..$ 13 ;,tat .10:, I(. 1131 1. ,.0 1Lc lllf.t eif. Sept. 30. 19dL e. Yd, n — . J 4.1, r 1 ,inch the ohar:cr pen \':alone am 111 ",1,!.I,d mJ T 1S\\ 19e: \mCMNw'n \IaJ[ n, ,.11.1]111\[ ♦hanee, Ire - ,m 1noc J1, a,lnl ma 'e ura M —, a me e,:u Im• .,... r -I nn 50011 of the Fnlucal:nn ('alu nr "n \mrmlmtet. i,lJea me e„er1: n u Inc K5m Cm,c Her<rvnc<, -a at ,•< «u,° Fle.nw I.I x, .,I , ff -- ,<r 111111r,", Cn 199111mendmrrlr. n«nea the I<,.rtn.< to (:v, C. rol distnrt lo,."d m a curu•nd $ \1\11\ ;11 ' • '.u' or mun[p elermn 11.11 In a , poyuletmn. s ?602 School district or community college district election ndum nr recall Jert ens F;v t t', Wr, tic ,[o.ar nhvtrn to -, e, drc . • • th11m of fl., \yl_ � 'I,:L :F9 I✓` 1'l'! rn r ,t L,. .J .ell n __ _ ,..lr orned 1p' St,, 1,7,t, ,� IJTn. 1) - .132. 5 14. SwtsJOi?. r -367, I - 131. W, lmamtmmr. auFnve9<.I ?m "pv "4a" dfec!,J e. ,,e Icenulwe 1 :1, " -'c Rrndar 5t—,n 19'9 lmrnnmenl. AJW r nnmuml, ,evince Jl,. r.l Ih< I +•.,,, v,..,. ., r, ., .,, wnra mFcwuuw ✓I I, nl oi!ne nl Irv,icrc of I: _ NJ ..rmmYnn, :r 1!ey'r .Ir,lr, la Nio,, § g), } :604. Np,ci,i dis(H,t election If nor 6,,tton In rhnnse wtn!xrs ^f tFe gnvrrn:nC burl 11, .1 ,: a mtn:iy rtu,nday' wltniu�.rd 4y mallall Ira!;"' "shall Le held nn the i:r,.[ T_r..,,.e. 5 +,,,c :r� 1,:+G Ire ecytemner of each ndd-numbemd -__- ': : • .• ^ held on any day n[hr :han a e!fa1 aRrr n ante nnlmay I 1Amnnded by 3tal[. LN, c. IJNa p. 4.1,62, § 1,12 1 e. 9. p. ;^, §11,, uraenry, uf[. 19'11 lmrndment. Ir: a+f ;\:gvnn - CHAPTER 4. SK('IAF ELE('I'ION, 4 2650. Election date M1, r ca,n c;n,'Ia, r n,rrlien shall Un n,,A on rgv I 1. ^..: r.•ql . "., .'..' r .rt 'v rt,, n --,o 1.`:r nrr rlr!1I �.J,. .2111 1111. {I i.3ia. i i 1 I $ B ;51. Pruclamatinn of gmerun, Th., 16„r nor <F li, ry ,i 0I =Wtrx,do • • p. fl r,'r, ^.1.n•, d\ .., 1•g a ; rr1 Ir:.n,m 1.;!.xant to S,,IIr,n M,:11,- h11,, ,,( I,aranrr ur ruLIZ.... "'Il r < add,,..e, by amendment A9tensl,S ud,"te delebans by amendment 1:3 T �� ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING THAT THE GENERAL MUNI- CIPAL ELECTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SHALL BE HELD ON THE SAME DAY AS THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION,,NAMELY, THE FIRST TUESDAY AFTER THE FIRST MONDAY OF NOVEMBER IN EACH EVEN NUMBERED YEAR. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: This Ordinance is enacted under the authority of Government Code Section 36503.5(a)• SECTION 2: The general municipal election of the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall be held on the same day as the statewide general election, namely, on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November in each even numbered year. SECTION 3: This Ordinance shall apply to general municipal elections held in 1986 and subsequent years, provided, however, that nothing in this Ordinance shall limit or otherwise effect the author- ity of the City Council to change the day of the general municipal election in the manner permitted by Government Code Section 36503.5 or any other relevant statute. SECTION 4: This Ordinance shall become operative upon the approval of the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors. SECTION 5: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passaqe at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: CITY CLERK T., ` CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM Septmber 5, 1984 TO, City Council /� FROM: Lauren M. Waaaersan 7 �r� City Member PVT SUBJECT: San Bernardino County and Cities Information Exchange Conference San Bernardino County and the City Managers Association will be boating the annual Inforaation EmhwW Conference on Thursday and Friday, October 11 -12, 1984, at the Arrowhead Hilton Lodge. The work sessions for the conference will begin early Thursday afternoon and conclude at noon on Friday. The priaary Issues to be discussed this year are, A. proposition 36 (Jervis) B. Waste to Energy C. Disposal of Hazardous Waste This conference has been very worthwhile in the past, and the "line -up" of topics this year appears to be Laportant subjects the City will be dealing with in the near future. It is hoped each oomoilaeaber will consider attending this conference; additionally, if you wish Co attend, then as seen as possible contact Bev Authelet who will be asking arreogeaents for lodging. LMW:ak /71 r44 azuC tk a� August 27, 1984 Lauren Wasserman, City Manager /Clerk City of Rancho CucammW Post Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Lauren: A conference of the Cities of San Bcrrmrdino and the Canty of Son Bertiardims has been scheduled for Thursday, October 11 and Friday, October 12, 1984 at the Arrowhead Hilton Lodge, Lake Arrowhead. The conference will begin early Thursday afternoon and conclude at noon on Friday. The positive acceptance of last year's meeting and the spirit of cooperation which was fostered has resulted in a recommendation from the respective administrators that our jurisdictions again mat to discuss issues of common concern. Some of the issues suggested for discussion include: Proposition 36 ()arvis)i Waste to Energy; and Disposal of Hazardous Waste. It is hoped that our Bard and Council Members will again attend. This past year was a difficult one due to economic conditions and the uncertainties relating to adoption of the State budget. These and other problems are better solved through cooperation, as has been demonstrated. Let us join together so that we may Continue to strengthen that cooperation. Please Put these dates on your calendar. We will be contacting you in a few days for preliminary reservations. If you have any questions or suggestions, please call Walt Wells, Administrative Analyst at (714) 383 -2263. —Aawq Very Truly, ROBERT B. RIGNEY County Administrative Officer San Bernardino RBRtbj //JL2[ �� 3ACK.RISTFL& City Manager City of Fontana Chair, City Managers Association COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE - 137 West 5th Street, 2nd Floor, San Bernardino, 9241 5-0120 ,:. MOBILEHOME AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASK FORCE • of San Bernardino County 217 East "A" Street Upland, California 91786 (714) 946 -2617 August 8, 1984 Ms. Beverly Authelet City Clerk City of Rancho Cucamonga P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Ms. Authelet: During a recent luncheon meeting with members of the Mobilehome Afford- able Housing Task Force representatives, Councilman Jeff King requested that the enclosed chart of Resident -owned Mobilehome Park Development Alternatives be sent to you for inclusion on the agenda for the August . 15th City Council meeting. Yours tru� Sam A. Angona Chairman Enclosure • a/0 RESIDENT OWNED M0BILEMOIIE PARK DEVELOPMENT - ALTERNATIVES SITE ACGUIBITION OWNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT FINANCING MORTGAGE FINANCING city ne County Public Surplu. Property. Terms. To be negotiated, e.g., Subordinated Trust Deed for market Val", w long tern lease. City or County &*development Agency site acquisition irate Surplus P[opertY, Tern, Oseated at lose than market vsiw, maximum 20 year Trust Dead 0 negotiated interest ante L City or county Community mewldpment Block Grant ICDDG) write does at any land Purchase predevelopmatt Loan, State of callfocelas Department of Housing A Coarlty Development, Terms, 100% Lmonatep for all predevelopment Activities Trot ronatrrotion) at 7.3% Internet rate Tam Simple Ownership, Planned Unit Development IPUD) fee simple ownership, hobilshowe subdivision HUD 212, Cooperative Development Financing Insurance Program RedavelopPSot Agency Tar Increment financing HUD 207 N, mobllehose park development and permanent fln.nelAg insurance program. Tens, 20 year loan at Government Insure +eriitrint- rest cat y te loin emorcld Rent Rental ea Reing Construction Program Lited Llesd LgsitY CoopentSw p)1:109, 10 yetre, 0% interest rate ownership a loan for 101 of will cost Comeunity Development Slack Grant : ICOSG) may be granted or loaned or write down development costs Stock Cooperative Ownesahip bLLd*nt conversion of existing rnbilehoma park to any of the above ownership alternatives HUD 201 d Mortgage Insurance Program for U* simple own.rahlp, Tera9, Government insured rates no Title I ' Mobll.hoSe 20en Insurance program. Terms , 13 years at Government insured r ttt Conventional Mortgage flnan :ing of new moollehome Relocation of presently owned mabilehome Special Assessment TSnaroing, (1923, 1913 Acts), Tune, finance All right-of- way improvements at tar -amewpt rates Donation of in -kind ferric" other private Sources, Conventional mortgages, equity syndication, pension [undo, foundation grant@ vu a va' aaaai. w.v v.JV�mv�. n IN, MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM DATE: September 5,, 1984 TO: Members of the City Council FROM: Karen Paul, Deputy City Clerk SUBJECT: LOCATION OF WEST VALLEY COURT FACILITIES Resolution No. 84 -237 pertaining to the location of the West Valley Court Facilities will be distributed prior to the September 5 meeting. KEP • 19 1977 rleL J/ 41518 ' RESOURCES AGENCY • TrILE la (p 722 20) (Ant.t., as a. I Whether there would be any n'¢nificanl physical effects on esisting strut• tures and neighborhads o(tustoric�aJ('or aesthetic signjficance if any curt in the area covered by the plan or program, and 4 Whether measures necessary to mitigate or avoid such effects are included in the FIR. (E) That a subsequent EIR is not required Purmant to Pubhc Resources Code Section 21186 and Guidelines Section 15162 (4) The lead aaggency shall make one or more findings as required by Section 15091 with regard to mitigating or avoiding each significant effect that the project would tuvq on the environment. ag(5) The lead agency shall file a notice of determination with the county clerk e) lead agency approves theyroject. (c) As used in this section neighborhood commercial fecihtias means those commercial facilities which we an integral part of a project involving the construction of housing and which will serve the residents of web housing. (dl As used in this section. "urbanized arcs" means only those areas mapped and designated as by the l!S. Bmeau urbanized of the Census. NOTE Authority cited. Sections 21093 and 21097, public Resource Code. Refs rence: Section 210907, Public Resource Code. ..' 15152 Residential Projects Pursuant to a Specific Plan. (a) Exemption. Wbere a public agency bas E[R ,CA prepared an on a spe if c plan after January 1,1950, oo EIR or negative decluation need be for prepared a residential project undertaken pursuant to and in conformity to that specific plan if the project meets the requirements of" section. "z (b) Scope Residential projects covered by this section include but we not limited to land subdivisions, inning changes, and residential planned unit de- velopments. (c) [.imitation. This section is sub'mt to the limitation that if after the Q adoption of Ne sy�Rc plus, co even) iescribed in Section 15162 should occur, this exemption shall not apply until the city or county which adopted the specific completes a m EIR `•G plan Sequent or a supplement to an EER on the specific plan. The exemption provided by this section shall again be available to residentil projects after the lead agency has filed a Notice of Determination on the specific plan w reconsidered by the subsequent EIR or supplement to the EIR. (d) Alternative. This section provides an alternative to the procedure de- scribed in Section 15181. (e) Fees. The lead agency his authors to chargge�fees to applicants for projects which benefit from this section. 7Le fee sha8 be calculated in the aggreggate io defray but not to exceed the cost of developing and adopting the specific plan including the cost of preparing the FIR. (1) Statute of limitations. A court action challenging the approval of a project under this section for failure to prepare a cop lemental EIR shall be commenced within 30 days after the lard agency's dPecision to carry out or approve the project in accordance with the specific plan. NOTE. Authony cited. Sections 21093 and 21097, Public Reources Code. Reference: Section MA53, Government Cade. 15187. Residential Projects Consistent With a Commurdt) Plan or Zoning. (a) In approving a residential project meeti i the requirements of this sec- tion, a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effect; under CEQA to effects which: (1) Are peculiar to the project or the parcel on which Le project would be located, although the effect may occur on or oft the site of the project, and (2) Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior L"t on the zonir..g or community plan with which the rcidential project is em.ssent. -11.E la MEOCRCES ACEN' ' 4151St Iaapbnr as Ma S -14M1 (p 32221) (b) The application of this section shall be limited to residential projects which are com8tent with a community plan adopted as part of a general plan or a roning action which. (1) Zoned or designated the parcel on which the roject would be located to accommodate a particular density' of residential development, and (Y) Was the subject of an FJR certified by the lead agency for the pluming or zoning action. cant ensirommen- (c) This section shall limit the analysis of only thou dpdfi tat effects for which: (1) Fieh public agency with authority to mitigate any of the ri gtsificant effects on the environment identified in the EIR on the planning or zoning action undertakes or requires others to undertake mitigation meuures speci- fied in the EIR which the lead agency found to be feasible, and (q) The lead agency makes a finding at a public hearing as to whether the lean le on lgatio measures will be undertaken. (d) An effect of a project on the environment shall not be considered pecu- liar to the project or the Parcel for the purposes of this, section if uniformly applied development pokmes or standards have been previously adopted by the city or county• tvitb a fmdirig that the development policies orh� du ffuuture substntially mitigate that environmental effect when app Pros, The finding shag be based on substantial nidentt which need not mclude an EfR. Examples of uniformlY applied development policies or stand. (1) Farling ormmancea. (2) Public access requirements, (3) Grading ordinances. (e) Am environmental effect shall not be considered peculiar to the pro eat or parcel mlelY� on uniformly applied development policy or zMard b a plicable to it. (g Where a community plan meets the requirements of this section, any rezoning action consistent with the communiy Plan "ball be treated as a resi- dentid project object to this section. Pubnc Rewurces cede Rderen «. NOTE Audarit) cited Sectsmu 21083 and 21067, Section 210873, Public Reurm+s Cade. ISlga. state Mandated Local Projects. Whenever a state agency issues an order which requ'ves a local agency to sorry out apr ojeet object to CEQA, the follow wg Hiles apply: (a) If an EIR is prepared for the project, the lord agency shall limit the EIR to considering those hams and alternatives which will Dot conflict with the order. (b) if a local agency undertakes a project to implement a rile or regulation Zwl d by a certified state environmental regulNO program listed in Section 15431, the proiml "lull be exempt from CEQA with regard to the significant foran analyzed m the document pre P y �� � ftte with regudbto arty for an EIR. The local ency shall yx aagtencyass a sfgnificanl'dfecot on the envv0 eo. a local agency eed not re ,examine the general environmental effects of the state rode or regulation. NOTE Authority 000.5 and 2J 10063r R 21087. naucea Code Rea a Cade. Reference. V U11 Ur nAivUtiV UUUAMVNtiA �CUCAM%� MEMORANDUM DATE: September 5, 1984 TO: Mayor, Members of the City_Ltouncil, and City Manager FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate P an er ANNING SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PL COMM SSION DECISION DENYING CONDITIONAL U E PERMIT 84- - SYCAMORE INVESTMENTS The attached letter from Jack Tarr, Sycamore Investments, requests an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to deny a proposed shopping center on the northeast corner of Archibald and Baseline. The reasons cited for the appeal are the converse of the reasons why the Planning Commnissian denied the project. Basically, the Commission felt that the project site plan represented a fragmented strip commercial center without pedestrian orientation, and that a stronger architectural theme and focal point should be consistently applied throughout to tie the center together. Staff informed the applicant early -on of the significance of the design problems and recommended alternative design solutions. However, the applicant's approach throughout the review process has been to submit a design that is inferior and try to make only minor changes. The applicant chose to disregard the Design Review Committee's recommendation for design improvement and proceeded to Commission with an unfavorable recommendation from the Design Review Committee. Both the Planning Commission and staff have provided the applicant with specific direction to revise the project to comply with the City's standards and policies. RG:DC:jr Attachment , Mayor Jon D. Mikels and Members of City Council 9320 Baseline Road, Suite C Post Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 JACK TARR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 27, 1984 RE: Conditional Use Permit 84 -13 Sycamore Investments NEC Baseline and Archibald Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Mr. Mikels and Council Members, I am hereby filing an appeal request for the August 22, 1984, planning commis- sion decision to deny Sycamore Investments' Conditional Use Permit 84 -13. Enclosed, please find my check number 148, dated August 27, 1984 in the amount of $126.00 for the appeal fee. Our reasons for requesting this appeal are as follows: 1. We feel that the proposed use is in accord with the general plan, the objectives of the development code, and the purposes of the dis- trict in which the site is located. 2. We feel that the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable hereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. We feel the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provi- sions of the development code. 4. We feel the proposed site is consistant with the policies and intent of the general plan regarding pedestrians /bicycle orientation, and the development code section 17.10.030 F5(E) requiring vehicular and pedestrian coordination. S. We feel the proposed site is consistant with the development code section 17.10.030 F5(B) that requires shopping centers to be "planned" as a group of organized uses and structures ". Mayor Jon D. Mikels and Members of City Council August 27, 1984 Page 2 6. We feel the proposed architecture is consistant with the intent and purpose of development code section 17.10.060 C2(A) requiring a recog- nizable design theme that is harmonious with surrounding developments. 7. We are happy to comply with the landscaping policies of the general plan and development code section 17.10.040 C(2s3) requiring a certain number and location of trees within the parking lots and against buildings. 8. The proposed site plan is consistent with the development code section 17.12.040 C(4) requiring provision of locking bicycle facilities. Please note that we have provided such locking bicycle facilities in three areas. Please note that neither the members of the planning commission nor the planning staff have provided us with specific objective reasons to substantiate their opinion that our project does not meet the requirements of the general plan and development code. Thank you for accepting our appeal. Respectfully submitted, JACK TARR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR SYCAMORE INVESTMENTS Chs Jack General Partner cc: Mark Haines Saundra Haynes Mike Murphy Stan Westfall CJT /sr Enclosures CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CCCA%fq MEMORANDUM \� x J� y r z DATE: September 5, 1984 — 19=; TO: Mayor and Members of the C y Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Tim J. Beedle, Senior P an r SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION CISION TO PREPARE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE N BENTSEN APARTMENT PROJECT LOCATED AT HAVEN AND HIGHLAND Since the preparation of the City Council Staff Report regarding the Bentsen apartment project, several questions have arisen with Don King's letter regarding the requirement for a focused Environmental Impact Report. The California Environmental Quality Act has set forth guidelines as well as the City's adopted implementing procedures set forth in Planning Commission Resolution 81 -135 for implementing environmental processing in conformance with State law (CEQA). Hopefully the following discussion will clarify these questions of the City Council. ITEM 1: When is an Environmental Impact Report required? An Environmental Impact Report shall be required when the lead agency (the City of Rancho Cucamonga) has determined after evaluating an initial study that the project would have any of the following: a. That the project may have a significant effect on the environment, or b. When there is serious public controversy concerning the environmental facts. In this case, it was the judgement of the Planning Commission that there may be significant effects on the environment as a result of the proposed project and additional information was necessary relative to land use /density, traffic /circulation and alternative land uses /density. Memo to Mayor & Members of City Council September 5, 1984 Page 2 ITEM 2: Has an Environmental Impact Report been prepared on the Project? No. The environmental assessment prepared by the applicant is in the form of an expanded Initial Study which lacks certain mandatory components to qualify for an Environmental Impact Report such as: a. Required responses to all public comments, Preparation of alternatives, growth inducing and cumulative impacts, unavoidable adverse impacts if the project is implemented, and the short term uses of the environment and its long term productivity, and c. Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report by an independent consultant who is not affiliated with the applicant (Environmental Guideline of Rancho Cucamonga). ITEM 3: Will previous Environmental Impact Reports prepared for the i t"�'—yS'e— cons i dered adequate for this project? The degree of specificity of a project creates greater need for further examination of environmental impacts. The preparation of the General Plan Environmental Impact Report was geared towards the specificity of a broad base general document; however, it is not possible that the General Plan Environmental Impact Report could adequately assess all the environmental effects of any particular project. Therefore, the degree of specificity of an Environmental Impact Report will correspond to the degree of specificity involved in the underlying project. The Planning Commission determined that the examination of this particular project will require a very focused Environmental Impact Report on the design and land use issues associated with this specific project. SUMMARY It was the opinion of the Planning Commission that they could not adequately determine the level of the environmental impacts and potential mitigation measures to the project without additional input in the form of a focused Environmental Impact Report prepared by an independent consultant covering the areas identified in the beginning of this memo. RG:TB:ns a page I SFST 5, 1984 T0: Fnrrrhr, C.,Camorpa City Council PF: TTwal of F•lanO na Commi; ion ruling ,:n the proposed apartment _ump3ev 1v,PI mwH by R. J. Reynolds Inue St.'.,e:itli Mendaers of thla >unc i. 17 W-, wish to sut,", it fo: your coneidler at ion our one Pr-ns re I at. ive to ..ed apsr-`. ment complex dwwKprrrent by F. J. Reynolds invest- , "As i mm"ateiy to the st r,f our prope +-ty at 8355 Comet at. in th,- c,ty of Ran:hn M"nmonna. We were Present, at the planning 00"O •a;ion meeting when the commissioners voted against the plan or- I hnd •!oi•C prl rrur concerns at that time. We also feel that it is ner.es-.w'y to re - -tate cur concerns to you in written form since we are unable to attend the Sept 5, 1984 meeting of the City Council in pere "n. Item 1: The proposed density of 13.96 dwelling units per acre is much too large of a change from the si"le family residences to the west, and the condominium development to the north and east. The general plan allows for a maximum zoning density of 14 units per acre iT, this parcel which, this development _ has pushed to the limit. Even tivagh the deuebyment is "holow" the allowable limit, the chnnge " almo=st 10 units per acre (in the case of the single family units to the west) is far to great. The general plan was intended to serr.v as a guide to pr'wride for uniformity and compat- ability h,pt.w BPq rmes of the larva. Wn feel that considering the e %i•:t kw u-.e of the surrounding property wFrould be taken into COr.- i i,•r -r., n t. -f,•r r= anv F 1 o,.l d =• 1 l i.••n is merle. r " .. I ., .j,, ., 1 1 1. •mrnt. u,,t,y time the .•e•.acr, momber- of • 1 ;,r ,t•r, -, th,t. „pr oii tely tw• - hundred and .7: w:,t £. the ;n, rounding tI"IIt,• ha vf,••n Outo (111,1 -1 �f .e1 ":,1 firlur' PS) . Th,' ,, 1. r nay •khr 11 h�, a l,. ur,'r r •t. best. ha z rdor,, •iu--, n•�, t.r rrff r.. ho.,- .w. Th.e r., „p.,1 L. a•� present.ed by this 'mp'er arll., in my e,Aim',ft,�rr, rre9at. iL•: a ^.P fulness as - leyli"te exit r.,yt.o for this development, as wPl.l aI, the existing V. oo e t ier, nn Pe', e• Thre r. threr- exit route. from this complex are wr- +•,i +. `,ourrd or, Fn,Me-a£ to Comet and southbound on Bap.er to Arrow. In rm "nt. monthr. I have nearly escaped serious injury at the inter - sect.io. of Arrow and Baker when other motorists ran the stop sign or failed to yeild. This is not an isol at.ed case on my part, many of my neighbors have reported similar occurrences. Without enlargement of that inter -sectton and installation ..if traffic signals, this will only become a more dan +;serous situation for all. The route from Fernleaf to Comet will direct far- to great of a volume of traffic down a two lane residential street where children often play and will only invite disaster. Item 3: The proposed gradirna of the property will effer_tively place this new le,oMcTment "in a hale" and will present drainage problems from the site. There in al =.o a natural creek running under Foothill boulevard thr.,uoh thit; property which has not been addressed. Item 4: Wo fuel +,hat r, wner- mire ronsistant with e :•i.stino, - rrinn nr. r•i ties Q,0.wePn 4 to A units per ac") will be far m,ve of arc ,.,pt. to the nei.nh-bo,rherod. Due to the interest rates and ro ir:e r;,f the h, r•mn, in the tract. nn C,mnL ;t.., n number of spec- page 2 ulatnr -s bought some of the original homes and have been renting them ever since. If You were to drive down Comet you could readily identify most of the rental properties by their run down appearance. The pt-ide of home ownership is one of the best incentives towards keeping a neighborhood clean and neat. We feel that the proposed rent,'. ur,;tc will be a negati,e influence in the area. I'.oa, 5: We hat-e an e:;isting neighborhood watch group on Comet S a t. in r ",ti . m��t '.rt r =dux= the rapidly Ia>.sing burglary rate. @y filling '•F'e rv..! ^. r:h ^rho' A with the "tra usi ent" occupants of this complex inq irea wi'_1 be ad.ia1-ent too my rear' fence) You will have "':• ":1 7" I ; e•4'ocr. eor:,Ps route to the anonimity of they apartments. Item 5: r. th"gh W.-. "' not have are •:hiidren liv' Y ing at home, we .•1 that .., l al chr -o1. system is air lady seriously over o.r +1ed a'. the �,n•.-ent. r-aticn c£ <;tudents try sUrh a complex, will nly - ,rr�ly to ;c-r, the system fur-ther-. In addition, the number wr, iti r,g fc•r- school t,U53e5 at nearby interser_ti ons will drav,n t,ical ly increase creaf,ing a ha%ar-d for the students as well as pc':enti al damage to nearby property. Iter, 7: The developer has indicated that it will remove several of the Sycamore trees on the property and claims that those to be rem. owed are already diseased. It appears that these so called "dis- eased" tree; have been in their present condition longer than the proposed developer- has been in existance. I therefore, vote in favor- or- saving the trees that have been a part of the local history for years. Ir, cnr,clusion, we feel that the original decision of the planning commision should be upheld by you and the appeal by R. J. Reynolds in„estments be denied. We also believe that the General Plan should !.e rev i.ewni for- a redrn:t. ion in the zoning density of the site in MA., amt j, l 9 1739 ,:,ace I TO; City Coln--11- PE: Appeal C.f F•Janninq rulir,q on the apartment, Jquplc-.Pment by C. .J. Rey n Io I I I, lrojes taic Tits Members of the I -,,j r,,- i W, wish 1- -, fc,,- our . 'n.-I,-n- t-olat)f-e ..... . -,j t,v 9, J. Reynolds inw-st- lf,� 1, q. ,,j j & to j y I,.:. t If e east C. F .:PUI- P.Wt -VI t ,, a . 395', cemet " It in the f", we f,ierp at the plar,nin,l 17 -,.P II' 1 4 1 1 ri Ii I' t I n Q W I I Is P t!-.e ----MMl,SS 1 OriPf'S ... Aed aolinl;t this p 1, a r, .) -, ! : i o,j ...... . .- Tl, , at that 1, . We also feel that t i-, . -state - :,jrcot-ns tr, ypiu in wr-i t 1, en si T, if t + epol the, Sept 5. 1 QR4 irweltiTp-i :PF the City Courp•:il :r, pera r 12 The density of 13.96 1111lin,j unitI, Viet- 1, "-7e .:,f a .change £r-;.m the. si Pp! e family t esidsn,-es t--- the west ij:f, nx(lo, deoPlopment, to the north and easl - The f-7,r , u,L!rIRILIM 211niTl!) density of 14 units Ei I? a in t h i s c. I-: el w h I .;: h this J e lj P I op up Is ri t has p u S h e I to the I i ff, i t. E k - e, 1, th-.,koh the •IP"PlOpment is 'hellIll," the limit, the ;I lOp .if units per In the :Isc, of the sin,j) u f.j ff 1 1 v i I r. i t f ti. the west) is fat- t-I great. The general r1laTi was �. r- t e 7, -1 e - i to per k - e as guide t o rwj-ide f-,- jni p-,[-HIty and --0MP.at- a b i 1 ty uses a ip the land, We feel that considering the i.`t, in,: .,;e of the s arras U r, •J i. re] pt-,.ppr-ty whcluld be taken i,,,t-:- .on' ci oef'.Ie any final de, i 19 Made. IL 1. Ti r, fho, -,Par tr,QTI+. 111.1tS tIMPS the -11-VI-allp rlf-lfflh-p' of and V r,,, I 1—h, -I PI� I I I ) he fl,1 .-,tPJ t" 110 011 To e A,.,+", club :.f So. C;.1. f j Tho t ! i, l- I I I hl--1111 111 -1 1'! ':t, ho,, t PI --fv, p I :`F1 k. h.': -i l I I n': w. Thr� i fled 1C. d 1-1 11',If f ell hl .'.11"1 .e111., 1r. iffy rfst i mat i 7:r:, Tle-1 a to I t U-11flj I n— S as cl I t .1 j to f. p I,tIt In R-T I-i I < lel•e, I -��,Merrt as well. 3, the q�i i v t i r,g "r t, -,� 7'rz P,-, 1, v,- . The "then' exit t--7,kIt (17 4r1,1, + hi S 1—IMT11 elf are tI•;jn-4 -ri 'It 1) 1 Q;. f to Comet an,l 'nimthl-14 IT) rill I'll P a " p r t t .,w T hw-,l ri—irly ecj,-a . rp>.l , oi x,--us in fsjI-v at the j rit e, ,- ti''n -r A,,.k" ,,I pa�e- . III . or, other' motorists , an the et,,p e in T, S d T h I is an I I., I a t e, I e I:krl MI/ Part, many ,,v or, , I , , P':rteJ sin.iler Without !I'. at ir. tpl :ek I - 1) 1 rill t,.st,a I I 1 1,i nn of t f- a f f I .? r. I I , , t'. 1.a uom f,.o o -w- F-t ,1 1. The t -ut- - , F t I ,Mel v i 11 I rent Par- t". w-at .4.f , -lAuffe of traffic. t,.. 1 1 o P. np is 1. e t , h P,- P, . I I i I , I r, e n of f t e rl r. A y I TI --I ' 7 9: TI 1 , 1 1 ) d i I - , ) c.f the prol-or tf,' w I I I effe•-t ii-ely place thi;V nI. i-ir, a hole" and will pt e'.;PTA jt :flnaqe Tit Qblvras t, h " T I-,,, I- e j I, a I s . , r, - t I j - I I -- , el,l t i r, r, i fig under F,7,I- t In i I I tht okilli, f1ji : p,---q:•pf-t,,, whi,.h ha,; not been rtn1: 4: W, • feel 1, 1'.a 1� olriel- - npi III more -`lT1I1t;I1It with e:<,'.11. 1— ,i r,,, I .,, , i I i,• ; 4 t'. Ff units r.er a"i-P) will be far- M.) I f a r, neeet, t,.-. the life the "'tet-list, rates and p, j• e of •hl, h"mes in the tIa't -1, ("I'm pt t;t_ " numhot- of spe-c- n oage u l a tors ho,.rght s -%n,e of the or iii r,aI homes and have been r-enti ng them ever since. If you were tc, ,hive down Curvet you could readily i de nt rfy me „t, of the rental prop art i es by their - run down appearance. The or-i de of home ownership is one of the best incentives towards keepinc , nei ght,orhood clean and neat. We feel that the proposed rental units will be a negative influence in the area. It.,m 5: We ha„e an e:•.isting ucighbor-hor,d watch group on Cnmat St. in ar, attempt tr, redu,:e the rapidly raising burglary rate. By filling the .....ht, :,rhe,:d with the "transient” occupants of this complex (wh:,';e ni, -4.ing area will be adjacent to my rear- fence) you will have pr's• "id�d a erfe -t escape route to the anonimity of the apartments. I+em 5: tYOUpY, we d„ not have any children living at home, we urolc , ,,1`t! -at, ',t. 1,_ .al G _heo1 5 s to n: is al. r eady ser -xo us I noer- -r1�..rlS•d d the ,7 n "t • - a t i,-, of :', t,-id e r, t.s by surf, - ,comp I e x will ✓ „e to burien the s./'tam, further. In addition, the number" of ,1. -H=ats :::i'. ing °or schc, "7 bus ^ -,es at nearby intersections will 1 n,a t'i - ally "i. n r o a se r r e a t i i g a hazard for the students a.a well a.. e n t i, r,l ,a m', ge t" nearby , ':q:, e r t y. I teo ?: The ,:le „elrroer has indicated that it will remo! -e several of the SyCamore trees nn the property and claims that those tc. be ren, ., vr•J .,re alt eady diseased. It. appears that these so called "dis - -.se e r, trees have bee in their prevent Condition longer than the pr-opo�,ed develcaper- has been in e: <istance. I therefore, vote in faPic, r- sa„ing the trees that have been a part of the local history for yea, In _orn_losion, we feel that the t,riginal decision Of the planning _ , 1113 s•i,ai ;',hould he, upheld by you an-1 the appeal by R. J. Reynolds i r,ostm.,nti be denied. We also beliewe that the General Plan should 1 r'ev i. swr,i for' , redur t.i, or. it, the z,:n',i r,q ilensi ty of the site zn .,es'i .,. ECG:U Michael D. Mat- re r,i .Jean r. Mat.. - '1355 Comet St.. R an_hr, Cu,.a mon Ij, Ca 91770 City Council Agenda -7- September 5, 1984 • 6. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS A. REQUEST FROM R G BARTHOLOMEUSE FOR CITY COUNCIL TO 168 CONSIDER WAIVING DRAINAGE AND PARE FEES ON RESIDENTIAL DWELLING ADDITION - B. BASE LINE ROAD CLOSURE REQUEST - Request from William 173 Lyon Company to close Base Line Road in the vicinity of Day Creek for a period of 45 days to construct box culvert under the road. C. App 174 D. • :• • • \: AND •: \\:r• OF -SPECIFICATIONS \ AND ISSUANCE OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJEC . E. :• • DECLARATION, FINAL PLANS, AND • F. CHANGE OF MUNICIPAL ELECTION DATE 202 ORDINANCE NO. 236 (first reading) 207 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING THAT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SHALL BE HELD ON THE SAME DAY AS THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION, NAMELY, THE FIRST TUESDAY AFTER THE FIRST MONDAY OF NOVEMBER IN EACH EVEN NUMBERED YEAR G. CITIES AND SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY ANNUAL INFORMATIONAL 208 EXCHANGE CONFERENCE OCTOBER 11 -12 1584 - The City Council will discuss participation in this year's conference. 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. RESIDENT -OWNED MOBILEHOME PARR DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES 210 - City Council will consider discussing potential alternatives to the development of resident owned mobile home parks. i CITY COUNCIL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA CALIFORNIA PETITION PRP,PARRD RY: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RPSIDEWN JUNE. 1904 4 City Council of Rancho Cucamonga, City Planners & Staff We the undersigned are opposed to the density level of (14-24) D.U. per acre on the residential Property generally located South of Leman Ave., East of Haven Ave., North Of Highland Ave., and West of the Flood Charatel, specifically in book 201 pg. 1 271 - parcel is 58, Sq, & 60. Also, the residential Property generldly located South of Chaffey College, East of Haven Ave., North of Lemon., and West of the Flood Channel which is presently (4-8) D.U. per acre. Specifically in book 201 pg. # 271 - parcel #-a 13, 14, 25, 26, 30, 33, 44, 46, & 47. C WE WANT 1'O SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO (2-4) D.U. PER ACRE. SIGNATURE ADDRESS PHONE NO. 2. 3. 4. 6 fL- 9. Li IL 2. 13. 72-5 �1,1111il 8 1toa V14 LAO-) '44i -Z 14. L 11 P 6J(430(li -OTVF- A46 7i5T - '8 4-1 City Council of Rancho Cucamonga, City (Tanners & Staff We the undersigned are opposed to the density level of (14 -24) D.U. per acre on the residential property generally located South of Lemon Ave., East of Haven Ave., North of Highland Ave., and West of the Flood Clultmel, specifically in took 201 pg. f 271 - parcel is 58, 59, & 60. Also, the residential property generally located South of Chaffey College, East of Haven Ave., North of Lemon., and West of the Flood Channel which is presently (4__8) D.U. per acre. Specifically in book 201 pg. t 271 - parcel 1's 13, 14, 25, 26, 30, 33, 44, 46, & 47. WE WANT TO SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO Q-4)4) D.U. PER ACRE. SI0NATURE ADDRESS p , , I'l10NE NO. 1. /0573 Ua•&2 ,i2a, '40r 7 -7533 2. '1 3., , 563 V�.IIti�rL f�ti 9so �b y 4. .,Gc.[.�f / /;.;i- .....r_cff'.r.. GnS.s3 ��.�w� % ✓.t /�[i C.�=� J%, . LG 'LiM'e' - o I; 3 '' , � 9£7slo' �i, S s. 19ri7�Lc � G.S��doG. wle (71 9ko.5`t3 8. pt,CJ.('j 3af .r i'�3Eti�0C1A A0 r,.z s 4IK(f 12 �/ �N7aN4C 13. 14. —� ��6�z �iKeN oj'pFTA Ic►*/A /0 /'% 15. ,i i c�/D(Sf'S �ns �`P • /Ai,iCf �olw:, C�}- �1(7G�e� 16. lab 95 /f i 9Pr�. 17. Zt 20. �t5 w1 1 665 Rw� Aye a�lda(o(v�e,��aQ. ctal City Council of Rsncho Cucamonga, City Planners & Staff We the undersigned we opposed to the density level of (14 -24) H.U. per acre on the residential property generally located South of Lemon Ave., East of Haven Ave., North of Highland Ave., and West of the Flood Channel, specifically in book 201 pg. 4 271 - parcel 8's 58, 59, h 60. Also, the residential property generally located South of Chaf fey College, East of Haven Ave., North of Lemon., and West of the Flood Channel which is presently (4_8) D.U. per acre. Specifically in book 201 pg. 8 271 - parcel fs 13, 14, 25, 26, 30, 33, 44, 46, h 47. WE WANT TO SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO (2-4) D.U. PER ACRE. SIGNATURE ADDRESS PHONE NO. 1. _ ..illGlq/ " n 2. �'t��� j�.a.'� -/- ; r��s� � �ky;�:,,6/, fly• ,�; -k '�:1 4.(,Lc�uw Lw�.L�1,aw��}t.� !G(a (aSue 9. /2 ,�. %t'�ts3 -� /�Ges�� ..� �'Li --•� 96? 9. C i C �ew11✓ iu576 Q2&/ �89Y�6S 10. l.-Of 4..f•'- �J4- -� �� S �iO Rt „b 9'64 43. 12.. I:, owsfijb-'�.�' 13. 14. 00� 1 y 15. / 16. 19. �' U. •'n0. �- aY�o1S� 6b� Oa�q 1q \-Ira toMrT �8C �E�i o% 0 6616 Jeka�e ,9�rxL�sa 9f17 5%Sz L 1064"t, �/, Wovv XL JO ��� tic�ti�y ) o54, 1 ltia� City Council of Rancho Cucamonga, City Planners & Staff We the undersigned are opposed to the density level of (14 -24) D.U. per acre on the residential property genemUy located South of Leman Ave., Eimt of Haven Ave., North of Highland Ave., and West of the Flood Channel, specifically in hook 201 pg. t 271 - Parcel #'a 58, 50, h 60. Also, the residential Property generally located South of Chaffey College, Fast of Haven Ave., North of Lemon., and West of the Flood Channel which is Presently (4_6) D.U. per acre. Specifically in brook 201 pg. i 271 - parcel Ps 13, 14, 25, 26, 30, 33, 44, 46, h 47. WR WANT TO SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO (2-4) D.U. PER ACRE. SIGNATUREE�� "" ADDRESS PHONE NO. 1. Q,,-qf -a� ZtrGl� 2. 3 4114 9 4. kQK- ta,..a I. 6. 7. l_,c71.0 fyl 12. 13•,,.., � f,�C,r.N,L . 14. r lw /C�35 ffi"i3 due /*4: v s Glark 10j061 nil 24A-- '53-11 CAA6� Qf.lt 61st !aax.�aa� I&JP �JV .4(10� Puf �� - a4-w- qs �y ket syya �9�ST�,� 8 977 -a/79 9Y9- 14SfIY �lSi -i92� 9 er'? 912c� 9�0 • s��7 CG.S- 48o -sa w� ySP -9M. 9j �0 - " "; ,7. ��' �G'�fal/t'4. • ,,L „z� 1ln4,0 =6810 IB.. ((mil �Jtn, ` : ° .W R '�rE�� �rCf✓ -14i HC. / 'z� / %' City Council of Rancho Cucamonga, City Planners h Staff We the undersigned are opposed to the density level of 414 -24) D.U. per acre on the residential property generally located South of Lemon Ave., Past of Haven Ave., North of Highland Ave., and West of the Flood Channel, specifically in look 201 pg. 4 271 - parcel is 59, 59, k 60. Also, the residential property generally located South of Chaffey College, East of Haven Ave., North of Lemon., and West of the Flood Channel which is presently (4 -8) U.U. per acre. Specifically in book 20( pg. ! 271 - parcel Ii 13, 14, 25, 26, 311, 33, 44, 46, dt 47. WE WANT TO SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO (2-4) U.U. PER ACRE. S14 NATURE ADDRESS PHONE NO. y� `' a�Gi�GnGa� %� 3., n fC n -•w- tra4� Ja. - 6(99 -3930 /u�� l,;135- �/a.L7T.lt s. / b z s V„ 984 7565 6. je P 7. i�� ae -J-"�- 6..t "1'. -. �u��s -..�. Jo5LC LeAnai,l 9. 12. 14. 15. l6. .� 'tee _ � .. .,!�c /! •'JIB' <. awe, ,.., (7 City Council of Rancho Cucamonga, City Planners 4c Staff We the oMeralmed are opposed to the density level of (14 -24) D.U. per sere on the residential Property generally located South of Lemon Ave., East of Haven Ave., North of Highland Ave., and West of the Flood Clamol, specifically in hook 201 pg. 0 271 - Parcel #% 50, 59, 4t 60. Also' the residential Property generally located South of Chaffey College, East of Haven Ave., North of Lemon., and West of the Flood Channel which is presently (4(4 =8) D.U. Per sere. Specifically in book 201 pg. 9 271 - parcel 0's 13, 14, 25, 26, 30, 33, 44, 46, & 47. WE WANT TO SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO (2-4) D.U. PER ACRE. SIUNA URE 3. 4. 7. 9. 3. 14. ADDRESS PHONE NO. ivy 0� 31Af�...jC� /os�7 s/`• �Ff6 yy/ /oS77 .d g�7 -GvG 1p5n �64'irna- Sb- g87 6�a67 \c5f%� �►�.,. SC �j �j � ^-264 iO3Y7 I�t, qd0 - SC�3[' 10607 City Council of Rancho Cucamonga, City Planners k Staff We the undersigned are opposed to the density level of (14 -24) D.U. per acre on the residential property generally located South of Lemon Ave., Bast of Haven Ave., North of Highland Ave., and West of the Flood Channel, specifically in brook 201 pg. 4 271 - parcel 0's Saw 59, k 60. Also, the residential property generally located South of Cfmffey College, East of Haven Ave., North of Lemon., and West of the Flood Channel which is presently (4(4 =8) D.U. per acre. Specifically in book 201 pg. t 271 - parcel Oh 13, 14, 25, 26, 30, 33, 44, 46, & 47. WE WANT TO SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO (2-4) D.U. PER ACRE SIGNATURE -� .. ADDRESS Pf1ONE NO. 2. l ,. --1 !,d tii� ✓� �✓ �._- (,44TILL4 > � 6)3 5. L,,.ws. -. L�It7 6. .�.r 7. a. 9. /e 12. 13. %' �l1Ll. E7_. \ �:"C,, \\�c: wP GI';_ ,�_�.' ..','�.� /L•t / 26. City Council of Rancho Cucamonga, City Planners & Staff We the umtersigned are opposed to the density level of (14-24) D.U. per acre on the residential property generally located South of Lemon Ave.. rest of Haven Ave., North of Highland Ave., and West of the Flood Channel, specifically in book 201 pg. # 271 - parcel #Is 58, SO, & 60. Also, the residential property generally located South of Chaffey College, ]Rest of Haven Ave., North of Lemon., and West of the Flood Channel which is presently (4-8) D.U. per acre. Specifically in book 201 pg. 0 271 - flarcel ft 13, 14, 25, 26, 30, 33, 44, 46, & 47. WE WANT TO SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO (2-4) D.U. PER ACRE. SIGNATURE ADDRESS PHONE NO. '/S9 - Me 3. 4. -A 7. J K, 9. 12. 13. �L I r 14. 17. LT 18. C/xc 19- OL 20. > City Council of Rancho Cucamonga, City Planners do Staff We the undersigned are opposed to the density level of (14 -24) 1). U. per acre on the residential property generally located South of Lemon Ave., Past of Haven Ave., North of Highland Ave., and West of the Flood Clum el, apeci[je Uy in hook 201 pg. 4 271 - parcel 8Y 58, 59, h 60. Also, the residential property generally located South of Chalky College, East of Haven Ave., North of Lemon., and West of the Flood Channel which is presently (4_8) D.U. per acre. Specifically in brook 201 pg. # 271 - parcel /k 13, 14, 25, 26, 30, 33, 44, 46, 4 47. WE WANT TO SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED To (2-4) D.U. PER ACRE. SIGNATURE ADDRESS PHONE NO. 1. 9� 2. 4. �. 5. 6. )ra la ^_ 7JLC4[ ff/ 7.� 10. �e it. 12. 13. 14. /04/5 /USA /9 /d {/a 9 joq,' S �B't r�r✓ s, /YYl�e %'e�011 e,. S,4 16. 103so,aw� W / 031?C a1;/WWA- 1o39U Bu�y�n 9Q6o3z / � 9y0 -36 �7a 'V0 J4 6 9Iro' 329d 9sy -a� /g qv -Kv 4 980 -op5 `?b'Y3z 36 � *Jvg(� It , (2T- /04/5 /USA /9 /d {/a 9 joq,' S �B't r�r✓ s, /YYl�e %'e�011 e,. S,4 16. 103so,aw� W / 031?C a1;/WWA- 1o39U Bu�y�n 9Q6o3z / � 9y0 -36 �7a 'V0 J4 6 9Iro' 329d 9sy -a� /g qv -Kv 4 980 -op5 `?b'Y3z 36 � *Jvg(� City Council of Ranch, Cucamonga, City Planners & Staff We the undersigned are opposed to the density level of (14-24) D.U. per acre on the residential property generally located South of Lemon Ave., East of Haven Ave., North of Highland Ave.. and West of the Flood Channel, specifically in beek 201 pg. # 271 - parcel #'a 58, 59, & 60. Also, the residential Property generally located South Of Chaffey College, East of Haven Ave., North of Lemon., and West Of the Flood Channel which is presently (4-8) D.U. Per Acre. Specifically in book 201 pg. # 271 - 21M4d t 13, 14, 25, 26, 30, 33, 44, 46, & 47. WE WANT To SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO (2-4) D.U. PER ACRE SIGNATURE ADDRESS PHONE NO. ST 98o-76ze-, 2, 3. 4. -ILj-7 6. -7 7. 9. 4fiIA-/ )-1 Ati,L i--- A 0 UALI,,DA AV LL 12., Cll'Lr1YL -- UAZ- IoOA Avc 13. UAL.IAJOA 14. 15. . .. U C&NjC' '9'ei 0.qS7 16. 17. 7 Is. r C) City CouncU of Rancho Cucamonga, City Planners h Staff - - We the undersigned are opposed to the &amity level of (14 -24) D.U. per acre on the residential property genemUy located South of Lemon Ave., Peat of Haven Ave., North of Highland Ave., and West of the Flood C ,aa m' apeeifically in took 291 pg. i 271 - parcel 04 59, 59, k 60. Also, the residential property generally located South of Chaffey College, East of Haven Ave., North of Lemon., and West of the Flood Channel which is presently (4_8) D.U. per acre. Specifically i0 book 201 pg. 0 271 - parcel 0's 13, 14, 25, 26, 30, 33, 44, 46, & 47. WE WANT TO SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO (2-4) D.U. PER ACRE. SIGNATURE ADDRESS PHONE NO. 2. 3. i 4. 6. U I9.' ,. Ji .:7 ! �• h�vG Avc. 'r ,,.. .. C; Alt- It. F ' 6 ;4 i� j' 17. 20. City Council of Rancho Cucamonga, City Planner 6 Staff We the undersigned are opposed to the density level of (14-24) D.Y. Par acre on . the residential property generally located South of Lemon Ave., Pest of Haven Ave., North of Highland Ave., and West of the Flood Channel, specifically in look 201 pg. / 271 - parcel /6 59, 59, k 60. Also, the residential Property generally located South of Claffey College, Rest of Haven Ave., North of Lemon., and West of the Flood Channel which is presently (4_9) D.U. per acre. Specifically in hook 201 pg. 1271 - parcel /L 13, 14, 25, 26, 30, 33, 44, 46. 6 47. WE WANT TO SEE THR DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO (2-4) D.U. PER ACRE. � � .� )� i'•k" l l) ILt-$ C'N �t�/Etz St', j � �y� ---- SIGNATURE 1. 6. 9•. 11. t :. 13. t!. 20. ADDRESS PHONE NO. :o2�s -� vtoau :� c y87 -Giooa (yGt(� 1bt:.ncCe 11'+ 'i4cuv0-2 &C, -D Q63s .��s.,ds Ya�-irroz 66.. J- f/lr*-4'P Cr 74f 0 TG Gs10 %� Sc q 'rf- felon -ka 77q,,1� fed _`%~ wo MBA It M-9 62.1 i✓C> 1 i)�l �ityfi �4r1 -,1j y y 4141T�, 10 (126Z f 9 21 23 660 6Z4 f'iy 7aol "mt At--r4 Bs 39 !A)O -31 t(o eo' ell 4r ;?C,l d j 0 Vjq W aL City Council of Rancho Coc..roryl., city Plamra a staff We the undersigned are opposed to the density level of (14 -24) D.U. per acre an the residential property generally located South of Lesson Ave., Rsst of Haven Ave., North of HigMmW Ave., and West of the Flood Chanel, specifically in hook 261 PC, 6 2T1 - parcel 6t 56, 5o, a 66. Also. the residential property generally located South of Clnffey College, Rant of Haven Ave., North of Lesson, and Wet of the Flood Carne! which Is presently (H) D.U. per acre. Specifically in book 261 pg. / 271 - parcel IL 12, 11, 25, 26, 26, 22, 44, 46, It 47. WE WANT TO SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO (2-4) D.U. PER ACRE. 91 NAT —URE j ADDRESS PHONE NO. 1.'�l�a L-t // ne -xsra' 1 err, ; I 1 �. ,:, •r, Esc r 6., n'ALr'i� r• D 3rl,a lc�Y m.c...• 3'r i; 16. 11. u.' 12. 14. 15. 16. 17. t/. 1/. "'fir, city council of Rancho cueam ma, city narnan a start 00 the UNdmi ned are opposed to the density level of (14 -24) D.U. per gem on the reu'daut d property 9MMay lOmted Routh of 6esa s Ave, Bast of Haven Ave., North of HW90W Ave., and West of the Plead Chemed, speciHcWy in Oooh 201 pg. . 0 291 - parcel 0% K s0, k 00. Also, no residential Pep arty generally located South of Chsfrey College, Rest of Haven Ave., North of Lmnm., and West of the Flood CMaael which Is preseelly (4-8) D.U. Par amen 4ectfig0y a Noah 201 Pg• 0 2Tl - Parcel OL 12, 14, 25, 24, 90, 22, 44, 40, k 4T. WE WANT TO SEE THE DENSITY LEVEL LOWERED TO (2-4) D.U. PER ACRE. ONATURE ADDRESS PHONE NO. 2. 2. s.��G �i5W'fCwn(cr� ff7'u7�t� SSA !7010, 7c/ 9xci ��03 g. ; n. Ski-.. n_ `- .� v .ai— �./.v,_ fm� ✓ c..� p.i e �• � It aff" 412• vo ;Z /ir lo.. 0�- �Jur�.•J ��ic+c, l2 +/i' ></� vgl,�da 9 ?n Z'�• i� it. 12. 12.1 14. ls. u.! 19.1 !0. 10. SL 40 M%k mill- LV 1:41 13 1 JE2� 14 21) Ilm F" FrOS11911 2 M.9 20134 Z 'qa C't' —22,27 M-ft- •B& a Lo Am % Alcp m cww I' y11 ho -- 5.112 5et.25,TIN,R.7W,SA & aM. Rancho c.comc..00 Ury Zg-r/ 7a Role Area • 15001,15007 ,. Vi X82 .. ., . .z ortw:. I s.v 1 :raai ..ur na - f26 na eJ6'c� z k /r► C i 1 I r ,....ti.'�:. °..::- - � •� -�` yy.. t nr.c.x u �1 N - FvMI Mm Nz. 728{ P. M. bV62 -63 q - M.F Fyllyz knil LO3W.Ab.2M.b 201/3. beer- Avesw'sMblM Az ,wV Mm i r Mebrrr 3Mrha Chtbs BaeM20l ptre7 r,Sne' ''r _ Sae Bzms6'ns al,1 lea �Y. 1! AR OIwIIv= OP 198 crry OF RWHO CDCR"GA, CALSFORd" ANED11G CRAPPHt 8.10 CP "M RANCHO CUC%M= MDNICIM OME, PROVIDING FOR AN ANNOAL MAXIMUM RENT ADJUSTMENT, AND ORQ,ARING 1198 URGENCY T MEF The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECTIMi1: Chapter 8.10 of the Rancho Cucaamoga Municipal code is hereby amended to read as follows: Chapter 8.1 McbilO Homo Park A 11 BUJISM Haar Adjustment.- The Sections t0 be included will be as follows: 8.10.010 Findings, Purpose and Intent. 8.10.020 Definitions 8.10.030 Applicability 8.10.040 Mobile Rome Park Registration 8.10. 050 Mobile Howe Park Tenants Committees 8.10.060 Rent Adjustment 8.10.070 Responsibilities of Park Over 8.10.080 Enforcement 8.10.190 Retaliation 8.10.100 Severability 8.10.110 Termination There exists within the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the surrounding areas a serious shortage of mobile home rental space, which has resulted In low vacancy rates and rising space recta. Further, because of the high cost of moving mobile homes, the potential for damage resulting therefrom, the reguireme is relating to the installation of mobile tomes, including permits, landscaping, and site preparation, the lack of alternative tame sites for mobile home residences and the substantial investment of mobile tame owners in such tones, there exists a virtual monopoly in the rental of mobile hose perk spaces. Accordingly, the City Council finds and declares that it is necesmry to protect the residents of mobile tames from unreasonable space rent increases, while at the same time recognises the need of mobile home perk owners to receive a just and reasonable income sufficient to corer the costs of repairs, maintenance, insurance, employee services, additional amenities and other operations. Further, the City Council finds that decisions of a rent stabilization board or similar decision waking body do not necessarily fulfill the intent of protecting mobile home residents from unreasonable apace rent increases nor do those decisions always provide owners with the opportunity for a just and reasonable income sufficient to operate a mobile home park. The City Council also finds that concerns among residents and owners of mobile home parks over rent increases and other perk related situation can often be best resolved between the two parties, providing there exists the incentive for both parties to negotiate in good faith and reach agr11 1 . The intent of this chapter, they is to protect mobile home perk residents from unreasonable space rent increases, while providing an incentive to both perk owners and residents to negotiate future rental contracts in goad faith and to reach agreement therefrom. 1. "Committee" shall mean the mobile home perk tenants committee crested in each mobile tame park and establishd by this ordinance. 2. "Concern" shell mean that situation occurring within a mobile hors park which is determined to disadvantage a majority of the perk teams or property ordinance No. 231 Page 2 3. "Consumer Price Index" shall mean the Consumer Price Index for urban Wage Earners and Clinical Workers (CPI -W) published for the Los Angeles -Long Beach - Anaheim area by the Department of Labor Statistics. 4. "Mobile Rome" shall mean a vehicle, other than a motor vehicle or recreational vehicle, designed or used for human habitation. 5. "Mobile Home Park" shall mean any area of land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga where two or more mobile hone spaces are rented, or held out for rent, to accommodate mobile hones used for human habitation. 6. "Mobile Home Space" shall mean the site within a mobile hone park intended, designed, or used for the location or accommodation of a mobile hone and any accessory structures or appurtenances attached thereto or used in conjunction therewith, or the location or accommodation of a recreational vehicle. 7. "Owner" shall mean the owner or operator of a mobile home perk or an agent or representative authorized to act on said owner's or operator's behalf in connection with the maintenance or operation of such park. 8. "Rent" shall mean the consideration, including services, amenities, and benefits in connection with the use and occupancy of a mobile hone space. 9. "Tenant" shall mean any person entitled to occupy a mobile home dwelling unit pursuant to ownership thereof or rental or lease arrangement with the owner of the subject dwelling unit. 1. The provisions of this Ordinance shall apply to any mobile home park and mobile hone space within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 2. Section 8.10.060 of this ordinance shall not apply to tenancies covered by leases or contracts, at the effective date of this chapter, which provide for more than a month- to-month tenancy, but only for the duration of such lease or contract. Upon the expiration or other termination of any such lease or contract, all provisions of this chapter shall immediately be applicable to the tenancy. 3. None of the provisions of this ordinance shall preclude a mobile hone park tenant from entering into a written lease or contract with the park owner. Within sixty (60) days of the effective date of this chapter, all park owners subject to the provisions of this chapter shall be required to file with the City Clerk a rent Registration Statement for each rental unit affected by this chapter. The City Clerk shall devise such registration forms so as to call for information necessary to carry out the purposes and policies of this chapter, and shall mail such forms to all mobile hone park owners in the City in sufficient time as to allay such park owners to file their Registration Statements within sixty (60) days of adoption of this chapter. The City Clerk shall forward a certified copy of the registration statement to the tenants committee. All rental units shall be registered annually thereafter. No rent increases permitted under this chapter shall be allowed to park owners who have failed to properly register all mobile home spaces. 1. Creation of: Within sixty (60) days of the effective date of this chapter, each mobile hone park within the City shall create, by special election of the park residents, a five - member tenants committee. The City Clerk shall call for and schedule such special election for each park at an Ordinance No. 231 Page 3 appropriate time when such election may be held. Residents shall notify the City Clerk as to their intent of special election, and submit a listing of committee nominees. Each park resident may cast up to five (5) votes, but shall not cast more than one (1) vote for each nominee. Those five nominees receiving the most votes shall be elected to the tenants committee. A —rpc e� -ative of the City shall be in attendance at the special election to conduct the election proceedings and to verify the election results upon completion of the ballot caucus. The City representative shall not vote or influence any vote. 2. Powers and Duties of: Except as otherwise provided by law, the tenants' committee shall have the following powers and duties: (a) Meet to discuss problems and concerns within the mobile Name park and when necessary to recommend further action on such problems and concerns. (b) Inform all residents of the park as to developments of proposed rent increases and other park concerns. (c) Negotiate with the park owner in order to resolve tenant concerns. (d) Elect one of its members to serve as chairman, one to serve as vice - chairman, and one to serve as secretary. The chairman shall preside at all camuttee meetings and shall exercise general supervision of the affairs and activities of the committee. The vice - chairman shall assume the duties and powers of the chairman in the event of the chairman's absence. The secretary shall record and maintain all minutes of actions and meetings for the committee. (e) Any action of the committee shall require affirmative votes of not less than a quorum, except that less than a quorum say adjourn a meeting sine die or to a specified time and place. A quorum shall consist of a majority of the members not counting vacant positions. (f) The committee shall prepare specific guidelines for the election of alternate committee members to fill vacancies, and the length of terms for all committee members and officers. SECTION 8.10.060 RENT ADJUSTMENT 1. Advance Notice of: At least sixty (60) days prior to the effective date of a rental adjustment, the park owner or representative shall serve all mobile home residences, either personally or by mail, with notice of the proposed adjustment in accordance with State law. Said notice shall also include the recent consumer price index as established by the City Manager. Within three (3) days of notice to park tenants of a rent adjustment, the park owner or representative shall provide the City Clerk with the following information: (a) The effective date of the noticed adjustment. (b) Identification of the tenants or mobile ham spaces affected. (c) The amount of the rent prior to the effective date of the notice for each of those mobile have spaces. (d) The amount of the increase (in dollars) for each of those mobile hone spaces. Ordinance No. 231 Page 4 (e) The quantity and identity of tenants or spaces under lease or contract. 2. Period of: No rental adjustment shall be noticed or permitted or enforced more frequently than once every 365 days per mobile home park. 3. Maximm Allowable Adiustme t: Once each year, park owners shall be permitted to charge rents in excess of that which they are lawfully charging during the previous year based upon the Consumer Price Index as established by the City Manager. The first annual adjustment permitted hereunder will be based upon the percent change in the Consumer Price Index from August 1983 to July 1984. Monthly, beginning on the effective date of this chapter the City Manager shall determine the most recent published consumer price index. The City Clerk shall record the latest published consumer Price Index and shall notify each park owner of such upon request. Computation of rent increases allowable under this section shall be according to the following formula: Multiply the base rent and the maximum allowable percentage rent adjustment provided thereunder, and add the prorata share of additional rent. The resulting figure, rounded off to the nearest dollar, is the maximum allowable rent which may be granted to park owners under this chapter. Additional rent, above that established by the Consumer Price Index, shall be granted to park owners in the event of increases in taxes, assessments or levies (such as increases in ad valorem real property taxes) imposed by local, state or federal government entities. *(, or in the event of need for repairs caused by circumstances other than ordinary wear and tear). Such additional adjustments shall be computed on a prorata share for each mobile hone space. 1. Park Services: It is the responsibility of the park owner to provide and maintain the physical improvements and the common facilities of the Park in good working order and condition, and in doing so comply with the requirements as set forth in the Mobile Home Residency law. No park owner shall allow a reduction or elimination of arty service in a mobile hone park or to any tenant within any mobile hone park unless and until a proportionate share of the cost savings resulting from such reduction or elimination is passed on to the tenants in the form of a decrease in rent. 2. Meeting with Tenants: The park owner shall meet upon reasonable notice with the tenant committee as required by the Mobile Home Residency law. It shall be presumed that the intent of good faith negotiation as established under this chapter shall be practiced by the park owner and tenants committee in attempting to reach agreement and resolve tenant concerns. 1. Any tenant or park owner aggrieved by the willful violation of any of the provisions of this chapter may sue thereon and recover actual damages therefor, plus a civil penalty as provided herein. Any park owner or representative who demands, accepts, receives or retains any payment of space rent in excess of the maximums lawful space rent, in violation of the provision of this chapter or any rule, regulation or order hereunder promulgated, shall be liable as hereinafter provided to the tenant from who such payments are demanded, accepted, received or retained, for damages as a civil penalty in an amount of five - hundred dollars ($500.00) or three (3) times the amount by which the payment so demanded, accepted received or retained exceeds the maximum Ordinance No. 231 Page 5 lawful space rent, whichever is the greater. The park owner is also liable to the tenant for any such payments actually collected and refunded, if ary, plus interest from the date received, reasonable attorney's fees, and costs as determined by the court. 2. The fact of ary willful violation of this chapter may be used by the aggrieved tenant as a defense to any action for unlawful detainer based on non - payment of rent. The park owner may use the fact of any willful violation �` this nhapter as a defense to recover ary rent due under this chapter. 3. Any willful violation of this chapter shall be a misdemeanor and shall be punishable by a fine of not more than five - hundred dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment in the County jail for a period not exceeding six (6) months or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each continuing day of violation shall be deemed to be a separate violation. It is unlawful for the management or any owner of any mobile hone park to harass, evict, retaliate against or otherwise discriminate against any retaliation against a person who has opposed any practice believed unlawful under this chapter, has informed law enforcement agencies of practice believed unlawful under this chapter, has asserted any rights under this chapter, or has petitioned, testified or attested in any proceeding under this chapter. If any provision or clause of this chapter or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional or to be otherwise invalidated by a final judgement of any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or clauses or applications thereof which can be implemented without the invalid provision or clause or application, and to this end, the provisions and clauses of this chapter are declared to be severable. Unless extended by action of the city Council, the Ordinance shall terminate and have no force and effect after November 21, 1984, SECTION 2: This Ordinance is hereby declared to be an urgency measure, and it shall take effect imnediately upon its adoption. SECTION 3: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cticamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of September, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Jon D. Mikels, Mayor ATTEST: Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk