Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984/06/06 - Agenda PacketI City Council Agenda -2- June 6, 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 -06 -06 and I Payroll ending 05/13/84 for the total amount of $301,442.18. B. Approval of Alcoholic Beverage Application No. AB 84 -12 7 for On -Sale Beer 6 Wine Eating Place License, Out D. Chan, 9030 Foothill Boulevard, #102. C. Approval of Alcoholic Beverage Application No. AB 84 -13 8 for On -Sale Beer A Wine Eating Place License, National Convenience Stores, Inc., 9718 Base Line Avenue. D. Approval of Alcoholic Beverage Application No. At 84 -14 9 for On -Sale Beer A Wine Eating Place License, Pic N Save of California, Inc., 12322 4th Street. E. Approval of Alcoholic Beverage Application No. AB 84 -15 10 for On -Sale Beer 6 Wine Eating Place License, Daniel J. McConohy, 8800 Base Line Road. F. Approval of Improvement Extension Agreement, submitted 11 by Calvin and Rosemary Morgan for Parcel Map 7646, located on the south side of Hillside Road, between Carnelian and Beryl. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -154 1- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT EXTENSION AGREEMENT FOR PARCEL MAP 7646 G. Approval of Improvement Agreement and Improvement 16 Security, submitted by Leonard Quarells for a single family residence, located at 7735 Calls Clarin. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -155 23 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 7735 CALLE CLARIN City Council Agenda -3- June 6, 1984 H. Approval of a Real Property Improvement Contract and 24 Lien Agreement, submitted by James Previti for a Lot line adjustment on the property located on the east side of Hellman Avenue, south. of Base Line Road. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -156 30 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM JAMES PREVITI FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 40. 181 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME I. Approval of Boudg_ and Agreement and Construction - 31 _ Improvement Agreem�e�nt� submitted by Citation Bu ders-- for -Tract Noe: T2238 and 12530, located on the vest side of Hellman Avenue, on the north side of Church Street. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -157 48 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING • IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL MAP OF TRACT NOS, 12238 AND 12530 J. Approval of Bonds and Agreement, submitted by Edwards 50 Construction Company for DR 83-06, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Grove Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -158 58 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEN 83 -08 K. Release of Bonds: 59 DR 81 -22 - Located at 9120 Center Avenue; owner, Lord -Shobe Constructors, Inc. Faithful Performance Bond (Road) S 8,500.00 U City Council Agenda _4_ June 6, 1984 I 1 l� RESOLUTION NO. 84 -159 62 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,- CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR DR 81 -22 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 12919 Sumi[ Avenue - Single Family Residence; owner, Richard T. French. Security Instrument $ 8,500.00 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -160 64 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 12919 SUMMIT AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK M.S. 72 -0711 - Located on the vest side of Vincent Avenue and the north side of Jersey; owner, Lucas Land . Company. Surety Bond (Drainage) SI2,000.00 Tract 12090 - Located at the northeast corner of Archibald and Peron; owner, USA Properties Fund, Ltd. Faithful Performance Bond (Road) $49,500.00 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -161 66 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 12090 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK Parcel Map 5760 - Located on the northeast corner of Milliken 6 6th Street; owner, O'Donnell, Brigham 6 Partners. Faithful Performance Bond (Road) 527,000.00 l V City Council Agenda -5- June 6, 1984 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -162 68 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 5760, PARCEL 7, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK L. Approval of Replacement Bonds and Agreement for Tract 69 No. 9539, submitted by Plaza Builders and release of previously accepted Agreement and Security from Brubaker, Davis 6 Person for the subject Tract, located on the west side of Sapphire Street at Jennet Avenue. Accept: Faithful Performance Bond $ 92,900.00 Labor and Material Bond $ 46,450.00 Release: Improvement Security 9174,000.00 Instrument RESOLUTION NO. 84 -163 79 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RELEASING PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AND APPROVING REPLACEMENT IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND SECURITY FOR TRACT 40. 9539 M. Approval of award of contract for the construction of 80 Beryl - Hellman Storm Drain and Beryl Street Improvements, Phase I, to the lowest qualified bidder, Riverside Construction, for the total contract amount of 5889,904.50; and acceptance of proposals from Bill Mann and Associates for the construction staking of the above project in the amount of $23,500.00; and from Richard Mills and Associates for the materials testing of the above project in the amount of $12,600.00. N. Approval of $1,100 transfer from Community 90 Development /Administration Travel and Meetings Account to City Facilities Equipment Account. 0. Approval of recommendation that the Engineering 91 Services Contract Change Order to CPS Consulting Civil Engineers be approved for the completion of design services for the reconstruction of San Bernardino Road from Vineyard Avenue to Archibald Avenue. The contract amount will be Increased by $4,840 to a new contract total of $24,740. City Council Agenda -6- June 6, 1984 P. Approval of Traffic Signal Maintenance Contract Supplement to Purchase Order No. 2588 in the amount of $50,100.00. Q. Approval of Resolution establishing those individuals who may sign small claims court documents. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -164 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, NAMING THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO WILL BE ALLOWED TO SIGN SMALL CLAIMS COURT DOCUMENTS RELATING TO BUSINESS LICENSES R. Approval of Resolution to update the records and change the names of those individuals who may enforce City ordinances and all primary and secondary codes. RESOLUTION N0. 84 -165 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING • CERTAIN CITY EMPLOYEES TO ENFORCE CITY ORDINANCES AND ALL PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CODES REFERRED TO THEREIN S. Approval of Agreement for Engineering Services to C. G. Engineering for preparation of Plane, Specifications and Estimates for Archibald Avenue F.A.U. (street resurfacing and rehabilitation). This Agreement supersedes or otherwise replaces the existing Agreement with C. G. Engineering for the same workings. Contract amount not to exceed $13,900. 4. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. TERRA VISTA PARR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND LEWIS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., WESTERN PROPERTIES, LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA AND LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - Item continued from May 24, 1984 meeting. r1 L.i City Council Agenda -7- June 6, 1984 ORDINANCE NO. 227 (second reading) 103 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ENTITLED "TERRA VISTA PARR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 1" BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ON THE ONE HAND AND LEWIS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., WESTERN PROPERTIES, LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA AND LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY ON THE OTHER HAND B. ALTA LOMA CHANNEL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 82 -2 - City 105 Council to conduct public hearing on the formation of an Assessment District to construct channel facilities between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, north of Banyan Street. Item continued from March 21, 1984 meeting. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -166 127 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA ABANDONING PROCEEDINGS AND REJECTING BIDS FOR THE • CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE "MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1913" RESOLUTION NO. 84 -167 136 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA REINITIATING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN ALTA LOMA FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS C. PUBLIC HEARING TO ORDER THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH 139 ANNEXATION NO. 18 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. I FOR TRACTS 9399, 9400, 12414, 11915 -1, 12362, 12026, 12027, 1.663 AND DR 83 -17 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -168 156 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION NO. 18 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. I AND ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR TRACT NOS. 9399, 9400, 12414, 11915 -1, 12362, 09 12026, 12027, 11663 AND DR 83 -17 City Council Agenda -8- June 6, 1984 • D. PUBLIC HEARING TO ORDER THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH 158 ANNEXATION NO. 3 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1 AND NO. 2 POR TRACTS 9399, 9400, 12414, 11915 -1, 12362, 12026, 12027, AND DR 83 -17 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -169 178 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION NO. 3 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR TRACT NOS. 9399, 9400, 12414, 11915 -10 12362, 12026, 12027, AND DR 83-17 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -170 186 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION NO. 3 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 AND ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR TRACT NOS. 93 °" 9400, 12414 AND 11549 -1 • ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS 188 AMENDMENT 84 -01 - RICHWOOD - A Development Districts Amendment from Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac) to Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) for 16.3 acres of land, located on the north side of 9th Street, between Baker Avenue and Madrone Avenue - APN 207 - 261 -02 and 03, 207 - 132 -01 through 37. Item continued from May 16, 1984 meeting. ORDINANCE NO. 226 (first reading) 203 AN ORDINANCE OF THE GIB!= 44i -THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 207 - 261 -02 AND 03, AND 207 - 132 -01 THROUGH 37, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 9TH STREET, BETWEEF BAKER AND MADRONE AVENUES FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8 -14 DU /AC) TO LOW-MEDLUM RESIDENTIAL (4 -8 DU /AC) F. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION APPROVING 205 TENTATIVE TRACT 12532 - ARCHIBALD ASSOCIATES - The development of III zero lot line homes on 14.5 acres In the Low Medium Residential District, located between Archibald and Ramona Avenue at Monte Vista Street - APN 202 - 181 -05, 06, 15, 16. L City Council Agenda -9- June 6, 1984 G. ENVIROMMMAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS 272 AMENDMENT 83-07 - ARCHIBALD ASSOCIATES - A Development Districts Amendment from Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac) to Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) for 4.5 acres of land, located on Archibald, south of Victoria - APN 202 - 181-15. ORDINANCE NO. 228 (first reading) 280 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 202 - 181 -15, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF ARCHIBALD, SOUTH OF VICTORIA FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8 -14 DU /AC) TO LOW MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4 -8 DU /AC) H. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING 281 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -02 - HARP - A request to maintain a 350 -400 bird aviary at 9110 Carrari Court in the Very Low Residential District - APN 1061- 781 -19. • 5. NON- ADVERTISED HEARINGS A. STATUS REPORT OF ACQUISITION OF TRAINING LEVEE FOR 318 FLOOD CONTROL PURPOSES - R.C. LAND CO. - Construct-on of Training Levee providing Flood Protection for Tracts (,✓ 11934, 12044, 12045, and 12046. Approval is recommended of agreement with R.C. Land Co. to cover all costs involved in the condemnation of lands required for the construction of a flood protection training levee. 6. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS A. CITIZENS REQUEST REGARDING THE OFFICE OF MAYOR 324 B. CABLE TELEVISION MATTERS - Development of minimum 325 requirements for Cable Television Service proposals (RFP), and setting of interim minimum system design standards for present Cable Television operators within the City. i City Council Agenda -10- June 6, 1984 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -171 327 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 6ALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING INTERIM MINIMUM SYSTEM DESIGN AND CAPACITY STANDARDS FOR CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA C. RENEWAL OF ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE CONTRACT - The City 329 Council will consider approval of Animal Control Service Contract with the Public Health Department of San Bernardino County. D. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO LOWEST RESPONSIBLE 338 BIDDER, R A R GENERAL CONTRACTORS, FOR THE 3600 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA NEIGHBORHOOD E. DESIGNATION OF FOOTHILL FREEWAY INTERCHANGE AT DAY 343 CREEK BOULEVARD AND EAST AVENUE - Recommend approval of resolution requesting CalTrans to designate and protect rights -of -way to construction Route 30 Freeway interchange at Day Creek Boulevard and East Avenue and Is Avenue. eliminate the interchange designation at Etiwanda Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -172 345 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA REQUESTING THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DESIGNATION OF FREEWAY INTERCHANGE ON ROUTE 30 AT DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AND EAST AVENUE F. BASE LINE MEDIAN DESIGN - Landscape and construction 347 design concept for the Base Line Median, east of Haven Avenue. G. BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 1984-85 - Due to 355 reduction in CDBG funding in Fiscal Year 1984 -85, the Council will consider reducing the contingency by $12,000. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -173 356 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING PROGRAM FUNDING FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10 BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 1984 -85 City Council Agenda -11- June 6, 1984 CA H. ADOPTION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN - The City 357 Council to consider adoption of a Community Development Plan as required by Block Grant regulations. RESOLUTIION NO. 84 -174 359 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE CITY'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN I. CONSIDERATION OF CHANGING JULY 4, 1984 CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE IN OBSERVANCE OF INDEPENDENCE DAY HOLIDAY 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS 8. ADJOURNMENT • 112 1 r] J I* CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONI REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: Members of the Redevelopment Agency .-ROM: Jack Lam, Deputy Director BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: REGIONAL CENTER REDEVELOPMENT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT - Approval of a 30-day extension to the schedule of performance regarding approval of Master Plan and Use Permit. SUMMARY: A focused Environmental Impact Report for the Regional Center is being prepared pursuant to the Participation Agreement and Victoria Community Plan conditions of approval. In order to allow adequate time for the preparation of the EIR following submittal of the Master Plan and Use Permit, and to comply with State mandated time limits on the EIR, it is necessary to extend the approval date from September 30 to October 30, 1984. The schedule of performance may be extended in writing by the Agency and the Redeveloper, HFA Associates, Attached is a letter from the Redevelooer agreeing to the thirty (30) day extension. The Redeveloper has indicated that this extension will not effect the scheduled opening date for the Regional Center. Also, please find attached a copy of the schedule of performance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the extension to October 4 in order to complete the EIR. Res ectfull.v ubmitted, � r! Jack Lam Deputy Director JL :DC :jr Attachments: Letter From Redeveloper Schedule of Performance CCCAhICy v6 C7 1977 � ERNEST W. HAHN, INC. _ 3666 KEARNY VILLA ROAD, SAN DIEGO, CALIPORNIA 92123 • TELER.ONE.:6I91 569 -n9. May 22, 1984 Mr. Dan Coleman Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency 9320 Baseline Road, Suite C Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: Master Plan Approval Dear Dan: CITY OF RdrvC '? ,r 7 ?. COMMDN17 v rp�; f, 0P.,L 1 DEPT. 7 AM 14A Z 1984 7,819,10,118211 2j314i6 6 HFA Associates grants the Agency's request for 30 days extension to . the September 30, 1984 date for Master Plan approval. The September 30, 1984 date is provided in the Redevelopment Participation Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and HFA Associates. The new date for approval of the Master Plan is to be established as of October 30, 1984. Sincerely, Maynard Rice Vice President /Construction Project M ager Daniel T. Felix Vice president /Pedevelooment e� 0 • W:O:r .Z' ^v=1 IL PX lslJ told d OJ•:1C n!]rin0 :'J rein a:e,ry M _te PedevelC7e: o[ISeE, c,r Aat'cy ],all ]pO[tm aM1 eare:tt - a N[eF ,tens and Ve Parel 9A}:eoenc. .nd fwu ati�.: ewr i.i ce;n,[c orca:nal, o: nt agresnnc to cx PNewla>e[. •vet »er'a :am E v. xm_ e Paeevel�nr <• ]. bmcv t'aa MI.II. ame :saw W. : w[s]ant ce Section a. :ne dgr•ame. the M.Il yMll t w of b aL. ar COOIn O txf tNdf . Ny itit In C,e fsnanc:nq elan, EM'.:; -v. >: - e1Lt : re:v •e vr/eioper f tr< -ale a - tt atl lwemoy eevv>rmenm uxstrnmu, ar amn OC•.er per - ttwnc ew Veme�.ai : •'1 ;s rttn reee<t w a cue uorwenen:a IS N CO's L=ed ,rA eons; tested c t. a +a pvaufnt to v:s .gre•tenc. ]srwel >[ !Etter P:,n sld t'N c -e —• ran s: se ,?: -:ca. me aevet,:xenc, 1t aN, >Nraum iW - ct-s,:e a A,r mprevicencs sxc:[Ir: I _ Is ,Wt to m dev<laxf a-A :a fU.erd Vwrt>n, Ineledsm vw fllnq of • wuS. of aIm' atten i n. r drys a ttr ue'd,te ^aK':Cr >n Ytl =uOntaylm Of vcdr- O: e e - ,I c- -s - , t vc 1.c, 33. e_9 ;4. o":i v e deLvery at c a uuuu >n sows ut l,t•[ an narrn 9a. 1991, prwtdad VJt w •m' event ve 'u Nlowtson BaN< Icfw W. t :n YI MNC futtl- C'.TC A 11,E3f Cx A�IKY w ?IY = -b Ca=n por ClCVi Ol VI .t � 53.:51.:001 � >Ld ceLC,d a._ _ a-.:- I .. l9ai . .:N: [-'.. ' -:. :. :::J. I I J nhn i0 ]_ =± .i'= IV JV YNM � . _ a•yn �I nn�iean :i\�` -J•,'L 'u'JO J,x iw��erii� v 3' �^ O �1 S >�.NNNNARwn:. JX CY= l.fO n� ii h_ i � i L • .L = i 1 I l � LJ; jL ....s A-. l �i nwii[c. - eL e; ._...�I �fff •rr +.rrrrr:rf.f♦f _y if YO.'JYL.YY, .JiYYYUL Nt 4..JY`!1 f Y _ L A ' t A s 9 of -f•J. n � +�. �� � � n ] L a Y O+J•J.npL • . `• J. .. ice_ nnL L i i aJ t..i Y.= .eia: $aiilu -.a a✓t ,°i i .L, i i i`a ]a•7�a •'ili?i �.Ln =eses_ �.i.�..yi�a�fy.��iwaYii\`Lbi cca .]a y¢,iii u a ¢J o Y.s�Ji i.isiNyau.L. +I �.'. >S�CbJ� o.O .Li i i ni Y ril �wonn u.a -.... o.YN.JrJ. >rNShnnYn ,I � � o�n • • r • • • • • • • o • • • • • • J^�IwN JrgJO O r -VWO7N Zlrn ^J n• a. \7JG yyNgJ •1 J lryJJOJYr ^JrJ- OrrWJ.w M•�J VM JVl•NJ >YLplilt O 1 •J IPJ-J .:r .ter J +` ry! .w L� JJJNrJ r•r J`iN99 ^JOYySJyYJr A, \Y f pr ./wNr wP hPh ^Y.I- iPVNVOrn\i4 r.• Y.•h NWrr J'�•\q> W 1 M1^ rph r = rrYNh.w J'N J � ! rra d { 1 ^ TI 1 { 1 •: O }O rV•wrAJ- 9r•� ^ry wrN JIrWPJr v•\rNJnJSJrN:\rNJ -Y •J it /V hlw lw lw .n n.w ^ ^,wnYJNYfrr'lr r.\N +.WA A +�.� +� J •I 1 nor. nnn ..�\nri.�nrin�n.�.r•n +nn�.r\n i\w�°.n n.r��rrTnnn°3i^il .r J A A n • n\ 73 T w w • w Z -r r rr rr r rr .i T L t iL JfL L _- �p A J 1 < � Zi < rr L r r = JnJ j: n= L L Z,,, J• LC 1Ot..i�.>i�Vr ! .w r -I rl Y+: 1. \J pp f t- ijiJJ- 1 {YJ ^r�LiLU +�nW .11rWL— L� ^S•�L >• J1, •li .Y it <J .1tLL•'C —�>1•^ I N • N I J A + n J L I r •J r l 2{ J r == J J AA � V •r i 1 2 i 1 JrJ`^ < r U • - J A A 1 -� i J t -iL ` •T ar t != • r- N L i J - L < J V J: < r n W L - O O< r A > 9 L N! 1 J L L .n VrU r JS J•1 jfS -- •J .7Y J- •7L�{ +1 J J JrZCW AJWL - Y -� J_1 I { -{iL r L � jY WN r rAWW`r • \�SJ L O[ Lr- OjJrLp -J '• ,J < l06 »itZZf.Ni1�LY=Ol LJly_yuY LJ 1 ^tLiirf JLJ7JrY _ _ __ •\� W 6 S r; �� L i r J i L y J L r� N r � O L� r r t N'y L Y L f 0 0{ S- i 2 SYiir JUW1 ^JD YY •ir r {Nr�••IrrWV� N IJVr { {Ja JJJ L {i YnO •{OL <ri n 1' ZjWJOr20 aQi0 <l1oOWLrrZOOLiirWN�h ^YNjWWiW 1 W U J N r O r W W Z Z 9 W N U R •I W J O` { W W J N� i J A J ;3 O q� ul Wpp W a W- W W r O tl O V U V U' � O Z S Z S L N� •w� •=•� �' Y ri o� i Y� J J� i N 'p V nlwY .w.• ~nq' ^�n.��.a ilW.43• Fiw a'a >oO;i�O'ii � I arrynitl f • • i i. i 1 ' • • • • • • • • 1 1 Dap OJ aJO 00: .0 yJVNJ••10.J ON NNONy}N yraO vy�VNO • 1 P h O N V N V r S O N O P l O r J w.n O J y it V•Y Ny.IJ Oan.lJ rf !•r .JOJ.vIYr —w INp YN h —rJ Ja.D JQ aI rNRNNP r�rn r. NrNnnw YNraI I�.I _o•O ^VNPN YNJN WMM1rM3 W s1 rry V wr J Nr : •V f V = { 1 h r r ,r• _ h r r•1 t✓ 1 i 1 POr•v• ^rNan= J.J_'V S�iA in Y >Jr`• ^rN •1 YJVnNIn .Iq Wn D} O� 1 r •. n O u is 's P)i } V PI' V yVOV V00�,1 > N'J ri ��r��. u it r rrr__rrrrr r rr r r_r rr rr r 3 • A A ,• • 4 L LC L L Ci C Y C� ! •t i i L a t L< t a t r[ L2 � C J n � � a aIOU^ LYO i n_♦ J N � 1rNy aJJ r�rt f� L� (S L J ♦• r N J L J r r l l _r r J L ^ ^]OJJ =f JJJ 2.♦ <JJJ ^W��yy LVWJ paJ:rJJ J••�h r �']•���20[>j�a .�6 a`ud CWi�C��J�r�J� }.l Ly�.�L, iii= :if`�....NCZ�i•iir n�•ai i�A.i�_J ��>. a' .__ ^. .< i! S� i o— i i i a N! N r ..� . •] [= y— i Wi � i_ :: n .J o 1 L J 1 a l 2 L ♦ 1 Z Jl}' <fC10./L• " - � AJO � J >WW `�ri Z • =2 v0 fJ I C ZZ yW^ O ^ML J(W )lrWW} l • Z O 3 5 l 2 J L O a U J i 0] L s ! ^'A J N O Z I y J L L � L�2�70 .A iv L J LO ZS.adJ ZL Y }'� ..yr lJaa^ �SfAO {J <ZNO a .Or iOrr Y.S WN6V0 <20iZL < J O 1 W Z=y rrtJ 2T=O JWWa'1'� LN�DjOr� i <r Y•.rN AC =l1 1 ZV T <J aiiZ aU rL <Z J = ^S O r V1 O Lr••Vy.1W1`] < J J \, O J'Y O{V�fy'uiM `O lOr rOE r•fA J /M3JJ �`rtw WLNWr w t 11 j=YV�Ylii�i <l ia�83��:�.l,.i��`33M.�tf i�:f ir��g :µ \J • • • • • • • • • • • • • •� Jry1n.��hPN J,a irW. .........P...........NYN\gpJVUN A L� wl}NJ.,hh �•Y a�.�.• "J �.w .IOT I�w�TpY •J i1. f �Ph^_NP rN •.nrJ= �O_JW�JPSWJWOYHJO rOPw =•. Ntl�� f i •1 _rrr_r \_ -__J _.V ..I J.p aw YJJ_M.,J {\�Iwtl J_NP\,IN NN N,vhNh Vh1.n p1 Il �,nnnn ,nNtJJJV''YJY�N < 1 n�nnn.nni,= n�\n - \� \n T�n.\nN\NL\• \N�. \N. \N �,. Y \N M1\N V. w. ..NNN 1 - W L if iLCLiL iL� i i LL v • i =< yWW<.,a11 ..syay1 y<y SZZ a J�)1 0Qy yAa =I I _T ` L if Gi J rJ�ir rOJ • .J Yy � J 'J.1 .IJJ4.11J .� JLIV J d J J4 .IJ N r N < z JI i i = 1� �> i J L 1 S• A S J r r- J<- L d Z J •. a � I .V\ � ja > t< a� r C '177. i 1 _ M J i _ .. V y r A -I r l s NLL `AV 21 OAJL L � nOOWi �< LC_ii2 A <Z w i v� Jsr < 1 SJtA a a 'S r SrJ SL- -WSJ SY_ONb_pryz r`a J WJV OSrA 11{!•r�J1i ••O 2117_! 6000 JJ.JtJ ,Y�l <fi .`] .J � .Lf OO 1G J•V I•Y - iL _ � OfiJWW <WSW :i 2iiiriWW 2Wi OO C; J r r O r N N N N l O r l J S J 0 � N tlOW..•OZ •]NJ l: _ Y7- rWryWr •y l•\lf Z� J 1 tl p J W S L J w �' ! «IYIJN p WZfL f� • O f t W W W W'= Y J.0 O O O ��G - w__ f t W tl M V N M N N N NNtA N N N N N N NM � S L` L.. r= O ji 0 1 V � N NR N_ lr ► ►_ r_ r__ J J� O np ^ 1`•'a �� Pwl i aPn 1� • • El WILLOW" 10A ALOPHI YC M�Ma 71C S) r. De9naa�f N Alokk r,.fr cw 1971 Ipeplarfp yAA tKimftd1r10 r..r. Ci.9tI1F iew.w eww.e,..r. rho eeieNre/ fe.Nr epM� Ar any �+r.P I 1. rims) OF uctNas) Al N0. ON SALE SZEA Appaea el,d. See. 240" ❑ flee, Deeel 1 /1 /9A 'fn9�2 cDa 1..,w T;;; rwM MMw7we: t. Ku" OF AINCAMM CnAN, Dut 0. CTUM, !a1 S. 7. rTpHfl 09 "AmUCT010) IR 1r' r1R GU, Wnry ^w �On,00 4.7 Annual Fff 106.50 a Nr l..e+ r:M Chloe Iltchfn C.• 21 CITY % .OVn 1 LeeeYe N tr+r- ++.r�r wM Ywl 9030wperamDptn111 elvd., 1102 A ON pa'ZV. Cuearonga 91711 Son C'= atdln * rOrA. / ]16.50 f ). a,e FMYMi. a if t _ Mel Md. CIIT I=ft? yes 1. AW W Aw.eN all .r�.F IYfq 7aTf I. Ile.e Tee MI Nee ten.wM N e 1NM1T 10. Ne.e iw ww naNeM enY N ,M pM.wew N rIN AIeM< le•e•eae CMr.N M w rer4NOw el M Depe,+rnr p .f re.wy w Fe atl? J 10 l...... 17. AeNewn Mow pl nw en wenMe. eFNerM a M.We IrtMW Yennn .AI ee•e ell Mr Qua L11<er�Ml el l Art I rtle+ r eww r ere.e + 4a ewleM M. al we pereM. el gee Akeetl�e Mowp Cml,el Art 13 . ITATI OF CA11FOpe11A Cwnry N _.$OS 2rwrt Lnn ------------ DAM ...... i.:1 ^ /.N A. °...... �. I w.. T .r.r .w T ✓. Yw. w. .n.M w w M .Y `W Uy .r .. �rrMrw. .r .W,.• � ~.W.r•!rrw• rr�1 W .Wry . .w..w..e • w.w N� �. Y.`Y,1 M~r.w w.w •• 0.wi�. r . .•. wirr. r • �... u...n ....rte• ..n .wJU •W e .. n.r . ........................................................ r r ...r .. •. .. 4 aeICAN T 71GN mitt .. .. . .. . -- .. .. .. ............................ I .:. ....................... . APPMAt10N St f11ANSFFAOA 17 STATE OF CAII /ORNIA C..F el---- . - - - -- .We +M r nr ..rw ...... ..rW�rr��rr Ir Owr.r.w r ✓r .r � . .. .r ewr r rrror .,r b .n.,n.r .r un le ,...... NewM ells few+ CIM em Z;p Cole ' -ee^•T DI NO wrTle Below, VIA, Lit; For Dep*~,,l Uer 0-* ♦loth! C awerie Male. C 1laeaen pape.A p AewoL Aw CONS w170 ---- — ----- i!I la -•- °--••----- AAs. ....... ..._ ----- jW.11~Fill, ----------- eta+l M p • e • • .© SOOLKAMM PUS ALCCNMX .v.Aaa LCOMo 1, s•a.•+t a AI.MIat aw.•r ca.w1 141151 bone., ,,. mmAaDlflo swomiftul.asla I. T101g1 OF WA NOW Fee Off Sale bear and alas -DC 5/10 /as Afee.e WAST, 4 7.e.. ❑ ea..wo.. 7/1/.4 mcr M0. / C0 11101 ,..`I.f k.lif wATa. SY seems, i+r. Asa... New t Kill" OF APP-KA M ..r le.alw OM :4Liooal Caeryalaaoa Stores Tne. p -12 1. 110101 OF nua.cnowcsl � LK. 1101 Or1g1ns1 s 100.00 Annual Fee :... 1G cm a Lim SLOp .`I Go Mow -w.kr W f..w 97,1d baaoLlae Awnua r6lfh$1�C7lu,onn 11701 SlMrnard oo TOTAL f 12 .1] ♦ M Inrw wMlre. -_ -. I. An rylMrt InW yr. T p M lk.w C,h L.wnN yes I...f.1. WS..w 1. •W�?��o�y+oo e �na.•.e L ^.. tea, Mw. T.. ..w \..n C.... .mil 0. Foley? 10. It..,, Y 1, " .rl.we •.y .0 .r I..v..I. N III. AI.NN I...v.e. Cs." Al, w ..e.l...M .1 w. O..w....l M n0 II�� 11.1 /�N]Ti0'yef :Va L 0C9 I.iMI.I N 1A. At.1 •Ie1 .O�lealee CO �SROla If. ANiM.M ./IM I.1 II..0 pl) M.I.e.V .M 'fK.K..ill A....11 A..Mli.t. «pl..l . C..IN..i All ... ft k.n.p. Cw* All 11 STAT/ OF CALITOl Cw.,, N Or...IS w '. � 1..4 ....... .... ........................... D.w............J -. 4........ .r/.�y�r .r A..w +r Y. �.•M . i y _ r . 11 AT.LICANT s" HIM ............... _ .... .. ----------- ......................................................... •N a APOLKATIOM BY rRAWfrnoN If STATI Of CALITOWIA C..., M ....... ............................... D.w ...... .................... D. NM Mre. a.k. TAY W: Few Drpwwnt C•. O+17 Aned..a GI howd.e ..Ile.. ❑ Ra.M seve• St1�0 /Ba C3 ....__..___.._ cowls ❑ Mwi f. l.._.._..1.1e w.._...___....�......_..OAe. w._....._.._...A.I/ AIA .................... 0 AAUtAl1O11 w mcom Z SAM sco Ip ti ptA�l a A71di1M 11j,1f= b■� u. Nw I. Tns{p O _ _ — a 4wo am /r wrW� es� r.t� idA 0. Me.a pu a.- b•an t- 1.�f1•d d a labrryi 10. Mvn rN nw .iW.•i ant d W Ia^� -• J M AbAda �A.b. ccrpwff.1w-. Aa.a•Na Cr M - /qaM••.. d M T..a.. WAAM71 a A/IUCAMW r..» Oaa. rn an v O.. �.. aC. 11 ery4. = 3. rVp" OF rM11sACMAM =�• " m UC. nR lb, .b. M .AI •e..a•.a ar .wr - r+-r r d walraA awf d A.n r Carl A[t. ?1da�t Los AePlM Fw 3w 9Aro. !fq 17A 19lt s 1OO.OD 7[ �L 2{.10 U= - "h U. I oW (2) 41730 Dwly MTA( 1 s l N M1•aw- Lta...r. m 1. M M1.w. InaY 1. AMIICAM • • � ----- �d� t JM4EeA_ 414!_!_i'fAkAM. • A►MUCArl�N tY TPANSM01t 17. STAr[ OF CA11/OMIA C..p J .......... .------------------- — ----- Oar ---------- ---- �. r � ...y w � ter.+.•.. w la Wn«n d l..wM.l 17 . ]:anaN. «.1 a lia..w«.1' 1s . l:.ww. nlr• a IE�YEEI O 6ifYA�N1IIST–RATED—NBN61 -��- M► 2304 ,A4r I0. Isaaw II.rA- a•A L , Co b Mr Alir ma 7'A(a fir; Fa Dip.rtar.l Ur Ay ------------ _ i AIP1�4 CJ 90091 0. Me.a pu a.- b•an t- 1.�f1•d d a labrryi 10. Mvn rN nw .iW.•i ant d W Ia^� -• J M AbAda ccrpwff.1w-. Aa.a•Na Cr M - /qaM••.. d M T..a.. 11 ery4. = • 1 =�• " 12. AAPPW n.aI•w• (a1 .M a^I —a M.. d111y Mbf. d o IKe ^w..y lb, .b. M .AI •e..a•.a ar .wr - r+-r r d walraA awf d A.n r Carl A[t. Los AePlM Fw 3w 9Aro. !fq 17A 19lt 10, STAR O. CAl1.O M C., al ------------------------------- _____— Oar._........_ - -____ . �. rr • A►MUCArl�N tY TPANSM01t 17. STAr[ OF CA11/OMIA C..p J .......... .------------------- — ----- Oar ---------- ---- �. r � ...y w � ter.+.•.. w la Wn«n d l..wM.l 17 . ]:anaN. «.1 a lia..w«.1' 1s . l:.ww. nlr• a IE�YEEI O 6ifYA�N1IIST–RATED—NBN61 -��- M► 2304 ,A4r I0. Isaaw II.rA- a•A L , Co b Mr Alir ma 7'A(a fir; Fa Dip.rtar.l Ur Ay ------------ _ i • �t: Fir..r.•• G„' fAPY_r rr ob r.r.rwrrrr rr�+Y�r Yr IY am i Mi� �+ fL.fd nw iw+n r �SLfd1Y R-Yii 7RZ • 1lm MM KACZ ANOW f8 ~1`m� � •Of `�Al L aAw a NwR.MM SN— 0..'�76•M m OAS. ■ 01 J. Ynam oow0 . M. 1 trNW OF nwuCrAmm f.l♦1 2"1ni1. J0", ?nf. L 100X iteekio r 1rs. 1�. f '�.r V R f7 S trwr d Y�.r -M+�w W Yrw Mp �Mllti 1t. - 7 *mom SO S{ M"t *-3 Eb S= Slllua w, wCra.. 90732 •mow• f�• v M.•. fv. .wr M. sanrerM N a hIMIi �0. M... fwr ..w .•IIwJ .N d N /.r�w� d L. LkaAM[ Cwid b� d V O.r.� r• • 11. f Ww^ .'T6' an... w nnA. v w IO .n a artl.r.•r .Aq. JV11 Y Lr.! Ob d M .sd•rw' — . r]..wl..w tiAw t.l rr ..f ^wq.• .r.AM.. w o.rd. 4.•+M a.r...n ..tl .... b M ww'drrw d a 4�.... st ;!I rM Ir...11 mr .Wr. w fwrAr w Arirr N M wMOl.d .•1 d M wer.awt M M .4.�... Y.w1. Cwd b 11. STA" Of CAOOb C..•4 0l _.. - 1�---------- Oaw .++•1��-•A— • +ti. A r rN. r-r ^+r-f!GiiUY CO S, IX. — --------------- -------- - --- -- - ---- --- - - -- — yy LMIItiT10N BY nuwsruoe le. SLTf 00 c.ufOe A CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIIIONGA STAFF REPORT 0 DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician GLG'HaL%�' t' Z 7 197- SUBJECT: Approval of Improvement Extension Agreement submitted by Calvin and Rosemary Morgan for Parcel Map 7646 located on the south side of Hillside Road between Carnelian and Beryl Mr, and Mrs. Calvin Morgan, developers of Parcel Map 7646, have submitted a request for a one -year extension of time for the construction of on -site drainage improvements. Surety in the following amounts is on file in the office of the City Clerk: • RECOMMENDATION Faithful Performance: 51,100.00 Labor and Material: 5 550.00 It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving said improvement Extension Agreement and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign same. i#:jaa tfully subm" ted, AttAChments r 1 0 0 9 Ir� SITE Li LZ CITY OF RANCI IO Cl CxNIO\G,\ cnlr P:M. ENGINEERING DIVISION Tyr ' VICINITY NIAP N a z r> 0 8 May 1984 City of Rancho Cucamonga 98320 C Baseline Road P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attention: Mr, Lloyd Hubbs - City Engineer Reference: (1) Parcel Map 7646 (2) Improvement Agreement dated 2 June 1983 Gentlemen, It is respectfully requested that a 12 month extension be granted for constructing the improvements described on Page 4 of Reference (2). The need for additional time to complete these improvements is due • primarily to the unavailability of adequate funds. This problem has now been solved and our engineering firm (Linville- Sanderson) is preparing a final grading plan for the project. Your timely consideration of this request will be greatly appreciated. 5 encl. 13 Sincerely, i Calvin W. Flo rgan Developer • L CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INPROVENENr EVERSION AGREEMENT FOR P.N. '646 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is made and entered into, in conformance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the City of Rancho Cup amonga, California, a munm,oal corporation, by and between the said City, hereinafter referred to as the City, and exlvin aerg4m emit aoeeYaty Mprgw referred to as the Developer. WITNESSETH THAT, WHEREAS said Developer entered into an improvement agreement oltb the City as a redo site to issuance of buildings permits, and WHEREAS, said Developer desires an extension Of roe to complete the ter -s :f the Said improvement agreement. NOW. THEREFORE, it iS hereby agreed by the City and py said Cevelooer as follows: 1. The completion date of the terms of the said improvement agreement is hereby extended by a period of 12 months from the date of expiration of the Said agreement. 2. Increase in improvement Securities to reflect current improvement casts shall be furnished by the developer with this agreement and shall be approved by the City Attorney. 3. The required bond and the additional principal amounts thereof are Sec • forth on the attached sheet, 4. All other terms and conditions of the said imorovenert agreement Shail remain the same. As evidence Of understanding the provisiors ,onta -11 herein, and of intent b comply with same, the Oeveldner has Submitted the below deScnbed Improvement Security, and has affixed his Slgnat.re neretO: FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND Description: AAd:t:pnal Pr'ocioal Amount: -0- Surety: Address: MATERIAL AND LABOR BONB Description: Additional ir,nc;pal Amount; -O- Surety: - -- pdtlress: ,. .,7 CASH DEPOSIT MORUMENTIeG BOND pool banal Cash CeOasiL ,p_ - - -- MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND Pr'ncioal Amount: To be posted prior to acceptance of the project by the City. ......... n.. «e....... • ....I............... ............... ................... CI "v ^F pANC40 CUCAY04GA DE'/ELOPER CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation / By: f I`xrY E eon 0. likels, mayor Attest; i N Lauren M. waiseMlap, y ere NOTE: DEVELOPER'S stGNATURE MIST BE NOTARIZED iy RESOLUTION NO. 96- 96 =e'4CR S`7 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO • CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT EXTENSION AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR PARCEL MAP 7646 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Extension Agreement executed on June 6, 1984 by Calvin and Rosemary Morgan as Developer, for the improvement of public right -of -way adjacent to real property specifically described therein, and generally located on the south side of Hillside Road between Carnelian and Beryl; and 'WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Extension Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said real property referred to as Parcel Map 7646; and WHEREAS, said Improvement Extension Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Extension Agreement and said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is • hereby authorized to sign said improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984, AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Autne et, City ClerK jaa „on 0. fiKe s, Mayor /J • Ll J n LJ The subject property has been processed for the construction of a single family residence. The existing improvements were not finaled or approved by City Public Works Inspectors. Therefore, the developer was required and has submitted an improvement agreement and security to guarantee the construction of the required improvements. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council adopt the attached resolution approving the agreement and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement on behalf of the City. Respectfully sub rgi tted, L'BH: M: j as Attachments 1(9 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA C�'U^+o STAFF REPORT '�,, y' DATE: June 6, 1984 - 197 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: John Martin, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Approval of Improvement Agreement and Security submitted by Leonard puarells for a single family residence located at 7735 Calle Clarin The subject property has been processed for the construction of a single family residence. The existing improvements were not finaled or approved by City Public Works Inspectors. Therefore, the developer was required and has submitted an improvement agreement and security to guarantee the construction of the required improvements. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council adopt the attached resolution approving the agreement and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement on behalf of the City. Respectfully sub rgi tted, L'BH: M: j as Attachments 1(9 n L. BAY —" _uuE dal zl si ai II . 1 \ �1 \\ • TRAC7� < ., 7rc � ri 517L= 'RAL .7•,��� ' (TRt1, rs _ I' ^,R 11 FOOTHIL6 [;�aP` CITY OF RANCHO CUCAAIOINGA s �� R . .0 A 773 ENGINEERING DIVISION , ` a�eC VICINITY MAP im 1,7 PoBe —� 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA14ONGA IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR S F R 7735 CALLE CLARIN KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is made and entered into, in conformance with the provisions of the Municipal Code and Regulations of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referr- ed to as the City, by and between said City and [eDawn Homes hereinafter referred to as the Developer. THAT, WHEREAS, said Developer desires to develop certain real property in said City located at 7735 Calle Clarin; and WHEREAS, said City has established certain requirements to ba met by said Developer as prerep uisite to granting of final approval; and WHEREAS, the execution of this agreement and posting of improvement security as hereinafter cited, and approved by the City Attorney, are deemed to be equivalent to prior completion of said requirements for the purpose of securing said approval, NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the City and the Developer as follows: 1. The Developer hereby agrees to construct at develooer's expense all improvements described on page a hereof • within iE months fram the date hereof. 2. This agreement shall be effective on the date of the - esolutton Of the Council of said City approving this agreement. This agreement shall be in default on the day follow. ing the first anniversary date of said approval unless an exten- Sind of time has been granted by said .ity as hereinafter provid- ed. 3. The Developer may re Quest additional time ,n which to complete the provisions of this agreement, in writing not less than 30 days prior to the default date, and includ, ng a statement of Circumstances of necessity for additional time. in Considera- tion of such request, the City reserves the right to review the provisions hereof, inCluding construction standards, Cost estimate, and sufficiency of the �torov_ment security, and to require adjustments thereto when warranted by substaht'el changes therein, A, If the Developer fails or neglects to comply with the provisions of this agreement, the City shall have the right at any time to cause said provisions to be completed by any law - fil means, and thereupon to recover from said Developer and /or his Surety the full cost and expense incurred in so doing. 5. :onstruCtion permits shall be obtained by the Bevel - odor from the office of the City Engineer orior to start of any wors within the public rignt -0' -way, and the developer shall cpndq Ct such work in full Compliance wt to the regulations contained therein. Yon- conoliance may result in stooping of the work by the City, and assessment of the penalties provided. 6. Public right-of-.,y Improvement work required shall oe constructed in conformance with approved improvement plans, • Standard Specifications, and Standard Drawings and any special Nthereto. Construction shall include any transitions and/or other incidental mark deemed necessary for drainage or public safety. Errors or ommissions discovered during construc- tion shall be corrected upon the direction of the City rE■r NN 18 Engineer. • Nevi sed work due to said Plan modifications shall be covered by the provisions of this agreement and secured by the surety covering the original planned works. 1 _ 7, Work done within eals:!n9 streets shall be diligent - y our sued t0 COmolet,,,. tqe [ity Shell have the right to Comp 10 P any and all work in the event Of unjustified delay come t at on, and t0 recover all Cost and eFDense :ncOrred from the Developer and /Or his Contractor by any lawful means. S. The Developer fhali be rest, a n s ihle for •et, l ac eli, relocations, or removal of any cpmppnent of any irrigation water system in conflict with the — suired work to t71e let!sfact`on of the City Engineer and cne owner of the water system. 9. The Develo o er shell be responsible for removal of all loose rock and other deDr'.s from the ouo!ic rignt -of -way. io. The Developer shall D'an[ and ""tall parkw ey :reps as directed by the .. Ommuni[y 7eveloDment Director. il. The improvement security to be fpraished by the Developer to guarantee comoletion of the terms of this pgePm en! shall be subject to the aoorovai of the City 4ttPrney. -he prin- CiOal amount Of said 1mprOvement security shall not pe less then the amount shown: • r"%N%" /9 • FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE Type: P,incioal Amount: S3,000.00 lame and address of sire:y: MATERIAL AND LABOR TYp e: p't,cioal Ars."t: S1,300.00 Name and address of suety: CASH DEPOSIT 40NUMENTATIOR 'ype: nr 4clpil +TOOnt: Name anj address of sirety: TO BE POSTED PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY :N '41TIESS HERSOF, the dart'es Hereto 'na +e caused these presen is to be duly efecuted and a.knov ledge aith a'I reg,red by 1aM on the dates,41 fOrtn OP111ite their s•,ritUres. 0 ate h.��S kV ty Z2*q Z� , Developer 7 •es, camr ,:gnu ve step / / late Mtit �S fi(/!y rina.t} .�Z......+—� 0eve'3oer Th ep Accented: C'ty of �anc60 EOCamor Ea, $37:f Jrnia A wunicioal COrporat•o^ By: , Mayor Attest: MAY '.W C Approved: / �/ ... .�.>� NAB i>x / -,ty tr ^nr OEVELOPER'S SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED ao J SNGINEERING INSPECTION FEE SUB TOTAL RESTORATION/DELINEATION CASH CONTINGENCY COSTS DEPOSIT (REFUNDABLE) FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND (100%) MONUMENTATION SURETY (CASH) LABOR AND MATERIAL BOND (50%) Mvsuant to City of Rancho Cuc"d Municipal Code, Title 1, Chapter 1,08, edupting San IemRdlno Eoantr Code TItIH, Chapters 1.5, a Cash restoration /dellmetim deMit shall be ea" prior to Issuance of an Engineering Constriction Remit. r_ Revised ' i " 7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING DIVISION ENCROACHMENT' PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE • For Improvement: 7735 Calle Ctarin Date: 5/1/84 - omputed by: wartln File Reference: a e -drin City Drawing No. ' NOTE: Dols not Include current fee for Riting pemit or pavement deposits QUANTITY UNIT ;TEN PR I[E AMOUNT L.G. P.C.C. curb - 12" C.F. 24^ gutter 7,25 L.F. P.C.C. curb • B" C.F. 24" gutter 6.00 L.F. P,C.C. curb only 5.50 L.F. A.C. berm 4.50 S.F. 4" P.C.C. sidewalk 1.75 S.F. Drive approach 2.50 S.F. O" P.C.C. crass gutter (inc, curb) 3.40 C.Y, Street excavation 1.50 C.Y. ;,ported embankment L50 S.F. Preparation of suegrade 0.15 S.F. Crushed agg, base (per inch thick) 0,03 TON A.C. ;over 1300 tons) 27.00 TON A.C. (900 to 1300 tons) 35.00 TON A.C. (500 to 900 tons) 45.00 TON A.C. (under 500 tons) 50.00 S.F. A.C. (3" thick) 455 S.F. Patch A.C. (trench) 1.75 S.F. 1• thick A.C. overlay 0.30 EA. Adjust sewer manhole to grade 250.00 EA. Ad3ust sewer clean out to grade 150.00 EA, Adjust water valves to grade 75.00 EA. Street lights 1000.00 L.F. 5500 ,in) Barr is odes (od 1.00 L.F. header 2 . 41 redwood header ,-5 S.F. Removal of A.C. pavement 3.35 L.F, Removal of P.C.C. curb 3.30 L,F, Removal of A.C. berm EA. Street signs 0.0 200.000 EA. Reflectors and ousts 75.00 L.F. Concrete black wall 25.00 S.F. Retaining all 27.00 TON Aggregate base 7.00 Concrete structures 425.00 L,F, 1B" RCP ;2000 J) 29.00 L.F, 24" RCP (1500 0) 35,00 L.F. 36" RCP (2000 D) 49.00 L.F. 48" RCP (1200 D) 75.00 EA. Catch basin W • 4' 2900.00 EA. Catch basin W = d` 2900.00 EA. Catch basin W , 22' 4500.00 _ EA. Local deoressipn 4- 500.00 EA. Local deores%ion 12' 1000.00 EA. Junction structure ;000.00 EA. Outlet structure, Std 1506 :500.00 EA. Outlet structure, Std .507 500.00 EA. Guard posts 40,00 Guard panel (wood) 25.00 L.F. Sawc ut 2.00 EA. weadwall !48" wing) 4000,00 L.F. Redwood header 1.75 S.F. Landscaping 4 i- 4gation 2.75 �... Roll curb IP,C -C 7.50 SNGINEERING INSPECTION FEE SUB TOTAL RESTORATION/DELINEATION CASH CONTINGENCY COSTS DEPOSIT (REFUNDABLE) FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND (100%) MONUMENTATION SURETY (CASH) LABOR AND MATERIAL BOND (50%) Mvsuant to City of Rancho Cuc"d Municipal Code, Title 1, Chapter 1,08, edupting San IemRdlno Eoantr Code TItIH, Chapters 1.5, a Cash restoration /dellmetim deMit shall be ea" prior to Issuance of an Engineering Constriction Remit. r_ Revised ' i " 7 I LE DAWN HOMES 509 9,, ONt.•PIO. CA 91)61, r ? cc I�u9pG12'— "`000509"' •,:122239611": 001.11004301"• RESOLUTION NO. D V - /6 i A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO • CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 7735 CALLE CLARIN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration, an Improvement Agreement executed on May 15, 1984, by Leonard Quarells, as developer, for the improvement of public right -of -way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located at 7735 Calle Clarin; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said real property. WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Agreement and said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. • PASSED, APPROVED, and AOOPTEO this 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Authe et, City Clerk jaa On D. Mike s, Mayor a3 • • 0 CITY OF RANCHO CtiCA.NfONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara 'drall, Engineering Technician ,tp ��c+m °tic !9%? SUBJECT: Approval of A Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement submitted by James Previti for a lot line adjustment on the property located on the east side of Hellman Avenue, south of Base Line Road James Previti has submitted the attached lien agreement to guarantee the future improvements on Hellman Avenue in connection with a lot line adjustment on the property located on the east side of Hellman Avenue, approximately 300 feet more or less south of Base Line Road. -hese improvements will be installed at the time of building permit issuance on the property, RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign same. ResAEctfully subm..ytted, Attachments ';�q .i. i,l LINVILLE - SANDERSON & ASSOCIATES sx¢sr eo or 9587 Arrow Rot-% Suite H RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA 91730 csraurloe. (714) 980.1211 I sr�.. <ys.' %E.: '•.v, ;b 208- 43i -3o 1 iN'(fl -i 1 I L / Fi, - •IC. I -i -� cFnct _� � - - -- • y.I WW.14L C\RCE L 31' >'F 37 /c EX ,, l > km AIrIA = 1. °1L% qG. AheA = 1- 200 Ac. jextolr - l �• 1 J r-geh ' 0. 95,`3 AC-- I f � FFGFEi_t `/ LI pIE WDI4ATE5 PFbPOSe L) LJT --LIME PD• wA5 M%CATED PcK PM• 4"M L7 11.OM.- 'YtI�� r+YM • RECORDING REQUESTED RY: and WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF- RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. 0. Box 807 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730 REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of . 19_, by and between James P. Previti (hereinafter referred to as "Developer *), and the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), provides as follows; WHEREAS, as a general condition precedent to the recordation of Lot Line Adjustment No. 181, the City requires the • construction of missing off-Site street improvements including curb, gutter, asphalt paving, sidewalk, street lights and appurtenant work adjacent to the property to be developed; and WHEREAS, the Developer desires to postpone construction of such improvements until a later date, as determined by the City; and WHEREAS, the City is agreeable to such postponement provided that the Developer enters into rois Agreement requiring the Developer to construct said improvements, at no expense to the City, after demand to do so by the City, which said Agreement shalt also orovide that the City may construct said improvements if the Oeveloper fails or neglects to do So and that the City shall have a lien upon the real property hereinafter described IS security for the Developer's performance, and any repayment due City. 1 ("14ft a. ;4 YON, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE: • 1. The Developer hereby agrees that he will install off.site street improvements including curb, gutter, asphalt paving, sidewalk, street lights and appurtenant work in accordance and compliance with all applicable ordinances resolutions, rules and regulations of the City in effect at the time of the installation. Said improvements shall be installed upon and along Hellman Avenue. 2. The installation of said i-crovements she: I. be completed no later than one (1) year following written notice to the Developer from the City to commence inst&llatIOn Of the same, installation of said improvements shall be at no expense to the City. 3, In the event the Developer shall fail Or refuse to • complete the installation of Said improvements in a timely Tanner, City may at any time thereafter, upon giving the Developer written notice of its Intention to do So, enter upon the property hereinafter described and complete said improvements and recover all costs of completion ivcurred by the City from the Developer. 4. To secure the performance by the Developer of the terms and conditions of to is Agreement and to secure the repayment to City of any funds which may be expended by City In completing said improvements upon default by the Developer hereunder, the Developer does oy these presents grant, bargain, sell and convey to the :ity, in trust, the following described rea' oroperty situated in the City of Rancho :,C3'0,gA, County of San 3ernardino, State of California, t,wlt: Parcel 4 of Parcel Map 4951 In the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, as per Map recorded In Book 59, Pages 89 and 90 of Parcel Maps In the o/ }Ice • of the County Recorder of said County. Together with that certain portion of Parcel 0 of said Parcel Nap lying southwesterly of a line described as follows: Bra 2 l � �' Si lnaing at the Most northeasterly corner of said Parcel 7 (said point being 60.00 feet south of centerline Base Line Road); thence South 41' 24' 16• West 401.62 feet along said line of said parcel to the true point of beginning; thence North 48• JS' 48• West (at right angles to said line) 86.SS feet to a single point common to Parcels 2 and 7 of said Parcel Map and the terminus of said line description. 51 This conveyance is in trust far the purposes described above. 6, Nor, therefore, if the Developer shall faithfully perform all of the acts and things to be done under this Agreement, then this conveyance shall to void, otherwise, it shall remain in full force and effect and in all respects shall be considered and treated is a mortgage an the real property and the rights and obligations of the parties with respect thereto shall be governed by the provisions of the Civil Code of the State of California, and any other applicable Statute, pertaining to mortgages on real property, • 7. This Agreement shall be binding uoan and shall flare to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of each of the oarties hereto. 8. TO the extant required to ;lye effect of this Agreement as a mortgage, the ._,m "7ev e l oiler" mall be 'Mort g agar ^ and the City eh a 11 be the "ma r t gageer as those terms are used in the the Civil Cgde of the State of California and any other statute pertaining to mortalts an real property. 9. if legal action is commenced to enforce any Of the orovisions of this Agreement, to recover any sum whicn the City is entitled to recover from the Oevelooer hereunder or to foreclose the mortgage created hereby, then the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its rests and such reasonable • attorneys fees is shall be awarded by the Cuurt I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed • this Agreement on the day and year first above written. CITY DEVELOPER CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ' CALIFORNIA. a municipal 1 �-- By: James P. Prevrti o❑ D. Mikel, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM ATTEST: MAY 2 1 04 an( e, ever y A. A-ithelet VO City Clerk ................................ na)dou" K Is '10aw. ................................ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) On ,19_,btfole me the vn ers,gned votary Public, Personally appeared M 0. M N_L , personally known to me to be the Mayor of the CITY OF RANCHO C'JCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation, and known to me to be the Derson who executed the within instrument en behalf 11 • said tunicioal corporation, and acknowledged to me that Such municipal corporation executed it. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL Notary S,gnature STATE OF CALIFORNIA I Ss COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) On MAY 16, ,19_4 ,before me, toroth E. 31adle' the .,nor _ igne o ary Public personally appeared JAMES ?. ?REVtT'_ known t0 m @— ioTTi< ""1011 s, whole hame15 1A Su DSCr ibed 'J the .,thin instrument and acknowl<ged That `.e executed it 41TYESS NY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. PI•. a ^.e-'T 7 y a,gnatere NOTE:NHEN DOCUMENT IS EXECUTED DV A CORPORATION OR PARTNERSHIP, THE ABOVE ACRNOMLE06ENENT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. CORPORATIONVPARTRERSRI7— EORROlrEE08ENERT IS REQUIRED. a Imo. A9 RESOLUTION NO. %-ft- -03M 9 V —/S'° • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM JAMES PREVITI FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 181 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME WHEREAS, Lot Line Adjustment No. 181, located on the east side of Hellman Avenue, south of Base Line Road, submitted by James Previti was approved on June 6, 1984; and WHEREAS, Installation of off -site improvements established as prerequisite to issuance of building permit has been met by entry into a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement by James Previti. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California does accept said Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement, authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign same, and directs the City Clerk to record same in the Office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984. • AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Authe et, City Clerk jaa 40 ion D. Mike s, Mayor 30 n u • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 1984 - I9 %7 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: John Martin, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Approval of Bonds, Agreement and Agreement of Improvement submitted by Citation Homes for Tract Nos. 12238 and 12530 located on the west side of Hellman Avenue between Church Street and the Southern Pacific Railroad Tracks The attached bonds, agreement and final map of Tract Nos. 12238 and 12530 and construction agreement for additional street work on Hellman Avenue are Submitted herewith for Council approval. The project is a division of 19 acres of land into 74 lots located on Hellman Avenue and Church Streets. These subdivisions were tentatively approved by the Planning Commission on December 14, 1983. The bond amounts submitted are as follows: Faithful Performance Labor & Material Tract 12228 $447,200.00 $223,600.00 Tract 12530 S 84,000.00 S 42,000.00 Off -site S 33,648.00 $ 16,824.00 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Tract Nos. 12238 and 12530, accepting the bonds and agreement and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign on behalf of the City. Respectfully s4mitted, L .JM:jaa Attachments 3/ 0 • G 3 J 12530 I - i I' 1. N�7, CITY OF RANCHO CllCAbIO1NCA tic 2 p ENGINEERING DIVISION ` � � VICINITY MAP page 32 Central School District MISTRATION ADIN Fronk A. Coeur, J(. �57 Fool hill BI•d, - Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91770 - (7141989-6541 a.n••n sneo.M....r John A. McClary burmnr Sroe.nrenNnr. hnen.er Thomas W. Garn ell o. Fd.O. March 6, 1984 Date LETTER OF CERTIFICATIOIJ FOR SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPACITY s Within Central School District and Central School District attendance boundaries for the following described project: Developer -•rr !•r. c•^ . M2• 1STrc Location/Description Tract No. 12238 - SS Chu- h/14S Hellman Number of Nelliag Units _ Seventy -four 741 cinple f nil Anticipated Completon Date June 1985 • Gentlemen: The Central School District hereby certifies that it will provide capacity for 44,4 students in grades K -6 Living in housing units to be constructed in the above residential development. This certification is given on the condition that: 1) The developer and district have executed the "Agreement for Financing Public School Facilities and Establishing Interim Fees" and 2) The developer continues to comply with the terms and conditions of the Agreement. The commitment of this 'letter shall expire ninety (90) days from the date of this letter. However, the district agrees to issue further Letters of Certification to this d ^_-eloper so long as the executed Agreement between developer and district remains in effect. This Letter of Certification for School District Capacity shall be nonassignable and all assignments are null and void. Approval of the final map or the issuance of building permits by the City of Pantho Cucamonga within the 90 -day period shall validate such commitment to this developer. Sincerel.J, cc: City of Rancho Cucamonga Frank A. Cosca Superintendent 12/63 AOnm or Trust((% Jack tAtUvey Lawrence W. ounon Ruth A. Mutter Glon F. Ogden Pa(ndo J. Wright Ir1U1(nl Pal MrMM MowNT MrnrM 33 March 6. 1964 Date LETTER OF CERTIFICATION FOR SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPACITY Hithin Central School District and Central School District attendance boundaries for the following described project: • Developer THE :JEST CCNPANIES Local icn /Description Tract No. 11530 - NS Church /WS Hellman Number of Dwelling Units __Fyv r5g, 1 Fr io F�m�j -y Anticipated Completion Date Gentlemen: • The Central School Cstrict hereby certifies that it will provide capacity for n students in grades K -8 living in 'nausing units to be constructed in the aoove residential development. -,his certification is given on the conditicn that: 1) The developer and district have executed the "Agreement for Financing Public School Facilities and Establishing interim Fees" and 2) The developer continues to comply with the terms and conditions of the Agreement. The commitment of this letter shall expire ninety (90) days from the date of this letter. However, the district agrees to issue further Letters of Certification to this developer so long as the executed Agreement between developer and district remains in effect. -his letter of Certification for School District Capacity shall be nonassign able and all assignments are null and void. Approval of the final map or the issuance of building permits by the City of Fancho Cucamonga within the 90 -day pariod shall validate such commitment to this develo -en. cc: City of Rancho Cucamonga 12/83 Sincerely, 7� Frank A. Cosca Superintendent no +lo or 141ST@1 • Jack McNelvq levnenee W. Duuan Ruth A, Munn Glon E. Ogden Pamela J. Wright IrrulrM Clad Mr,naM MHnM1a M.nBr 3`{ District ADMINISTRATION Central School Frank A. Cocm, Jr. 9457 Foothill BI-d. - Rancho CMcamongo, CA 91730 - 17141 989 -8541 0nu•u J.on,.•..c.., John A. M<Clary A, .•... 1 Sweeen•u,nr. Inur Thomas W. Garnett.. N.D. Annonr Supp.men0enr, Irnnen Srnrn March 6. 1964 Date LETTER OF CERTIFICATION FOR SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPACITY Hithin Central School District and Central School District attendance boundaries for the following described project: • Developer THE :JEST CCNPANIES Local icn /Description Tract No. 11530 - NS Church /WS Hellman Number of Dwelling Units __Fyv r5g, 1 Fr io F�m�j -y Anticipated Completion Date Gentlemen: • The Central School Cstrict hereby certifies that it will provide capacity for n students in grades K -8 living in 'nausing units to be constructed in the aoove residential development. -,his certification is given on the conditicn that: 1) The developer and district have executed the "Agreement for Financing Public School Facilities and Establishing interim Fees" and 2) The developer continues to comply with the terms and conditions of the Agreement. The commitment of this letter shall expire ninety (90) days from the date of this letter. However, the district agrees to issue further Letters of Certification to this developer so long as the executed Agreement between developer and district remains in effect. -his letter of Certification for School District Capacity shall be nonassign able and all assignments are null and void. Approval of the final map or the issuance of building permits by the City of Fancho Cucamonga within the 90 -day pariod shall validate such commitment to this develo -en. cc: City of Rancho Cucamonga 12/83 Sincerely, 7� Frank A. Cosca Superintendent no +lo or 141ST@1 • Jack McNelvq levnenee W. Duuan Ruth A, Munn Glon E. Ogden Pamela J. Wright IrrulrM Clad Mr,naM MHnM1a M.nBr 3`{ Letter of Certification of School District Capacity and Nithia the Cha_`fev Joint Union a tterdance bounaar:es for the Al a Loma Hioh School o.:ow:nq descrioe.. project: Location /Description: Tract 812238 Hellman Ave. Between Church 6 Baseline Rancho Cucamonga, CA Number of Dwellings: 74 •Anticipated completion Date: unknown The school district hereby certifies that the capacity for 11 students will bo provided certification is Given coc.p.euon of the above pr ) on the condition the Leroy G. Greene1Lease /PurchaseoAct fund the F in such s. er that the State of 1976, or any successor Act, Allocation Board may fund all school building pro]epoi ^u9der its cnrre. ^.t rules and requLatiorta without Priority g0 days frcm tha The cc-. of this capacity shall expire date of this letter. Aooroval o_' the final mao or the issuance of building permits by the City of Rancho Cucamonca within that 90 -day period shall validate such commitment. fir: ^-Indent Super:n teade. ^.t /:sst. •,� by Dianne Allen cc: Plane. inc Dis isicr. � � City of Rancho Cucamonca • 3S UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT CHAFFEY J�Nt On1 MgT NiTM P,FFT. OMia110 GLIFORM..i>•i „�. •. •e• cn +.v « ..c.• • +mv.umm* av c w .nr ao. c.,,ces i w .v,T,m.n, .•ry o:v February 16, 1984 Ronald Martin Assoc. Box 157 E1 Toro, CA 92630 Letter of Certification of School District Capacity and Nithia the Cha_`fev Joint Union a tterdance bounaar:es for the Al a Loma Hioh School o.:ow:nq descrioe.. project: Location /Description: Tract 812238 Hellman Ave. Between Church 6 Baseline Rancho Cucamonga, CA Number of Dwellings: 74 •Anticipated completion Date: unknown The school district hereby certifies that the capacity for 11 students will bo provided certification is Given coc.p.euon of the above pr ) on the condition the Leroy G. Greene1Lease /PurchaseoAct fund the F in such s. er that the State of 1976, or any successor Act, Allocation Board may fund all school building pro]epoi ^u9der its cnrre. ^.t rules and requLatiorta without Priority g0 days frcm tha The cc-. of this capacity shall expire date of this letter. Aooroval o_' the final mao or the issuance of building permits by the City of Rancho Cucamonca within that 90 -day period shall validate such commitment. fir: ^-Indent Super:n teade. ^.t /:sst. •,� by Dianne Allen cc: Plane. inc Dis isicr. � � City of Rancho Cucamonca • 3S CHAFFEY JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT o }I NR FIFTH STREET. ONTAq, 4L1101H41111 D O.•..Iw Wtinwra+unr, O 0 0 0 0 vtfu nmvc• Wu a awa._(•, • \L1w 4 t..�TM [D VCa }IO N.I [LIIV ICI4 CEN1LH� .w ONE Ir raI ,1 D1 L11 p1wD O, tNV,I[[t 'AII.;I11 L[N..D w .Oaa I vi.',I ,N t 1iJlR .lAT C .,u TIN . CJwa C..,wLH 1 —.y.,. . TNVIT[I, w,. ,•.NIO NAT•«IV "Na*. February 16, 1984 Ronald Martin Asso Box 157 E1 Toro, CA 92630 Letter of Certification of School District Canacitv Within the Chaffev Joint Union Hich School District and the Alta Loma HTOnc oo attenaance boundaries for tie o'.:1 r,g cescrlcec protect: :.ccaticn /Description: Tract X12530 Hellman between Church b Baseline Rancho Cucamonga Number of Dwellincs: 5 • .Ant_ .Dated Cempleticr. Date: unknown T.el sc -col district herehv certifies that the capacity for stacents will he provided within 24 months of t: ^.e of the above protect. This certification is given on the condition that the State of California continues to fund the provisions of the Leroy G. Greene Lease /- urcnase Act . 1976, or any successor Act, in such manner that tie State Allocation Board may fund all school huildinc projects under its current rules and reculations without cricrity points. The cc= --meat of this capacity shall expire 90 days f the date of this letter. Approval of the final map or the issuance of buildinc oermlts by the Citv of Rar.chc Iucamcnaa with_a that =u-day period shall validate such cor. ^_taea t,. ,t 8;er_ntendect, Asst. Sipe— n— ..zent by Dianne Allen cc: �13nn.inr DL: 1910 n. cf Ranctic ..u..aacnca 6 IRA.J�AL.IL.LL��� • 3G iCUCAMONGA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT VICTOR A. CMERBAK. JR.. P.n — a February 10, 1984 City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Department P. 0. Box 607 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Re: Tract No. 12238 6 Tract No. 12530 Gentlemen: Vierpl, ROBERT NEUPELD S.-. Gr•e.,1 M.-, LLOYD W. MICHAEL AR n EARLS ANDERSON BEVERLY Y A E BRADEN CHARLES A WEST As requested by Ronald Martin S Associates, Engineers for the above referenced tracts, the Cucamonga County water District does hereby inform the City of Rancho Cucamonga that the proposed tract layouts will not interfere with the free exercise of the District's easements. Said easements being described per deeds recorded in Book K, Page 251: Book 754, Page 87; and Book 783, Page 256, all of deeds, If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact the undersigned. Yours truly, CUCAb1ONGA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT Fernando E. Cobos Engineering Aide III FEC:bf cc: Ronald Xartin s Associates • 3? 0 • • C'ry n° RA4C4C C'2CA -04GA p PROVE]EVT AGREEMZV FOR 'RAC' '.2570 tt CC ALL `ES 31 '4ESE PRESEt"S: That tn,t agreement 's ,aCg and e^ :erect ',to, , c3,00'.dnd! .,th tme o,o1,S•ont of the $.]T V•t•Or •,b Act of -`e State or Ca'iLf Orn,A, and 0' the e]p' u]'e Ore,rrces or the City o' Rancho Cvcampnga, CA',fe „,n, a n n.c"fl car pprat,om, by and between said City. ^ere�naltcr •N r•td to es one EI:y . aed CITATION MOMES�eiD +ere'na,tr referred to rt :sh mtTSESSE'v: - ,iA% '44EPEAS, WC 3eve'ooer Cestres to develop Certain real property 'e Sa-C C'ty as shown on --me cond :t:onal'y aooroved s.3d4,%s•on Inc., as Tract '2570 ; and u'AEREAS, sa•d City ,at mstabl,smed ce,ta•n regu,rementt to be met by Said ievelooer as prerecyls,Le to ADorovai of said S.Ociv,Sidn ge,eraily located at Peoper Street and •edam Avenue VON, T'ERST34E, it is hereby agreed by said City and by sa-c :evelo "I As r"! 7iiWooer me,eby agrees t0 conitrvct at nve'OOer-S efdent! a:i 'mDrove-01.5 deicr,ted on Page 6 here. c' .• - :1.1 tw <�1e non. ^s '•0m t,e e'reccive cafe hereof. 2. • +it agreement she'.: be ereective on time data Of the ^eso' t,o, r, tme 'pone ' or sa•o C•ty agorov,nq tm•.s Ai- eeme,t, -,•s agreement small be „ ce`ault on the day follow. :rs: amn•vertary Cate of ta-d ap,rova% unless an eeten. s,on of t'me has teen granted oy said City at hereinafter orov,o. ed. 3. ' "e Oeve'ooer may repoest an eftens'on of time to cpmp'ete tie te,mt ,ergo'. S.P ellcitit small be si,",ttec to : ^e i.;y ^ .—t At n • 'ets t,an GJ zo,% be,ore one eAO„at,on CAte ,er.o `, rd t,a'' contain a sta: :•ment of c :rciA- stances •etnss'ta1',nq tie eftent•On 0f •,e C':y shay ,ave .ne ,•g-: to review the ]ro,,s -ions of m.; s agreement, nctud•ng the COnftrvCt'om soand"CS, Cott t%t mule, and improvement security, Art to rega're AO;R ;n A,a :`erein tv err substantial Change has occurreit tur•nq tie tell 'Areal, C. f e tie iev'ooe, ea „s or neq'ects -0 comply .1th tme brov,t'bns or th's aq,ee -rt. :ne - ty sna'1 nave one r•Cmt At any t•mt to caese to o ],CV's'd ^s to be at by any 'a.fd' ,Pans• ant t"ereuooh liciver vrtm tme Jeve'oper and /or nis s.rety cast a,c efpe,te •ncurrec, S. The °ieve'opPr tball Drovi :g •etered water te,vlce to gal• 'Ot 00 sAid ceve'o] *r,; 11 Acc],<a,cA .'tn tme req+•at,ont, tc -ec. es, Ann lees o' :me :dcvonga rou,tl mater ]tstr,ct. 5. -AP ;evn'Yer s-A” be resoo,sib'e for reolacement, ,.✓OCA:'0•, air 101011 n ` A,s' e0,00 ^ert ,, Any •rr•gd:,or water syt ;e+ Cp _ ^co,st r'.:: n' Jv ooa raid •mOrpvenents to e sat'sract'o, Of m. a .'ty E me", arc t,e owner of sucm water system, LraRt and Con' /:aid. 0”, 32 0 7, ;vrovements recurred to be constructed Shall cd•f ^rm to -.It Standard ]rnwinys and Standard Speci'ic,tiaht of '•y, and to the ;•v orem en: plan apdraved be and am file +d d office a• • C'ty 'rg•. Said improvements are tabulateO an the Co *tV.ct•an arc 'laic Estimate, nereay incorporated on *age h h+reof, as taken er0* the imoravemeit ]:ant I'Sttd tnerean by rurier. 'h! )eve :lot• Na:' also be •es,onsibie for Cd•struc- tion of any trans t'a9s or Other incident, work beyond tie tract eo.maar+es as needed for safety and droner surface drainage. •rams or oem'fslon{ I ;SCOkeled dering conntructin sna11 be corrected .don t -e direction o' the City Eng"te'. Revised mark cue to said Plan maaif'catio-t she!' be covered oy the Previsions Of ti's agree^ent and secured by the Surety covering the original dlannea works. B. CO- S.fuctbr Pern''tS Sna" be obtained by the Oeve'ader '•n^ :re office o' :ne City Engineer prior to Start of work; ail eequ'atio,S listed :hereon she' be abservea, with attent•on given to IfetY procedures, Centro' of dust, anise, or at her nw i s an at to the arr. , and to proper not, It cIt, on o' Pup I I 'ties and City D"Artients. yal'ufe to comply with thl, Section shall be s'.i]dct to the aenaltieS provided therefor. 9. 'he :eve+ooer shall be responsible for removal of a': loose rocks and other ^eons "On Oup'riC rights- of.way within Or aC;ointrg said cevelop*ent reSL!tt!nq from word relative to salt development, :D. York do *e w'th'n existing street, Snap be ci :i gent'/ pursued to coro'etian; tie City small have the right • to C'" f :e dry did a" word 'n tie even: a' .Ijlutt,lied sae l ay in cam"et•an, anc to recover 111 Cost "a repent. in tarred from the Dere'ober anc /pr ' +t contractor ay any law'u; means. Sa-c :eve'ooer She" at at' times 'clicking dedica- t'a^ 0' tme Streets did ease *er'.s 'n lard s"idivision, up t0 the cohd'etlon and acceptance of said word or improvement by Said ' :y :a.rCl', 9•ve coca and adequate warning to the traveling Dub It Or eJ•.h and every dancers :s condition existent in SNo street or else *ein, nra fill protect the travelinq public from s.ch dei ive or Cahgerous conditions. the completion of a'1 •mprovrerts, herein incorporated on ba ^e 5 , to be oer`Orfed, a," of ,aid streets not accepted IS 'nirovements she be .rttr tme crarae of sate Developer. Said OQW02er may ease a , Or a portion a' dry Street tup'ect to the cpnditlohs contained in a temOOrvary street ciosd•e Permit, iisueo by try C'ty Ergineer, whenever it IS necessary to protect the public d iq tie construction of the improvements nere+n agreed to at lace. :? parkway tree, recu'red to be planted shall be *'.anted by the Jeve'aaer aster other morovement work, grading and c ear, mat Peed Competed. planting Shall be done as ^o,'cec by Cid•nance 'n eccorPance wit' the Planting diagram a*ororeu by tie :'tY Community Deve'dpme^t Director. •he Dei•ei*oer Thal: be reibont•b'e for maintaining all trees planted gOJd nee to ,rt+l the end o' the guaranteed ^a'itenance ofr•ae, or for one year after Plaiting, whichever is later. :7. ' ^e ]tre'bge, is rm5, ...... e or meeting all Cond!- t oh, e,tdD.'t'iet by tit City P,r Ldnt t0 tie Sv b, leis l on • .2. " a" 37 0 vao AC:, City Ord•ancet, and chit agreement 'or tie d"elODment. I'd 'or the 1411tenArte 0' a" iia•ovements Constructed ....... 4r u -tll tie impeavemert •t ACtebtec 'or ma`nt° "AAce by tie , enc no •r0.OVe`ent seUnty provided ^ereenw :n snail De • '!dtea Dl role Sant, acceot"ce ",a,% ot'a,wlse "w oed and Aut.Q,,Z.a by t•e C•.ty CO+nCil of the City, 'h`s agreement s,a li l0: term', , to ur•'` th! mYnteraact guarantee secure ty ne'einafter Ce%Cr'bed boon reilasec by t ^.e C'ty, o• uitt' A new Agreement together . h the ocaue rea •'provement t!cuni ty has been 4aom +tted to the City by A taece t t ar to tie ne ^!•n hate lC, a,a by let OlutiOh of the City Co. ^c•' same ias Dee, 1C000tId, Ana this agreement and the Improvement security therefor ras been released. IS. ime tnD ^brim en[ secur•ty to no furnished by the 9evelooer with t—, agreement shay. contest of the following and to al: be in a Iarm Acceptaole by the City Attorney: A. ro secure wa'tn'ul bt ^'oriance of this agreement. .. n bond or Dona% by one or more auiy autior,zed coraorate suret`es the 'orm and content vet" ea by Government Coat Section 66499.1, 2. : "ll,ement Security :nstrument in the form Aid cartent SWIfita Dy the "' -y Attorney. 3. A deloset Nth the City of money or negotiable ,Ore% of t ^.e 4'rC oproved for securing ceoes•t% or ovo'•C mon•<s. a. 'a trc.r. abort" and - ate••a!meni .. A bond on bona, by one ar more duly auCior•tC0 tailor Ate Suretie% •n the 'Orm area Cant ant • soec" iic by Gavemi -e ^: Cate Section 66499.1. j, Ar Drpvemen: SOCa^i:y :nstr,lent •M tie 'orm aid Content Spec•'eee by the City Attorney, 7. I ce"s :t w`:h City of money or megottAbte ,aid, of the 41nd aoorovea for securing C. A case 6eaos,t Y,tn tie City to 9u4rantee oayment ,y tie )PVPIOoer to the engineer ar surveyor Ymo%e cP• :•''ca:e abpe"S "a' tree Gina! Mao for :mn 4C : :•nC 0' all :0. ^.E.Iry 'at carrel, And St -,,t ce ^ten • ^e •ionoments arc •foe f,rn`tning cent• me t•e notes to the C•ty. ^,r amount of the a. nt 'lay De any "Our' colt •' -d Dy tre engineer or S.rveyo- as acce:twe ]ayient •l roil; a', A no ,Aloe Is submitted. tine Iasi Done shalt be at %hewn al tie Con Ytr„Ltlon ale Bond Estimate contained herein. C, J 54-0 cash deposit may be •e'andfd aS loan +s prone. C_ ^e Der ^its After retP•Dt by the City Of the Cei :en'`ne t•e notes AlC Y••tten tsS.Nnce of paymemt 'i ru'1 frcm the e19emeer or surveyor, 'b reeu•re.', Done% one the pr•neiod, Amounts tnereof Art set forth on page 6 me this Agrtt,ment. :6. 'he Cevelooer w+r•antt that line Ieorovements cesc —tee •n •'s agreement s ^a ' De 'lee 'ram defects In ^•a's and 10,1%n a o, Any Ahd All ldlt'on% of the is a r a we• '1 4V , 'I:rd :o be defwc ti se " t, 1 1 O,P 'II year e0'wi .Omg ant :It, on .1-ch the *Drove ^e^ts are accectec by tree City snail be e ^ni•da 01 rdD'acec by Jwver ode' 'ree d' ae: changes to t•n ty. , Ole' S9n" e^ fuesm A maintenance guarantee uteri ty • e I Sam ecue'. to :en oercent (10 %) of t1f COmltrbctiOn .3. Spa r� u et :l ^ate or 5277.0;, whenever is greater, to sec -;re the faithful Jer`D r+.a nc! a` 7efe "e,, -% Col ' got .... at oilsC, ,10 In this PaN- g•ar•. '•e ^mn :fnair, csaraieee tecurr -v 0W also Secure the 'a': xr`armance Sy tie le'll dO 0` eny .5' "attoa of tie :eve'OJer :0 Co VeC'`leo •Ork VIt' reSDeCt to any Darlway ^te ^a ^c! assess -e': C,s :r'ct. Otte till morovements have deer, dcCeOted Aid A -a-1tem Alct qudra•cee teunty not been aCCeb[CO Dy Me CIty, tie Otis- 110,ove'nen! securty f. esCnoed In this ,q,etll lay oe •fleeted ;1OVIdeG that SGCn re'•ease IS oMeeVtse a.tidrlted by -.he S.JD,v,S,on Vs, Act and any apDtlCAble city - •nancz. :7, viat 'tie !,,Wooer 1Lll •ate put and mainta,e such a, eV•te,te of .rcerstA•.c• ^p tie oeovlt'ons ]wile ''a]ility and aroperty Carafe 'isiramce as small protect and -, "I arc a ^y co ^tractor or S4000iiraCtpr Jer`Dreimg work covered ,v t t to Uma'v w sa -e, re S,J C'y'cer by 'r'S aCree ^elit `rbm C'., -S `or Prdpe•ty Caaages +MICR may the "Se oeca.Sr o` tie ^atuee o` tie wort or from OberatlOns under CatCr•ye, Pr DVeiPnt iPC.f':Y, is aq- eemeit, wne:ne• s+ci Ogeratleni be by himself or by any net contractor or svecpmtrnctor, or anyone nlee(t'y of Indirectly P- o.oy ^d by sa,c 1rrs0ns, even tneunn such aAmayrt be not caused oy tie led isence Of tie 0eve'ooer or any contractor or .a. LdCpntiectOr or Anyoie embloyld Dy told persons. The public "aJ "I =y aid Property eA*ACe lMSuf,MCe snot• ',,St the City At y/ accltona' lA%ureC and directly OrateCt tie City. Its dfflcerS, Acen -.s and e'ip'oyees, as well at the developer, his contractors aid rs ",Can:-ac-ors, and a`: insurance DollCies issued nereuncer sr..al' so state. [he wimtmum amounts of such Insurance she" be as `o!'ows: A. .rantractor'S 1VW"ty 'msu'a,ce 0,00ding bad "y • „ry o• neat^ 'ty ''slits o` mot 'ett tmo 577C.7C^ `or each person and 51,000,000 for tags accice't or Occ.iieile, aid orooerty damage laabll. '.Y Ilh':S Of lot less tliAn 5'00,700 for each acCi- dent or Occurrence wit! in aggregate limit of 525.,00: for c'e'ps iri•dm may arise from the Ceara. doss at tie 7eveloper `n -he performance of the wills ie'e•M provided. 9. Au:amCJ•'e 'late —,ty Insurance covering all Vei'C'es .see 'n the a,lorea,ce of this agreement P•ov,fi' ^d :Cc.,y jury •ad" 'ty imps 04 not is t' <n 51;0,7 "+0 `or each aerson and 5700,000 for each Act ce ^: or occurm!mce, And prope•ty damage t•aoI''ty '."its of not 'a ss than 250,000 for each acc:dem: or occur•ence, wltn an aggregate of not lest !hen 5'C0,0 ;C wm cn nay an st from tie opera. t'Ont df tie )a of Or r,'4 Comt N Ct or IA perbrming the nor, Drov,dec for nereln. :5. "hat 2e`ore tie execution of this agreement, the :eVe'pyr tna ", file wits the C'ty a cart' "Cate or certificates o` I^s,raze cover•nq the spec✓ 'td •nsueamce. EACH Soto bear am ercorsewent oreclud %mg the .aice`'At ohs. o• •et,ct,2, ii cove•age or any oollcy evidences :a s,cm Ceet,`icate, befo•e the e,o'rat-on of thirty (70) days i -tP, tie r'ty tile" nave rece'vel, io :ification by registered *e, `rod tie 'nsur,I11 ca r•ie•. a, eV•te,te of .rcerstA•.c• ^p tie oeovlt'ons conca•iea nereln, and ,v t t to Uma'v w sa -e, re S,J C'y'cer IAS Submi tt fa the CatCr•ye, Pr DVeiPnt iPC.f':Y, and has affixed net .a. - y/ 0 FAITHFUL PERFORMAMCE 'ype: i•rnc+aar Amount: $84,000 Nave are address of sarety: mATER:AL ASO LA30R PAYMENT Type: principal Amount: $42,000 Vale arc acd•ess of s.-ety: CASH DEPOSIT MON9MENTA7:OX Type: Pr1 "c1pa! Amount: Yale and add ^ss 0` surety: MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE 'ypl; 7rrntrpal Amount: Aamt and address of surety: TO BE POSTED PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE Be THE CITY :N .f'NSSS MEREOF, tee Dirt ies he•eto have caused these •ate +ts to be de'y eaecutee and acanowleaged w:tn a ". . 'a ne'r :•es •e4.•,eo by a1Ii°A�I NAOil��a. -tn hQp opposite their s:gra t r e s. Oa:e by .Developer F. G. LiMUM , Sr, Deytialroment winger :e LL! by ,Oeveloper 3nat.re need AccePttd: C'ty or Rancho Cucamonga, ca, —0,14 A vurnd'Oal Cprporatton 3y; eayor -'ty . e•. OEYE:OPER'S S:0NAT9RE -.ST 3E NOTARIZED •5• A �� F:•v nF 0MCYC CCCAwOYGA • CCA'S•R!'.':CV ES" :1A'! 51CROAC :.YE\' PrBvr- rr SCvnl. c CCSI _,Y•: YSSVCY CCS•S FA: ",FU: PSRFn_RwAVCE SCRE7Y (,nom! '-ASCA AND vA MAL SEr_7R:'Y 15C-) EVG:VEER:VG :VSPEr_T:CV FFr •RCS•^PA-:^- V /M..:YEA••CN CAS4 nrynS7 P.EF7 \GAELS; S75,449 7,545 31, Og4 94,100 42,^ -00 .Parsuvt to C ^y tie Rdncno Cucamonga v'mic'oa' Code, -'•le :, Cnaoter 1,08, acoenr'g San Sernaratno COUn:v Coce • t'es. :haeters ' -S, a cash restora- 'o ^ /^- a c'reat'or :ecoslt s ^al' 4e nace oaor to -ss.a^ce Of an Sngsnewng :G^str.c -!,, Plrn•t, -6- �.,� Y3 • Far :morCveront oe: Tact 1Z530 Date: ..,,,:e- rile .e erence: C y Cwg. vo.�: - -- YOiE: Does not Include current lee 'or writing :ern•: or Pavement ceoosits. CCYS•R :'C• :OV r -CS' SS•:YA•E ^CAS± CY:• !'Y:' COS' S AYOOV+ Remove 5.1st. j4" P.C.C. Cur! 677 3,30 2,234 Corst. 3" A.C. /4" A.B. 5,798 S.F. 0.72 4,110 a ^st. 3" R.C. /CPmoacsed Y.S. 2,862 S.F. 0.64 1,332 :a ^s:. l2" C.F. Curti S Gutter 571 - - 7.25 4,:40 Ccns:. ^_.' C - C.IP d 5 tter 9 ' 5.00 1,074 :ors -. 4" P.C.C. S'dewa•k 6,112 S.... 1,75 7,794 ,s:. 5" P.:... Crave APProach ,068 5. °. 2,50 2,670 tins:. !" P _ ;utter A Soercrel ,.15 S.F. 3,40 3,553 S'cewalt Lar ^- • ^g /oanP 101 1.75 'IS 2' -0" Dec. Corc. 514, Ret..All 737 —F. 55.00 40.2C5 inter 9cewela Cra•n 1 EA 21500.00 2,500 rnl s^ S :nsta- Street L'ghts 3 EA 1.000.00 3.000 a ^st. 8" C,,S Cn'Y -,F. 5.50 -0- :ons :. rars't!0n 8 " -'2" Curbs only 110 5.50 605 ?grove East. r P.C., , Sicewar-s :ending -yoe "V" - S,F, 3.30 -0- :^sta'.7 Revlec•-ve var'cers - EA 35.00 -0- Cons:. 5' :ecorat•.ve 3'ock 4a1' - - 35. CC Cons:. 6' 'te. Cont. 3'Pr..al' - - 22,00 e- Const. 2' Std. Cenc. rock ?et, 'Wall - yn, :n • Sawcut A.C. S Rnave e'36" A.C. 3,, 677 c 677 ?grove Exist 5ec••3^. S.F ,CO 0,35 - Place 15 Gallon Paraway •reel '2 EA 70.00 840 Pace Sop Signs I EA !00.10 :CO Corst. 2" A.C. Cao - 1,33 -0- Piece Street Na-e Signs EAF 200, CO 200 Street Excavation <OC -. 50 CCSI _,Y•: YSSVCY CCS•S FA: ",FU: PSRFn_RwAVCE SCRE7Y (,nom! '-ASCA AND vA MAL SEr_7R:'Y 15C-) EVG:VEER:VG :VSPEr_T:CV FFr •RCS•^PA-:^- V /M..:YEA••CN CAS4 nrynS7 P.EF7 \GAELS; S75,449 7,545 31, Og4 94,100 42,^ -00 .Parsuvt to C ^y tie Rdncno Cucamonga v'mic'oa' Code, -'•le :, Cnaoter 1,08, acoenr'g San Sernaratno COUn:v Coce • t'es. :haeters ' -S, a cash restora- 'o ^ /^- a c'reat'or :ecoslt s ^al' 4e nace oaor to -ss.a^ce Of an Sngsnewng :G^str.c -!,, Plrn•t, -6- �.,� Y3 • 9ONO 90. 6398388 PRrMILN: 5630.00 4y -[� =n S, tn.e :'ty Co: ^c'' o` tine ;':Y of qan COO Coc among a, St ale d` :a'''c' ^'a, arc n-dt'pY HOMES A Pa rtne���P 'P'q• -al'^• Ce5'S ^d :eC d5 ':a " `dv2 PntP ^PE nt0 a•1 •Cignees ac•ePTen: a ^e -eDl or'rt' :A to tr,tail and comOlete :P•: din east 5-. A tad J'd'td Imd T.,eIUntF, '• :CN Said a r eem en t, cA :ad :99w and 'oer.t'IIlo as pro,. 0C. '� > ;= is na•edy referred to I'd Cabe a Jd :r,`P'2O' ;d'C, u4ri:A3, said o IlC•dal •s "C., led Inter t "e terms of fa'd dorm. -. -t to `,., •'sn d acrd for t-! !a rt a'ml performance of said agree ^e -:. :v- we t ^e p, ,Cldal and - n -. Ame111a0 a Covany 5C, - ` < loran -ancno as t]xety, A" ne'd eno ir.'y sou no ,to the Ityn .ca -C'ca ; '^a'ter CA "ed "[Icy "S, n tee Penal tlm of _ -ty -4 r r.S9anC and ra '0C - - - - - - - - po7?'r, 7 ray o ire .rl nc ate t, —�[�e payment -on aSIT o' n •e" c 'y to xe Tape, we p,na ourselves, our -e• -s. successo^s,a elecrutors and aemin'stratdrs, jointly And severs'ly, f, T'y oy trese presents. -ne CO -C"-on of tlrl o0'igat•on •S suCn that if the a1,ofe ''C'Pa', n•s P• ItS It'll, P{eCutcfS, April IStratar5, %— CAOSO•S Cr ASS —IS, Ya'1 ^, a', "'•'I(S Stand to and 49tCP 3y, a ^d we u'y den art derrarm :le COVenan :S. CUnd•tIOIS a ^d oV1 i'O +s In tie va - c ]tree -ent ant Any A terat'on : -eeedf mace as :nere'c pr ,Cat. or His or their tart, to be kept and • ]e -'rred A' t^P '• ^e ale n the TAnne, tne" , spec i`iea, and In i" ^eitaCtt ACCprc It td ene•r true t -tent and meaning, and s -a'1 • ^pewn•`y and save na^n'ns sty, its officers, agents and :'pyees, as tr"e'n st19e'ated, tree th's aa'•Sattan tna'!' 3e:a-e •a ^d Yc'd; alherw' � .Se, . sna" oe and remain in full `p- Ce,anc effect. AS a :a ^t o' : ^e ot" yat•on sec. Ile ne ^ety and •n additlon to : ^e `ace d^dunt STE:- Pr, tIeIT'or, :re ^e sla I 'T incise[ costs O^ a^] ^eaidrdo'e a :or M1es a•c lees. ^eASaO'le Attorney's ^`y `oef, Cy : ScctOtt''. 3 rcrrg sLcn oO "gat'on, d" to pt taxed as Cas :S Alt .ceC '^ dry ;,CgItlt rendered. Wlety e,"y S-1'pu -Alas And agrees t'IAt no Change, Patt- nJSTATEOrCALIFORNIA 1t5 I any 55 C, 4 -1 C04NiV OFC i/e [(� 1) // ^ .ne [' Nail P•uClK .r and for Ilia caunlY anA flit% o.rfon•Ily laaSaM.A +�- _ �_rc � �� __oa,ur•ai dm. �Or omaaio ne on me muMm f.nn•ciorV Ed by nr6e:,eCrE' - :,:Lt cis �] e• «Ilm mew•m„ loyaa v1. wn -e m'o sue wn.e'+roaor'no+. lo.. rc yrn ICRTi10H eCMES. T. wnnsr 1r� o ln•I.r LC UlaL ll,e nan,n nfir's m e�i•no aL ]numNa9]a ,r•x {14 0M?A4}' - wnremnm mm.'. ua lama •] fur S Ann CIhM wn ^ In 1n]n,Ln unn n.nro P•cNaa Ina San. gYr,n pRN ewr `n4y wa,.. wln. alp 'A anus +'r ^^ 1••wm N+'r M TUFT •wnVf. _ a / Maxx yexw +w a. x.n OUn'A � S:GhA'.d i5 MuST 9E NO'hP: (fJ 4y i BOND Yo. 6390388 98E.IL^f: : "chid L0.900. hNO MA'Eg LAIMEY 30YG ,'-'q :AS, t ^e C'ty C011C'' 0' ' +e Cr tY o' 4arcro Cucamonga, St ate o' :aii,011'a, a•- C:'A71ON HOMES, a pa,t,e,ship ^e• ^^ : , r def'glatec as "pr'r c' :a "I+ area ^to an a ;rx = ^e ^i mlere>y )n .11c., arrees to t '-va' and complete ,aria'-. designated o10 "c ,mo- ove -et tt, on sa,d agreement, Gated �i8 and 'Cent: "ed as dnoJed: 'S -are], - •e erre- :0 and made a part 'arE;"AS, .nde- the ten-s If sa-d ag- eement, 0r-nc •.;a! is - ecu,•ec oefd -e art in no dot tie oe- 'dnrance of t "e .01x, to '''e a Sooc and s."•cvnt paymert cone, v t "e City of gancno :uca-orca to sec. -e t ^e :'a'•t to c^ :nce 't mare in Coe,- e ^ : :-; Sect on e „ rt 4 of v,s -,d- a o' a -.v tote o' t+e State of Ca �10 -n �a. NN, +EgE °:1 E, in 'C e^nc ^dd' and t ^e anders`gned as a Co- :elate s +r°ty, are -e'd f --y bo1 ^E a ^to tie C,ty of ga,cho - :a,orga are a1' Ci,traCtors, i' +nCn "tl.ctort, 'ado -eri. -at :l'a're" an: of "er pn•iori employed 'n tnr oerformdnCe o' the alo-es a,c agreement arc referred to tre aforeta',c Code e' :roced.re '.n to tam of coy -too tnousane and no /'00 - ;dV n lart ;S C2.::0_) r s r mate t `. 's-,ec on door e"<r ern of a•y "no. or a- oa ^,ic.e a^dee one .nemd'oyment ltsurance Act - esoect to "on vo ^t or 'aDo•, t "d: sa d surety .1', `, pay one lane ,n an amount not oxide; 11 t ^e amount neee,na "ve set fort", a -: also p case cvt 't brdagnt 1001 gn'i bone W, Day ,n is :r re, • -o t^e 'ace a -cant t- ereof, costs and reatora0'e 1denles And `ees, 'rC .d'-.; nedlondo'e attxney's lees, ',ncl+ Oa " :'ty " S.cdess'.', y ed ore' ^d sec', do gat,on, td 0e a.arded .1 • A- 'red :y the Cou -t, and V c De taie as Cott& and to De ' -c' +red ,d tle J +4.-ent ttere`n relder24. •' 'S lereiy er on! is'y St' :.'ated and 4,,e,e t °at tt,, bond S ^a' -re to t ^e .bend "t Df ary a ^d a" oe•id ^i. Co,oan'es arc - colat'd-s e- t'tled td '1'e C'11-t a -der ' r'e :i (d,mmenc'no Sect or ;,32 , 1 dart 4 o' " 'r,,cn : of tn. :'v" Coce, so as to e a -'get It act-on to tun on tre•r ass's gna in ary suit o -c + ;1t eion 'inI JanC. S1011d t ^.e Cond-t'or d' tt,s eorc :e 1a "y oeredrm.ee, then ^'s do'-gat'on s^a ' c ^c: -e nu­ a "c volt, otner.,se 't sna',1 oe a -d ra-a,+ ,� 'jilt" . c e'feca. - ^e s,nety •ereby st'ou'ates and -aes t "at no c "anee, e.ten,­n o' t 'me, alto -at'cn v ace '-'•^ to one terms of se'd ag- ee -e ^t on t ^e sor.c.'. :a :'ont acccnoe-y'ng tre sane t"a{, a-y ^.ann n.r affect 'ti oo'' ;at-drs or i oo ^d, and does lere- by .d'Vr not{ce o' any s.cn clanye, ea :ers,ot, alteration or ace't,or. :Y 'n: -sESS •''EISOe, t" S 'n&tr'.ne -' -as Been duly ew.ted py r o- •-C')a a ^c S. ^ ^:y anoye, ra ^e:, °.1': gJ . . r;rAr:jN HOMES. a 0artn%Csl,e :ev9 ri idol P. 3 tinta; r. - Oe vela nt Manager Citation Widens, a partne ship - . e'Urr :iv -;;:CC S a ty, -�,1W / 'Y �;E; rtto•neY-'s4 °act) • PLEASE A -•ACY pnNEN OF A--OR4Ev rO AU BONUS S:GNATOAES MOST OE NOiA8:yE0 I ye, .'tea AUEEHENT FOP. IMPROVEIIENT CF THE NEST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE SETWEEN TRACTS :2238 AND 12530 CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT ,HIS AOREEMENT rade and entered into this day of 1984 by and between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONDA. CAL;FCRNIA, a municipal corporation, "rein - after re *erred to as "CM-, and CITATION HOMES, a oartnersnip herelrafter r.fer,eoi to as "DEVELOPER provides: WITNESSETH WHEREAS, DEVELOPER is developing Tracts 122:8 and 12530 in the L `, iodated ,r the west side of Hellman Avenue between Church Street and baseline Road; and WHEREAS. DEVELOPER as a condition of said Tract 12530 is required :o irvrove poi: vns of Hellman Avenue west of the centerline; and WHEREAS, It ,s the wish of the CTY to join with the JE'IELJPER in the corcur lent imorovement of a portion of the west side of Hellman Avenue from 785.30 feet to 7:05.20 feet northerly of the centerline of Church Street; and 'WHEREAS, the said improvements are designed by the Civil Engireers, Ronald W. Martin end Association, Inc. of E1 Toro, and shown in the :iTY arornveo drawing No. 352, Sheets I tOrcugh 9, hereinafter referred to As "EXHIBIT A and WHEREAS, C:11's and DEVELOPER'S respective responsibility for costs as reds - ^ -s the Improvements Shown In Eshlblt A shall be as follows: v_'r.LOPER'S RESPONS;B IL I,v FOR COST: :'prgvema,ts of "1act3 :::3B and 1:530 as shcwn cn Sheets I thrcogh 9, Edhlb,t A. evicept •nr [hd vest side :f °e it -ac Avev+e •r -m. station 8 5 65.30 to station 12 ` 05.30 as 3r0w1 do Sheet 3, Ecn,bq A- r;-v'S RESGCNS:BILITY FOR COST: Irorovoverts the wdSt side cf nellran A,, .e as SHOWN ON Sheet 3, Eahlblt A from station 3 E5 33 tC sta:'en :5 • C5.3C and as further described In Eahlblt E attacned. NOW, THEREFORE. IT 15 MU%ALLY AGPEE2 AS SJLWAS'. 1. DEVELOPER SHALL 1. Act as the lead ace. cy in the construct:dr o£ the Helican Avenue imoralererts .; Srrwn to Exnlblt A. Prnv nr. all labor, enui ome -t and materials end s w '+oervls,oa regrcd td pr'Ofete cerstruction Of sa,d improvnrents In accordance wan a,p,d,Ql clans, speii4,!tions and estimates prepared ;ointly b7 Y a -d CEIELJFER did as aiiord,ed by the City Enq,peer. -. AdvNrb Se, award, and administer all cohstrucrcn c;r ;r ac is and rake al' J O"'ss day",ts, 4. LO,tr,b,tq funds sdfflciert to Compio.te the street 'n.prcver'en[ u.rk as defired rn Enhlblt 6 and as stipulated herein. S. Provide CITY at comoletidn of comstructign a detail audit of all cost and dlvts,on of funding resoonsibthty. fi. Provide CITY upon acceptance of all the improvement work for the CITY with d maintenance bond of the amount of ten percent (IOr,) Of the total cgedtfuttlon y6 0 cost of said improvpments for a period of one ::ear. 11. CITY SHALL 1. Upen completion of CITY's ;olden of the lmroverents. CITY shall pay to DEVELOPER an amount which shall ccnst Bute A total aggregate of ninety percent (90') of the actual construction cost of C17'f's portion of the improvements. Said payment shall be made by CITY within ten (10) days after submission of the detail total actual cost of construction by the DFVELOPER. 2. Loan acceptance of CITY'S portion Of the improvements by C:DY, C :TY shall pay to DEVELOPER an amount which, together in the PrevtouS payment as stated in Paragrapn 1 above, shall constitute a total aggreaate of one hundred percent (100:) of the actual construction cost of TTY's portion of the Imernvements. Said payment shall be made by CITY within thirty {301 days after acceptance of the said irprovemrtC, 3. Upon acceptance of all construction work and receipt of ten pe rc = ^t (I7c` maintenance bond mentioned earlier, CITY shall release DEo'.DPrP from al' bona obligation covering completion of construction. 111. I' 15 MUTUALLY AGREED: That the CITY's cost of construction and the DEVELOPEi's cost of comtructinn nereurder will be ecual. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a schedule nhicn sets forth a breaedpwn of the estimated quantity of constrac -ion ratena:r exPeCtea to be used for the street im elne prnvnts of Fellmar Avenue. Sato Exhibit S •s the sC ^ecule of CCTY's portion of th estimated cuanttty and the estimated cast. 2. In the erect any legal action is commenced or either Par;; tr enforce .his Agreement or to recover any sums due nereurder, the orevaili -l; party shall be entitled to reaseratle attorreys' fees and court .:nsts. -his Agreement shall inure to the benefit of all x55;CnceS and s..ccessorS 1, !m,r- est. :S H17NESS WHEPEOF, the parties have executed tn:s Agree, ant at Fanrho Oxamonga, California, on the day and year first above wFitter. CITY OF RANCHO CUC,AMONGA CI'A':C :, MOPES, a oartnersi b MAYO'. D. Lllr:lSn. Dr. V Cevelrrment ^'arager c>.. Cita ;OM Rut iders, a partnership APPROVED AS TO FORY.) • ttfs-aTma,�� -- 417 RESOLUTION NO. 06- 96 -99GR- ?' —/57 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AND CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL MAP OF TRACT NOS. 12238 AND 12530 WHEREAS, the Tentative Map of Tract Nos. 12238 and 12530, consisting of 14 lots, submitted by Citation Builders, Subdivider, located on the west side of Hellman Avenue, on the north side of Church Street has been submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga by said Subdivider and approved by said City as provided in the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, and in compliance with the requirements of Ordinance No. 28 of said City; and WHEREAS, to meet the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the Final Map of said Tract said Subdivider has offered the Improvement Agreement submitted herewith for approval and execution by said City, together with good and sufficient Improvement Security, and submits for approval said Final Map offering for dedication for public use the streets delineated thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, as follows: That said improvement Agreement be and the same is approved and the Mayor is authorized to execute same an behalf of said City and the City Clerk is authorized to attest thereto: and That said Improvement Security is accepted as good and sufficient, subject to approval as to form and content thereof by the City Attorney; and 3. That the offers for dedication and the Final Map delineating same be approved and the City Clerk is authorized to execute the certificate thereon on behalf of said City. 112 4. That the Construction Agreement be and the same is • approved and the Mayor is authorized to execute same on behalf of said City and the City Clerk is authorized to attest thereto. DASSEO, APPROVED, dnd,ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984, AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Aitnelet, City C erK jaa Jon 0. Mikels, Mayor 419 • • �J • • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 1984 _ 1977 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Approval of Bonds and Agreement submitted by Edwards Construction Company for 0. R. 83 -08 located on the north side of Foothill Blvd., east of Grove Avenue D. R. 83 -08 was approved by the Planning Commission on May 11, 1984 for the development of a 3,858 square foot auto service building on .37 acre of land located on the north side of Foothill Blvd., 750 feet east of Grove Avenue. Gerald Edwards of Edwards Construction Company has submitted the attached bonds and agreement in the following amounts to guaranteee the construction of the off -site improvements on Foothill Blvd.: Faithful Performance Bond: 58,000.00 Labor and Material Bond: $4,000.00 RECOMMENOAT104 It is recommended that City Council approve the attached bonds and agreement for 0. R. 83 -08 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign same. Respectfully su fitted, LB :jaa Attachments S� • 0 of RED HILL COWRY GLUE `00�"44 ZIP 3, 24 22 Z3 33 44 lor 112 X 3 title; CITY OF RANCHO CUCANJONCA T7 i ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY MAP N page Y 43 f J 47 m 42 411 49 54 113 li 55 Is S p m 39 40 SO S, SAN SERPQR:'NO title; CITY OF RANCHO CUCANJONCA T7 i ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY MAP N page CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR 0. R. 80 -08 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is made and entered into, in conformance with the Provisions of the Municipal Code and Regulations of the City of Rancno Cucamonga, State of Caiifornia, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referr- ed to as the City, by and between said City and Edva rds qc -s-rac mr Camper, _ nere,naf,er referred to as the 7e 19, THAT, 'WHEREAS, said Developer desires to develop Certain real property in said CI ty 1 t at ed on the north s' :e of Eootnill Blvd., 7S0e east of Grove Avenue; and WHEREAS, said City has established certain requi•gme,ts to be met by said Developer as prerequisite to granting of final approval; and WHEREAS, the execution of this agreement and posting of improvement security as hereinafter cited, and approved by the City Attorney, are deemed to be equivalent to prior completion of said requirements for the purpose of securing said approval. NOW, THEREFORE, ,t is hereby agreed by and between the City and the Developer as follows: i. The Developer hereby agrees to const ^vct at developer's expense all morovements described on page d hereof within Ij montns from the date hereof. 2, Th,S agreement shall be effective On the date of the resolution of the Council of said City approve mg this agreement. This agreement shall be in default on the day follow- ing the first anniversary date of said approval in less an exten- sion of time has been granted by sa,d :icy as hereinafter provid- ed. g. The Developer may request additional time in which to complete the provisions of this agreement, in writing not less :lam 30 days prior to the default Cate, and including a statement of circumstances of necessity for additional time. In considera- tion of such request, the City reserves the right to review ire provisions hereof, including construction standards, cast estimate, and sufficiency of the ii,rcvement security, and to require adjustments thereto when warranted by substantial changes therein. 6. If the Developer fails or neglects to comply with the provisions of this agreement, the City shall have ',me right at any time to cause said provisions to be completed by any law- ful means, and thereupon to recover flow said Develaper and /or his Surety the full cost and expense incurred In so doing. S. Construction permits shall be obtained by the Devel- 00er from the office of the City Em9ineer olio, to start of any work within the public rignt -of -nay, and the developer shall conduct such work in hull compliance pith the regulations contained therein, von- compliance ray 'fs'ilt in stooping of the work by the City, and also ..me wt of tie oeralties provided, 6, Public rIgnt -Of -way i,,orovement work required shall be constructed in conformance with approved improvement plans, _ Standard Specifications, and Standard Drawings and any special amendments thereto. Construction shall include any transitions and /or Other Incidental work deemed necessary for drainage or S.1- E public safety. Errors or "missions discovered during construa- tioc shall be corrected upon the dir ect1 an of the City Engineer. Revised nark due to said plan modifications shall be covered by the pro v151 ohs of this agreement and secured by the surety covering the original planned works, 7, York done within eklsting Streets shall he ti!igent - ly pursued to completion; the City sh a 11 have tie rlgnt to Complete any and all work in the event of unjustified delay in completion, and to recover all cost and eapen se incurred from the Developer and /or nis contractor by any lawful means. 9. The Develpoer shall Ce respons'ble for ""!ace -ert, relocac:ons, or removal If any component of any i r, : gat i or water system in conf I, C wi ti the rep an red wort to the sat isf oct:on of the City Engineer and the owner of the water System. 9. The Oeve`oper shall be resoors ib!e ror removal of all loose rhC( and Other dab1IS from the p'api IC 't Ynt'af'wey. 10. One Developer shalt pl art and is ntal'. partway trees as directed by tie Community 0"elopment Director. II. The improvement security to be furnished by the Developer to guarantee completion of the terms of this agreement snail be subject to the approval of the City Attorney. The prim c•.pal amount of sold improvement security shall not be leis than the amount shown: • • Ca` 61.3 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE Type: Lund Principal Amount: $8,000.00 Name and address of surety: Fireman's Fund Insurance Company MATERIAL AND LABOR Type' Same as Above PrinCioai Amount: $4,000.00 Name and address of surety: CASH DEPOSIT MONUMENTATION Type: Principal »mount: Name and address of surety; TO BE POSTED PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY IN AITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto nave ceases inese Presents to "re :Jly exec' and ackno -1 required by law on t da a EA c Q it signatures. Date o �c4 h �Ign et+re OeveiOber r ra. nt2d • Jf, 1 Oate by Ce ve':oer s Accented: city of Rancho Cucamonga, Cdlifornte A Yunicip al Co,acration By: , Mayor Attest: y ,erx i IYIY 2 i NB4 I Pty Kor —ney DEVELOPER'S SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED 3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOKA CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE 0 For improvement of: Fcotei— a'vd. Oate:3 /15/94 -lputed pyl sane & Assd' ales File Referenti,777 33 City 7,g. So. Wp NOTE: Does not include current fee for writing Perm, it or pavement deposits. CONS7RLC7:7V COST - '-ATE rw _ a• .: NT P,C.C. Curb - 12•' C.F. P.C.— ;,rt - B" C r P.C.C. Curb Onty 5 " C.F. -. . A.C. Berm ;5200 mm„ A" P.C.C. Sidewalk J34 - ' J7 V Drive Aooroacn 427 S d" P.C.C. Cross Gutter -- • "" Street Excavanon Imported Embankment Preparation of Supgrdde 2':C3 .... .:5 3: i. C0 Crisned Aggregate Base .,per ,n, tnics, A.C. (over 1300 tons) A.C. (900 to 1300 tons) A.C. (under 500 to 900 tons) A.C. (under 830 tans) 35 fin ...'.0 150•.9 Patch A.C, (trencn) 1" thick A.C. Overlay 1_—O S.F. ,30 300..'0 • Ad;ust sewer mannole to trade Adjust seve' C'.ear out :9 grade Adjust .ate, valves to grace Earn 5.:0 75.00 Street Signs ' •. i:0. ;0 1, >JO.00 Street Trees Parkway Landscape and ;rr,gaa cm, Sawcut .v -... 1.:0 i53,C0 !,S7RUC7 :311 CONTINGENCY "STS S 989. 7O 77AL ..9NS.R— :0N Ia.0 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE SURETY i:CC:) 58,000.10 LABOR AND MATERIAL SEC,RITY ;80:) $4, 3,0. '0 ENGINEERING INSPECTION FEE 5 a00.00 "PESTORATEON /DELINEATION CASH OEPOS:T 5 SCL -J (REFUNDABLE) MONUMENTAT:ON SURETY :ASH) mPorsuant to City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, Title 1, Chapter 1.08, adopting San Bernardino County Code Titles, Chapters 1 -51 a cash restoration /delineation deposit shall be made prior to issuance of an Engineering Construction Permit. • S 0 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND PeE,t i.06a6e R! s I <a.00 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rincno Cpcamonga, State of California, and EDWARDS CONSTRUCTION CO. ' nereinafter designated as "prinClpai "i nave ;melee into in egree,ent .hereby principal agrees to install and comole:e tartaln designated public improvements, whiCn said agreement, dated Nay B Lga4 198 a , t, dentlfied as project D. R. p is nereoy re erred to and race a part ne•enr; and, WHEREAS, said principal is required under ire terms Of sa-d agreement to furnish a bond for the fdttoful perror ^aaCe of said agreement. WOW, THEREFORE, we the principal and FTRICiXt's bl= :Nsu. NCE CC`Tk %Y as surety, are held and firmly bound unto :'-.e :Y Cr Rarccc Cucamonga (hereinafter called "City "), In the ne ^al S, Of Eight tnbusand and 00 /100 Dollars (50,000.00) lawfu' money of the 'Jnited States, for the payment of onion sum we and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, SucceIsor-, executors and administrators, jointly and Severally, firmly o; these presents. The Condition of this obligation IS such that If twe above Jpunded principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and aside by, • and well and truly keep end perform the covenants, cord•t'ows and provisions in the said agreement and any alteration therraf -i ;e as therein provided, on his or their part, to be •_pt t'd cer!p rlr ed at the time and in the manner there- inecifiec, end 'n all respects according to their true intent and meaning, a: .d ;nail Indemnify and save harmless City, its off -cers, anents and employees, as therein Stipulated, teen th'.S ool,gatlon shall become null and void; otherwise, It snail be and rera In In vll force and effect, As a part of the obligation secured nereoy and in addition _o the fate amount Specified therefor, there shall be nC'lided COStS and reasonable expenses and fees, inc'joing reasonable attorn2y'S fees, Incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as Costs and In,7wdeo In any jud;ment rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and :frees that no Chalice, ex'- nslon Of time, alteration or addition to the terms of ine ag'- Dent or to the work to be performed thereunder Or the speci- fications zc companying the same shall in anywise affect i:s obligations on this bond, and it does nereby waive notice of try s or ;range, extension of time, aiteratlon Cr addit•on to tre .eras of the agreement or to the work or to the soecificat :Ohs. IN b :iN -SS WHEREOF, this instrument has bEen duly executed by lne pr,cC ;.t! and Surety above named, on °dl a, g9 ED' :Aft S CC .STR0C::0N CO. _" AB "s -'YD llisl -.iSCE PAW, re io purl i I.v rety �� . 6� isl9 n a tur e! `tlornev -ln - r To t! iS,>"i5 s. JaFF0R04 / .. x i PLEASE ATTACH POWER OF ATTORNEY TO ALL BONDS SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED / LABOR AND MATERIALMEN BOND 7406468 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of RanCnO Cucamonga, State Of California, and EDVANDS CONSTRUCTION CC. (herelnafter designated as ^Pr nclP11", nave entered •nto an agreement Thereby principal agrees to install and cdmolete certain designated public IMPIOVementS, icn said agreement, dated YAY B , 199 Bo and identified as prat ea[ 0... -u is nereoy re erred to and made a pan hereof; and W EP EA S, under the terms of said agreement, principal I r e I u i r a J before enter n upon t ".e performance of the wore, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with the City of Ramona CpC among to secure the claims to wn l on reference a lade in Title 15 (c ammenc1 ng with Section 3052; part a of 0lai sion 3 C of the Civ iI Code of the State of al 7 f rn va. NOW. TREREFORE, said on inc IOaI and the undersigned as a corporate surety, are veld firmly bound into the 'qty of Rancno ;cam"ga and all contractors, subcontractors, !adorers, material men and Other persons employed in the VerfcnanCe Of the aforesaid agreement and referred to +n the of are s a : d CO de of Civil Procedure In the sum of Four thousand and 00/:00 Sal l ars (SA, 300.001, for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that said surety will Pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount herelnatove set forth, and also in Case suit is brought upon this band will pay In addition to the face amount thereof, costs and reasonable expenses and fees, '.ding reasonable attorney's fees, Incurred by City in successfully enforcing Sion obligat'on, to be awarded • and f•,ied by the court. and to be taxed as Costs and to be insl,ded •n the Judgment tnerein rendered. 's nereby expressly stipulated and agreed that tn's bCrJ small rile to the aenefit of any and all persons, companies and corporations entitled to file cla Res under Title 15 Icommenc,ng with Sect-Po 3032, of Part a of 3ivisom 3 of the Civil Cade, s as td give a -Tomt of action to them or their assigns i n any suit brought id3n this bond. Should the condition of this bond be ` 1 1 y Per f armed, then this o0'+3atla'I shall :eccme no ". and va' :, ]tnere•se t small ne and remain in full force and effect. She Sdrety hereby stipulates and agrees that ho change, exte ^S'ion of time, alteration or addition to the terms of said agreemert or the specifications accomoany,mg the same snal: in any manner affect its obl,gatlons On this bard, and 1t does here- by walVe not ICe Of any such Cha"e, e x t em S ion, alteration 0 add, tlon. :N W:Tm ESS WHEREOF, this 'instrument e Lly executed by the orinc'Oil and surety Above name:, 3- tyr I ;LLorney -in -Fag JA.tti ?. JEFFOROS PLEASE ATTACH POWER OF ATTORNEY TO ALL BONDS SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED • S7 RESOLUTION NO. 06- 06 65eR 8y—l52 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 83 -08 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement executed on June 6, 1984, by Edwards Construction Company as developer, for the improvement of public right -of -way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located on the north side of Foothill Blvd., east of Grove Avenue: and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said real property as referred to Planning Commission, Development Review No, 83 -08; and WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Agreement and said • Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A, Authe et, City Clerk jaa • ­7777 71 MeTlTs , .Mayor Sa n I • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 1984 1 TO: City Council and-City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Enginee,. SUBJECT: Relase of Bonds and Notice of` ompletion D. R. 81 -22 - located at 9120 Center Avenue OWNER: Lord -Shobe Constructors, Inc. 1828 W. 1 i St., Suite D Upland, California 91186 Faithful Performance Bond (Road) $8,500.00 ,tP °vU�'O'tc Y < j l � — Ilz The road improvements have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and it is recommended that City Council accept said improvements, authorize release of the Faithful Performance Bond and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion. 12919 Summit Avenue, Single Family Residence OWNER: Richard T. French SURETY: Western Community Bank Corona, California SECURITY INSTRUMENT S8,500.00 The road improvements for the above single family residence have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and it is recommended that City Council authorize the reduction of the Improvement Security Instrument from the original $12,150.00 to $4,250.00 (releasing $8,500.00), accept the road improvements and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion. S 197% City Council Staff Report Re: Bond Releases June 6, 1984 Page 2 M.S. 72 -0711 - located on the West side of Vincent Avenue and the North side of Jersey. OWNER: Lucas Land Co. 9224 Foothill Blvd., SUite 275 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Surety Bond (Drainage) $12,000 The drainage facilities secured by this bond were constructed per Assessment District 82 -1 and the bond is no longer required. It is recommended that the City Council authorize release of said bond. Tract 12090 - lccated at the northeast corner of Archibald and Feron OWNER: USA Properties Fund, Ltd. 1801 Wilshire Blvd. Santa Monica, California Faithful Performance Bond (Road) 549,500.00 The road improvements have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and it is recommended that City Council accept said improvements, authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Bond, and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion. P.M. 5760, Parcel 7 - located on the Northeast corner of Milliken & 6th Street OWNER: O'Donnell, Brigham & Partners 4350 Von Karmen Newport Beach, CA Faithful Performance Bond (Road) $27,000.00 The improvements have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and it is recommended that City Council accept said improvements, authroize release of the Faithful Performance Bond and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion. LBH:bc (1O • 0 R ECORD:AG REQUESTED BY CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P, 0. Bo. 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 WHEN RECORDED NAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. 0. Be. 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 NOTICE OF COMPLET;DN NOTICE IS HERESY GIVEN THAT: 1. The undersigned is an dinner of an interest or estate in the hereinafter described real property, the nature Of which interest or estate is: is 0. R. 82 -11 4. The name of the original Contractor for :he warK of improvement as a whole was: Lard -Shone Constructors, Inc. 5, The real orooerty referred to here:r is situated in the City of Rancho jcimonga, County of San Bernardino, :al iforn u, and is descr Toed as follows: G/ 9120 Center Avenue : :TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a munc:pal corporation, Cwner : ay : Ioyd a. iuoos, .ity engineer D. R. 82 -11 2, The full name and address of the undersigned owner is: CITY Of RANCHO C'JCAUONGA, 3320 -C Base one Road, P. O, Boa 807. lancno Cucamonga, Calrtarnia 91730. • 3. On the 6th day of June, 1984, there ens oomoleted an the hereinafter descrioed real property the work of improvement set forth in the contract documents for is 0. R. 82 -11 4. The name of the original Contractor for :he warK of improvement as a whole was: Lard -Shone Constructors, Inc. 5, The real orooerty referred to here:r is situated in the City of Rancho jcimonga, County of San Bernardino, :al iforn u, and is descr Toed as follows: G/ 9120 Center Avenue : :TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a munc:pal corporation, Cwner : ay : Ioyd a. iuoos, .ity engineer RESOLUTION NO. 96= 90=i4" 2"/—!' 7 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO • CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 0. R. 81 -22 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for D. R. 81 -22 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 cork 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 8th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: every A. Authe et, City Clerk jaa „On 1. Mike 5, Mayor �' 1 • • 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 R. 0. Bak a07 Awns Cucamonga, California 91730 NOTICE OF CDMRLE-ION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The undersigned is in owner of an merest or estate n the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which interest or estate is: 12919 Summit Avenue, a single family residence 2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner i5: CITY OF RANCHO L'UCAMONGA, 93ZO -C Base Line Road, P. 0. Rda 901, Rancho 'UCak e! • California 91730. 3. On the 6th day of June, 1984, there was completed on the hereinafter described real Property the work of 'mdrOvement set forth in the contract documents for: 12919 Summit Avenue, a single family residence 4. The nacre of the original contractor for the wcrk of !norovement as a whole was: RichaH T, Frencn 5. The real Property referred to here- 's sainted 'n the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, California, and is described as follows: 12919 Sunlit Avenue ,:Ty OF RANCHO OJCAMONGA, a mdnic:pal corporation, Owner r� L. J r"." . 3 RESOLUTION NO. 46-0643M ?y —!(D3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO • CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 12919 SUMMIT AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE 'WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for 12919 Summit 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 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Authe et, City ClerK jaa Jon 0. Nike s, Mayor :a � E • 0 RECO10IIIG REQUESTED BY: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P, 0. Bon 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 NHEN RECORDED MAIL T0: CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 7SA Properties Fund, :no. S. 'he real property referred t0 we,e'n s sitaated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, COa^.ty Of San Bernardino, California, and is described as follows: Located at the northeast corner of Archibald and Feron ,:TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation, Owner „ate Lloyd . Hu oS, City .^.g:neer E i'aft m G s 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: Tract 12090 2, The full name and address of the under5'9ned Owner Is: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. 9320 -C Base Line Road, 0. C. Sax 807, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. • 3. On the 6th day of June, 1984, there was completed on tnd hereinafter s,,ibed real property the wor, of 1iprovenent set fart, in the contract dOCYnents for: Tract 12090 4. The name of the Original contractor for the work of improvement as a whole was: 7SA Properties Fund, :no. S. 'he real property referred t0 we,e'n s sitaated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, COa^.ty Of San Bernardino, California, and is described as follows: Located at the northeast corner of Archibald and Feron ,:TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation, Owner „ate Lloyd . Hu oS, City .^.g:neer E i'aft m G s RESOLUTION NO. ft—et--MR ?'7 —/ �2 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO • CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 12090 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE 'WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Tract 12090 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 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: 3everiy A. Authelet, :ity Clerk jaa ion 0. '4ike s, '4ayor i � • n RECORDING REO'lE>fE0 BV: CITY )F +AN:HO CJCAMONGA P. 0. Boa Sol Ranchv :Acmmnga, California 91730 WHIM RECORDED MAIL 79: ;'Y CLERK :ITY OF RAMCHO C'JCAMONGA P. 0. Box 907 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 NOTICE OF COMPL - -:CN NOTI'E :5 HEREBY GIVEN THAT: I . 7nq imersigned is an owner of an ,9st ar estate in the h!`elnafter descr,hed real prOparly, t'ne 9lLre of .,,cn :mere s: I, estate 11: Parcel Mao 5750 (Pa^eel 7) I fall name and address of :1: ars'9ned is: C.'TY OF RANCHO C'JCAMONGA, '4,.i -t 3ase tine Road, v. ,, So, r07, Rancho Cucamonga, • Calif. 4'a 91730, 3. On the 6th day if June, 1984, there was bmoleted heremtfter des - '.ed ^ea' Property tre won, 7f yrdremen: set farts In in, Contract dO:Jaent$ for: Parcel Map 5750 . :al 7) 4. The lame ' ^e original ontraCtar fir _ wora of imoravemen: as a whole was: 7'Ovnell, 3ngna< S inrtne ^, 5. The real Property refvre; t rem Is 11t11tad in the City d RanCno Cucamonga, County Jf San Bernardino, California, and is described as follows: Located on the northeast C01-er cf wTll,,en 8 6th St. b7 ^v �F RANC49 CJCAMONGA, a mu1:np41 coroerat:on, Owner ,0y. e. Lucas, ✓�ty ;ng:neer RESOLUTION 40. 96- 96 —i5Clt By —/ �6d' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY 1:0'JNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO f,UCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 5760 (PARCEL 7) AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE 'AOR< WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Parcel Nap 5750 (Parcel 7) have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and .J9=REAS, a iotice of Comp Lt:xi 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 , ';S; °_D, APPgOVEJ, and riis 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: eat rly ,. ASE e eh 1 C ty Cier jaa :an 0. '4 keTs,-NSybr — • • • lJ • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA C!JG,ko, STAFF REPORT' >� SC, II!z DATE: June 6, 1984 - 19 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: John Martin, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Approval of Bonds and Agreement for submitted by Plaza Builders, Inc. for Tract No. 9539 located on the west side of Sapphire Street at Jennett Avenue The subject tract was recorded in August 5, 1980 with a $174,000 Improvement Security Instrument and Improvement Agreement submitted by Brubaker, Davis 6 Person. The subdivision was subsequently sold to Plaza Builders, Inc. who are now submitting the replacement bonds and agreement as follows: Faithful Performance Bond: $92,900.00 Labor and Materials Bond: $46,500.00 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council adopt the attached resolution oproving the replacement agreement and bonds and authorizing the Mayor and .Ity Clerk to sign same and release the previously accepted agreement and security being a $174,000 Improvement Security Instrument, "Respectfully submi ted, ' LBH: l :jaa � Attachments �5 • FL L71� r-1 CITY OF RANCHO cucAm""A A ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY MAP N page z 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 9539 KNOW All MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That th,s agreement is made and entered into, in conformance with the prpvis'ons of the Subdivision HAD Act of the State of Californ•a, :nd of the applicable ordinances of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. a municipal corporation, by and between said City, hereinafter referred to as the City, and Pt A BUTtp ERS, INC. ^ere" after referred to as tie eve goer. WITNESSETH: THAT, WHEREAS, said Developer desires to develao certain real orooerty In said City as shown on the Conditionally aoorove: subdivision known as TRACT 9539; and WHEREAS, said City has established cents,, redo i cements to be met by said Developer As Prerequisite to A p r oval of said Subdivision generally located at Jennet and Sapphire, north of Banyan, NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by Said City and by said Developer as follows: 1. The Developer hereby agrees to cclstr,ct at • Developers evoense all improvements described on Pace 5 nere- if within tweive months from the effective date here,`. 2. -his agreement shall be effective on tie late of the resolution of the Council of said ;icy Ain't, Mg this agreement. This agreement shall be in default on la day rollaw- I.ng the first Anniversary date of 5aid aporcval ess An e*ten- Sion of time has been granted by said City as hereinafter Provid. ed. 31 The Developer May request an eltegs•nn 0� tire to coidlete the terms hereof, Such request shall be SubTttted to the City in writing not less than 30 days before the eaoTrat Ton date hereof, and shall contain a statement of Cir: :umstdnCas necessitating the emtensI on of time. The City shall nave the right to review the or" isiOtis of this agreement, 'ncl Jd'h9 the construction standards, cast estimate, and improvement recur,t , and to require adjustments therein if any substant: al Change has occurred during the term hereof. a, • the Developer fa, is Pr neglects to conoly Itb the orovis ions of this agreement, the City and I nave the rl ant at any time to Cause said orovisI ons to be at by any :awful means, and thereupon recover from fne Developer and /or his surety the 'Jll Cost and l,PeMse inCUrrej. 5. 'he Developer shall oravile petered water Service to each lot of said develooment In accordance with the reg'JIatTOnS, schedules, and fees of the Cucamonga County Water Distr•ct. 5, the Developer shall be responsible for reolacement, relocation, or removal If any component of any Irrigation water system In Conf llct with construction of required improvements ti the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the owner of such water • system (�'� MN 07/ r� L 1. Improvements re0ui red to he constructed shall conform to the Standard Orawings and Standard Sp IS c, f is a ti o ns I the C!ty, and to the ;rorovement Ilan approved by and On file in the oefide of the City Engineer. Said improvements are tabulated 0 the !on s t r uc ti on and Acid Estlmate, hereby lncoroorated I page 6 hereof, As taken from the imDrovement glans listed thereon by number. The Developer shall el so be re so o n sible for construc - tlon of any transitions Or Other incidental work beyond the tract boundaries as needed for safety and proper surface drainage. Errors pr pmmissions discovered during constructin shall ae corrected upon the direction of the ^ity Engineer, Rev t sail work due to said plan modifications shall be covered by the provisions of this agreement and secured by the surety covering the original Planned works. a. Construction permits Shall be obt3l ned by the Developer from the office of the -ity Engineer prior to start of work; all regulations listed thereon shall be obse•ved, with attention given to safety procedures, control of dust, no e, or other nuisance to the area, and to proper notification of oublit utilities and City Departments. Failure to comply �'n try is Section shall be subject to the penalties provided tlerefar, 9. The Deve l oiler inn 11 be responsible for removal of all loose rocks and other debris from public rights -of -way within or adjoining said development resulting from work relative to said development. 10. Work lone within existing streets shall be diligently pursued to comoletton; the Dity shalt 'nave the right to complete any and all work in the event of unJu Stifled le lay completion, and tp lawn ar all cast and e.I e n se ` ^Ur -e ^, fit, the • Developer and/or his contractor by any lawful Teani. 11. Said Developer shall At all t'nes fotlovirg dedica- tion of the streets and easements in sail subldlrsion, 3o to one c"Pletia•1 and acceptance of said work a improvement by said City Council, give good and adequate warning to the traveling Public of each and every dangerous cond,tinn existent in Said street or easement, and will protect the travel'ng pub' !C from Such defective or dangerous conditions. DOtit the complet inn of ai: improvements, here,.n 'nCOrPp'aLed In Page 6 , to be oerformeci , each of said streets not accepted as improvements shall be under the charge of said Developer. Said Developer may close all or a portion of any street subject to the conditions contained in a temoor3ry street closure permit, issued by the City Eng, beer, whenever T t is necessary to protect the public during the construction of the •"r"ements here •.n agreed to be made, 12. Parkway trees r ^nuir ^d fO be Jlanted shall be panted by the Developer after otner •morcivement work, grading I'd cleanup has been completed. " anti ng Shall be done as provided by 0rdinan:e in accordance wild the blanting diagram approved by the 2ity :Cmmun,y Deva''.aomen• Director. line Developer shall be •esoiisib7e for mate :alw ing all trees Planted I good health Ill ,i fhe Ind If the jua•anteed ma '. nfanance period, or for one year after 01 ant '. n3, whichever 's later. 13. The Deve'aoer is •esoa,,Ib'a fir meetinq 31' cond•- tbns established by the ;i ty bursa ant to the Subdlvts,on wad Act, City Drdtinces, and this agreement for the development, and for the maintenance of A11 19oravements constructed tbareundele _Z 7i until the improvement is accepted for maintenance by tie City, and no improvement security provided here'nwitn shalt be released before- such acceptance unless otherwise provided and author iced by the City ouncil of the City. 14, Th +s agreement sh a 11 not terra in ate unt17 the maintenance guarantee serf r ity hereinafter described has been released by the City, or ant I1 A new agreement toaetner with the repu i red improvement Secir ity has been submitted to the City by a Successor to the herein named, and by resolution of the -ity Council same has been accepted, and this agreement and the improvement security therefor has been re' +ased. 15. The improvement security to be furnished by the Developer with this agreement shall consist of the following and shall be in a form acceptable by the City Attorney: A. To secure faithful performance of this agreement. I. A bond or bonds by one or more duly author zed corporate sureties I, the form and content specified by Government Code Section 66499.1. 2. An improvement Security Instrument ,n the farm and content specified by the City Attorney. 3. A deposit with the City of money or negotiable bonds of the kind approved for securing deoosits of public monies. B. To secure laborers and materialmen: I. A bond or bonds by one or more duly authorized corporate sureties in the form and content • specified by Government Cade Section 66499.1. An Improvement Security .nstrument n the form and content specified by the City Attorney, 3, A deposit with City of money or negotiable bonds of the kind approved for securing .. A cash deposit with the City to guarantee Payment by the OeveI open to tine engineer or Surveyor whose certificate appears upon the Final Mao for the setting of all boundary , lot corner, and street centerline monuments and for fdrniShing centerline tie notes to the City. the amount of the depot it may he any amount cart lfied by the an g'near or Surveyor as acceptable Payne,t , fJl is ]r, ^o value is submitted, the cash bond Shall be As shown on the Construction and 3ond Est-mate contained here,,. Said cash deposit may be refunded as soon as proce- dure Permits after rece,ot Py th¢ 'ty Of the centerline tie notes and written assurance of Payment In full from the engineer or surveyor. 7. The repaired bonds and the principal amounts thereof are set forth an page 6 of this agreement, 16. 'he Developer eAr,ants that the imorpvementt described -n this agreement shay be free from defects hater a'S and workma,shiD. Any and all portions if the 'm Drove i ments found to be defective within one :i year following the data In whim the improvements are acceated by the City shall be repaired )r replaced by Deve'aeer free of 411 charges to the ity, he Oevelaoer shall f�rn,sh a Maintenance guarantee recur •ty in a sum equal to ten percent i10il or the construction evtimate or $200.00, whichever is greater, to secure the Faithful ® performance of Developer•$ obligations as described in this Para. graph, The maintenance guarantee security Shall also secure the faithful performance by the Oeveloper of any obligation of the 3- 73 0 Developer to do specified work with respect to any parkway maintenance assessment district. Once the imprpveme its have been accepted aid a maintenance guarantee security has been accepted by the City, the other improvement security descr +.bed in this agreement may be released provided tnat such tease is otherwise adthoriied by the Subdivision Map act and any applicable City Ordinance. 17. 'hat the Oeveioper shall take out and maintain such pab'ic liability and property damage insurance as Shan protect him and any contractor or subcontractor performing work covered by this agreement from claims for property damages which "ay arise because Of the mature Of the work or from operation$ under this agreement, whether such operations be by himself or by any contractor or subcontractor, or anyone directly or ind erectly employee by Said persons, even though such damages be not caused oy the negligence of the 7eveloper Or any contras for or subcontractor or anyone employed by said persons. The pubilc $'ability and property damage insurance shall list the -ity as additdnal insured and directly protect the Sity, its officers. agents And employees, as well as the Oevelooer, his contractors and his subcont ^actors, and all insurance .1*icies issued hereunder Shall so state. The minimum amounts Of such insurance shall be as follows: Contractor's liability insurance providing bodily injury or death liability limits of not less tha S 300,000 for each person and $1,000,000 for each accident or occurrence, and property damage liabil- ity 'im.ts of not less than 5100,000 for each icci- den: pr pf cur ^oq c! with an aggregate i:mi[ o a $250,,00 for cl ms which may arise ^om the opera- tions .f the level goer in the performance of t I a • worm herein ordv,J -d. Automobile !lab,l'ty insurance covering all veh ties iced in the per$c.m ante p` this agreement prove, A, m9 bode 1 in; a ry 1 1abilaty 'im its of not less than $200,000 for each person and 5300,000 for each a:c :dent or OCCJr ^e^ce, and property damage liability limits of not less than 550,000 for each ac;ent J occur -ence, with an aggregate of not less than S100. 000 which may arise $rpm the opera- tions of th¢ v e'Jbe, or nos - ontract Jr m in perforing the worh pro,ije; `or herein, 18. That before the a xeCv t'cn this agreement, the 7eveloper shall file with the ;'ty a c `�cate or sere " ,sates of insurance Covering the spec' ^edert <sarence. Each such certificate snail bear An endorsement pies l ud ng the cancellations, dr reduction in :overage of any policy evidences by such certificate, before the emirit -on Of fnirty 30) days after ,he City sha'i have receivej 'i Jtificat'or D, r" lst ere? -ail f ^:m t,_ lhseran Ce carrier, As evidence of lnderst and i ng the pr'Iv is i cis :ont ailed here imi and of pent to Comp'/ wit" same, i)o!','del has Sabel tied the `),, wine described improvement s °C it 1 t f, and has off i.ed his S-1hatare hereto: -a. ['"ftwau. "Y • 0 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE Type: Principal Amount: 592,900.00 lame and address of surety: MATERIAL AND LABOR PAYMENT Type: PrrnCioal Amount: $46,450.00 Name and address of surety: CASH DEPOSIT MOROMENTATION Type: Principal Amount: lame and address of surety; MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE Type: Principal Amount: Name and address of surety: TO BE POSTED PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY • ;N AITNESS YEPEOF, the parties hereto have Caused tnese presents t0 be duly executed and acknowledged nth all Formalities required by law on the dates Set Forth Opposite their ,;gnat Tres. PLAZA BUILDERS, INC.: Date 6y �yi+ -4rQ �%� %fc...,..ry,.- .Developer ii gnat, re Wald 4. Yp rr la. Ass',. Se,rerary " ntnd Date Iy ,Developer "y hair A. L 4uvaer, Jr., ac¢ President or cut ed Accepted: A !y Ra of ncho "camonga, CaieFo A hiun�cioal Corporation Arrest: l __ :,ty . er -' -' - Aooro, -d: • DEVELOPER'S SIGNATURE MOST BE NOTARIZED -5- /�� 'y CITY OF RANCHO CUCANmGA ENGINEERING FEEIS M ENCROaEHWNT REEMIT T FEE SCHEDULE . For Imbrovement: Date: 5110/95 Computed by: 3ssorated : ^g. File Reference: City Drawing 40. ' NOTE: Ones mt Include current fee for writing pemait or pavement deposits OL'ANTi•v LNi• :TEM FR iCE AMOUNT L.F, P „'„C, curb 12" :.F. 24^ gutter 7,25 curb • &' ',F. CS^ gutter 6.00 - 159T.3T .. F. P.C.C. cu•b Only 5.50 berm 1.50 S.F. 4" P.C.C. sidewalk 1.75 �LIT6- ',F Orive aooroacn 2.50 S.F. B" P,C cross gutter zinc. curb ", 3.40 Z'T6- Street excavaton L51 1''oZ3 -'1� ` Imoortd embankment 1,50 75571- S.F, Freoarat, on of sdbgrade ^,'5 5. �NSAId dg9• AaX (0!r :PtA [M Ck'I J,03 .JR ou ` '3N A.C. iRver 1300 tonsi 27.90 104 A.C. '900 t0 1300 tons) 35.10 -'7Zl- TON A.C, /500 to 900 tons) 45.10 7Z- T65-7� TON A.C. (under 500 tons) 60.00 ` SF. A.C. (3" thick) 7,55 S.F. Patch A.C. 'trench) „75 S.F. 1" thick A.C. overlay 9.30 _ EA. Adjust sewe, Tanno''e t0 grade 250.70 'A. Adjust $ewe, c :ear Out to grade .`..00 EA. 4djus: weter valves to grad! 15.70 EA. Street IIghtS 1000.90 P v. Barr*c ales mterse. 5500 win) 4. '.' 2 w 4" •edwoon header .-5 .5 S.C. Remdva: of 1,C, oavement ,35 aemoval Of P.C.C. uro 3.J0 ArobVa' of A.C. Oerm T EA. Street signs 20n.30 , Ell and bditi 35, 30 ;.i U nc ^e•e c'ock wall 2'.70 ""70� Petain-g wa'r 20.90 7'^-1 73N Aggregate base 7.JO ` Conc," sbdccures 125.;0 IS,, RCP 2000 0' M O D ` L.F. 24^ ell ;1500 D; 35.90 ` L.7. 36" RCP '2000 O1 79.00 ` L.F. 48" RCP :1200 D, "5.30 EA. Catch bas -n H 3' 2000.00 EA. Catch tea ;, w 3 2900,00 ` EA, Catch basin H 22' 4530,00 EA, Local depression A' $00.00 Local 3eoress:bn :2' ioco. C0 EA. (unction st ^ucture 5000.70 E1. Outlet structure, Still 1506 :500.00 ` Outlet strmture, Std •507 500.00 ` EA, Cea rd o05ts 33.30 ` Caard cane' 'wood! 'S.00 ` - Sawcut 2.20 EA. "eadwa" '48^ wi ^0'. 4300.30 Aedwccd head!^ JS _ ',andscap T" t '••.ast-on ,'S -F. loll curd I ENG:NEERIYG INSPECTION FEE 53.927.00 5'JB r77AL $84.093, •RESTORA'lON /9ELI4EATION CASH ir7d'0 -773- CONTINGENCY COSTS DEDOSIT (REFUNDABLE) FAI•HFUL PERFORMANCE BOND '1005) MONUMENTATION SURETY 1CASH) $2,500.00 LABOR AND MATERIAL BOND (505) -Pursuant to City Of tax" cmmmga IMIICIP:1 CoM, fill* I. Chapter 1.08= adopting Sam 8arnwillm Cavity Code Tltln, Chapters 1-5, a cash miteratlm /delimation deposit shall oe aWe prior to Issuance of An Engineering Cmstruotlm permit. A �� 97111 I> i FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, State of Cal iforn l a, and FLSZA BUILDERS, :NC, (hereinafter designated as "prtnc,pa) have entered into an agreement whereby principal agrees to install and complete certain designated pub IiC Improvements, wh i Ch said agreement, dated my 11, , 1984 , and identified as project 1 M, 1, are., referred to and —made a part hereof; and, WHEREAS, said principal is reouired under the terms of said agreement to furnish a band for the faithful performance of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, we the principal and F11,e,ry rd 'itaryiand as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the _Ity of ant 0 Cucamonga !hereinafter called "City'), in the penal Sum of Yinety -two thousand, nine hundred and 001100 Dollars ($92,900.00) lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which sum well and truly to be mode, we bind ourselves. our heirs, sJCCes Sors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. The Cord pion of this pill igat ion is such that if the above bounded principal, His or its heirs, executors, administrators, Bocce SSOrs pr assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, • and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, Conditions and provisions 'n the said agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, am his or their part, to be kept and performed At the time and in the manner therein specified, and all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless City, its officers, agents and employees, as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall became no it and void; otherwise, It shall be and remain in fu11 farce and effect, As a part of the obligation sec led hereby and in addition to the face amount Specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, inc;udirg • easonable attD,noy's fees, incurred by City in successful'y enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included 'n any judgment rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extensi an of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the speci- fications accompanying the same shall in anywise affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any - I such change, edtens is, of time, alteration or addition to the terms of a agreement or to the work or to the specifications. ;N WITNESS 'WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by e principal and surety above named, pn °gym y„�,�, 33 Developer ,pu refYl A(y 4 i ,arn. lis. f `!attorney -in- e<t Jr. A � Numwr, , elca President .,. PLEASE ATTACH POWER OF ATTORNEY TO ALL BONDS SIGNATURES OUST BE NOTARIZED re 17 LABOR AND MATERIALMEN BOND WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California, and ?t A BUILa)ERS, INC. (hereinafter designated as "Drincipa nave entered Into de agreeme6t whereby principal agrees to Install and complete certain designated pubic improvements, on i ch said agreement, dated May li, , 198. , and identified as project TRACT 9539 is hereby re,e red to aann made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, under the terms of said agreement, principal is required before entering upon the performance of the work, t0 file a goad and sufficient payment bond with the City Of Rancho Cucamonga to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part a of Oivislon 3 of the Civil Code of the State of :alifornia. NOW, THEREFORE, said or Inc f pal and the undersigned as a corporate surety, are held firmly bound into the City of Rancho Cucamonga and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, material men and other persons employed in the performance Of the aforesaid agreement and referred to n the aforesaid Code of Civil Procedure in the sum of Forty -si. thousand, four hundred and fifty and 001100 Dollars (S46,450.00), for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that said surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount hereinabove set forth, and also in case suit is brought IDan this bond will pay in addition to the face amount thereof, casts and reasonable expenses and fees, including re a s a nap le attarney's f ee s, incurred by City ; n successfully enforcing such obligation, to be awarded and fixed by the court, and to be taxed as Costs and t0 be ',ncladed in the judgment• therein rendered. It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall inure t0 the benefit of any and 311 persons, companies and corooratlans entitled to file claims under Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part a of 7lvison 3 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this band. Should the candiIion Of this bond be fully performed, then this obligation Shall petunia hull and O,p, otherwise it Shd`1 be and remain in full force and effect. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or add iI, on to the terms of said agreement or the spec if icat'On5 accompanying the same shall in any manner affect its obligations on this bond, and it does here- by waive notice of any such change, extension, alteration or Spain ion. ;R WITRESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by e or�nclpal and surety above named, On y/) u�, y :g8 F' ^.^ , :: :.'ve and =S. o C. uret y) '✓W:4 %s, cat. ignra. I re? A�tfo`r n`e y•in- a— chi .A. 1/dummer. , nice Prn.aent PLEASE ATTACH POWER OF ATTORNEY TO ALL BONDS SIGNATURES MOST BE NOTARIZED • 7' RESOLUTION NO. • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RELEASING PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AND APPROVING REPLACEMENT IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND SECURITY FOR TRACT NO. 9539 WHEREAS, the Final Map of Tract No. 9539, consisting of 19 lots, located on the west side of Sapphire Street at Jennet Avenue has been recorded and was in compliance with the requirements of Ordinance No. 28 of said City; and WHEREAS, to meet the requirements established as prerequisite to constructon of said Tract said Developer has offered the Improvement Agreement submitted herewith for approval and execution by said City, together with good and sufficient Improvement Security as replacements for those presently being held by the City from the original subdivider. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, as follows: 1. That said replacement Improvement Agreement be and the same is approved and the Mayor is authorized to execute same on behalf of said City and the City • Clerk is authorized to attest thereto; and 2. That said Improvement Security is accepted as good and sufficient, subject to approval as to form and content thereof by the City Attorney; and 0 3. That the previously accepted Improvement Agreement and improvement Security with Brubaker, Davis & Person, as subdivider, be released and the City Clerk is authorized to return said documents to said subdivider, PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984, AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. et Authe , ty C er jaa Jon D. ;1ikels, Mayor %5 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.titONGA QC STAFF REPORT p t Z DATE: June 6, 19894 197; T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Monte Prescher, Public Works Engineer SUBJECT: Authorization of Engineering Services and Award of Contract for the Construction of the Beryl - Hellman Storm Drain and Beryl Street Improvements, Phase 1 On May 2, 1984, City Council authorized Staff to solicit bids for the above project. Bids were received at 10:00 am on May 29, 1984 from five bidders for the construction of the subject project. An engineer's estimate of $1,017,688.00 was prepared by Bill Mann & Associates. The total bid amounts are as follows: Riverside Construction $ 898,904.50 Granstrom Construction $ 970,161.00 Belczak & Sons $1,028,671.00 K E C Company $1,077,916.40 Colich & Fallon $1,100,295.00 A summary of each bid proposal is attached for your review. Also, proposals have been received for the materials testing and construction staking of the subject project. Bill Mann & Associates, the project design engineer, has submitted a construction staking proposal for the estimated amount of $23,500.00 based on hourly rates. See attached proposal. Richard Mills & Associates, the project design materials engineer, has submitted a materials testing proposal for the estimated amount of $12,600.00 based on hourly and individual test rates. See attached proposal. continued..,. 20 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Authorization of Engineering Services and Award of Contract for Construction of the Beryl- Hellman Storm Oain and Beryl Street Improvements ,lane 6, 1984 • Page 2 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council award the contract to Riverside Construction as the lowest, qualified bidder on this project for the bid amount of $898,904.50, execute the contract, and authorize the expenditure of funds for full contract amount plus 10% contingency. It is also recommended that City Council accept the proposals from Bill Mann & Associates for the construction staking and from Richard Mills & Associates for the materials testing of this project and authorize the expenditure of funds for the full amount of the above engineering services. It is further recommended that this project be funded from Systems Development and Drainge Fees as originally intended. Respectfully submitted, `i A {/ LBH:MP /jaa Attachments N \J F_ I L I CITY OF RANCW CUCAIONGA SUMMARY OF PROPOSAS OPENED PROJECT: Beryl /Hellman Storm Brain Project, Phase I and Beryl Street Roadway Improveaunls LOCATION: Beryl between Il19Nland Ave. and 19th 5L, and Storm Drain bet. Beryl Street and Hellman Ayer,. Riverside Const. Belcaet 6 Sans Cull, am ITEMS QUANTITIES BID AMOUNT 810 AMOUNT 810 �1 Traffic Control Lump Som L.S. 9.000.00 L.S. 2,500.00 L.S. 2 Rte. A.C. L Conc. Payed, lump Sun LS. 12,000.01) L.S. 20,000.00 L.S. 3 Nis,. Reamcals Lmp Sam L.S. 68. NO. CO L.S. I05,356.W L.S. 4 Am. trees on Beryl Lump Sum L.S. 4,400.00 L.S. 3,ODO.0D L.S. 5 031c lass. EacavaLlon 14,816 CY 1.45 21,510.20 6.00 89,256.00 2.00 6 Unclass. fill 14,134 CY 1.80 26,521.20 4.00 58,936.00 1.00 6a Imported Borrow 4,200 CY 5.00 21,0011 4.00 16.8N.W 3.00 7 A. C. Pavin9 2,169 tons JZ. SO 89,992.00 40.00 110.7w.00 30.00 8 A9g. Base 17 Tom 25.00 425. W 1 .0 1114.00 40.00 9 8• AC ben4 201 t F 3. W 6113. W 4. W 804.00 5.00 10 Rect. Conc. Clint. Sec. 1665 CY 180.00 299, IOO. UU 200.00 33J,DOO.00 250.00 11 Rect. Chll. Nall Trans. 81 CY 200.00 16,200.011 200.00 16, 200.W 300.00 12 Trap. Ch.). L Trans. 312 CY 205.00 /6,2bU.OU 200.00 14,400.00 200.00 13 Come. Side Spillway he CY 165.00 I0,890.W 200.Ol3 13,200.00 NO.OU 14 Eaten. Reinf. Conc. Boa lump Sum LS. 19,00K).00 L.S. B,B00.00 L.S. 15 Conc. Headwall Lump Sum L.S. 5,400.00 L.S. 3,000.00 L.S. 16 Conc. Disip. L Def. Nall Loop Sun L.S. 7,50.00 L.S. 2,000.00 L.S. 17 Reinf. Conc. Min9wells 9 CY 500.00 4,500.00 200.00 I.HrKi 50.00 IS Reinf. Conc. cut -off I CY 195.W 1,365.00 250.00 1,150.00 30.03 19 66• RCP, 1350 -0 3J/ LF 115.00 38,155.00 100.01 33,100.00 200. UO DATE: May 29, 1984 CONTRACT NO. 23 -4637 -8069 h- Fallon Granstron Const ADLINT BID AMOUNT 5,000.00 L.S. 5,0011.00 10,000.00 L.S. 24,000.00 30, UDO.DO L.S. 130, WO.W 3,000.00 L.S. 6,000.00 29,752.00 3.W 44,628.00 14,734.00 3.00 44,202.00 12,600.00 7.00 29,400.00 83,070.00 35.00 %.915.W 680.00 30.00 510.00 1,005.00 IO.W 2,010.00 416,250.00 1 W.00 299,100.00 24,300.00 250.00 20,250.00 74,400.00 150.00 55,800.00 19,800.00 150.0) 9,9W.W 25,000.00 L.S. 15,000.00 5,000.00 1 . S. 3, 000.00 ID,WO.W L.S. IO,WO.W 4,500.00 250.00 2,250.00 2,IW.00 400.00 2.BIXi.W 67,400.00 14U.00 47.180.00 K.F.C. Company BID AMOUNT L.S. 100,000.00 L.S. 30'292.00 L.S. 13,400.00 L.S. 4,000.00 3.35 49,834.60 2.20 32,411,80 15.15 63,630.00 37.00 102, 453.00 35.00 595.00 10.00 2,010.00 190.00 316,350.00 213.00 17,253.00 150.00 55,eW.00 208. W 13,728. DO L.S. 11,000.00 L.S. 3,000.00 L.S. S,WO.W 36O.W 3,240.00 300.00 2,100.00 140.00 47,180.00 Bid Summitry Beryl /Melba. St-,,- Uruin Page 2 H veers iJe Const OelCmk 8 Sum Cululr Fetlun Graro l Cam l_ K_E.C. COV ny BID A113UNT BID WONT BID AMOUNI BID WONT BID MOUNT 20 36' RCP, 1353 -0 32 If 75.00 2400.00 6.00 1,920.00 100.01) 3,20.00 100.00 3,200.00 150.00 4,800.00 21 Conc. Inlet Apron I FA 260.00 260.00 1,DDO.W I, OW.W 5,UOI1.W 5,000.00 1, CDC. 00 1, am. on 2,010.00 2,010.00 22 27' RCP, 1700 -0 )5 if 43.00 3,225.00 55.00 4,125.W 100.W 7,50.00 70.00 5, 250. DO 75.00 5,625.00 23 24- RCP, 1700-0 46 Lf 40.00, 1,040.00 5O.W 2,300.00 100.00 4,600.00 W.00 2,16.00 43.00 1,978.W p 24 24' RCP, 1350 -0 8 LF 6.00 504.0) so. DID 400.00 100.00 60.00 6.00 480.00 50.00 400.00 1.,125 Pipe Closure, Type A 1 EA 435.00 415.00 250.00 250.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 500.00 500.00 1,500.00 I, 500.00 26 Pipe Closure, Type B 1 FA 115.00 115.00 W. DO 50.W 1, ".Do I,OW.W 500.00 500.00 I,OW.W 1,DW.W 21 Man.ole, 8 1 fA 6,000.00 6.U0U.W 3,000.(0 3,00.00 5,000.00 5,000.6 3,000.00 3, OOO.DO 5,OW.co 5,".DO 2818' Corr. Steel Pipe 466 IF 24.W 11,184.00 30.W I3,9W.W 50.00 23,300.00 20.00 9,320.W 35.00 16,310.00 29 Corr. Pipe Cleanuun 3 EA 315.W 1,115.00 400.00 1,2W.W 1,000.00 3,000.00 500.00 1,500.W 450.00 1,350.00 30 24' Corr. Steel Pipe IDl IF 41.00 4,494.00 40.00 4,180.00 100.00 10,700.00 20. DO 2,140.00 90.00 9,630.00 31 35' GW Inlet 5 EA 1, DW.W S, OW.W 600.00 3,000.00 1,000.00 5,000.00 200.00 1,000.W 1,450.00 7,250.00 32 24' Corr. Pipe, FI,i -J 1 FA 150.00 15u.00 40U. DO 4UO.W 2,000.00 2,000.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 33 Reloc. W' CMP Iunp Sun L.S. I,OW.W I.S. 600.00 L. S. 5,000.00 LS. 1,OW.W Li 2,000.00 34 S.D. Cleanout Bon 1 EA IJW.iID 2, IOU. DO 1,60.00 1,630.00 50,000.00 W, 000.00 2,".00 L,WO.W 2, BOB. Do 2,500.00 3S 12' PC curb, 24' Gutter 1246 If 10-IM 12,46.1X1 12.00 14,952.00 10.00 12,46.00 9.00 ll,2I4.W 5.00 6,230.01 36 Catch Basin, LOG. Dep 3 I ti,1W.W IB,JW.W J,WO.W 9,001.00 2.OwOD 6, NO. DO 2,000.00 6,WO.W 5, OU0.W 15,OW.W 37 8' PCC curb, 24' Gutter 492 if 9.00 4,420.W 1.00 3,444.00 10.00 4,920.00 8.00 3,936.00 4. DO 1,968.W 38 4' PCC Side.alk 11812 SF 1.45 17,156.40 1.00 11,832.00 2.00 23,664.00 1.50 1 1,748.00 2.50 29,580.00 39 PCC Drive Approach 116 SF 2.J5 413.W J.00 528.00 111,00 1,76.00 2.W 352.W 5.00 88O.W 406• Chain LiA fenc 5040 LF I.0) 35,280.00 6.00 30,240.W S.W 25,200.00 4.00 20,160.W /.W 35,280.00 41 16• Block Mall 12381F 13.00 16,094.W 6.W 1,428.00 20.00 24,76.00 10.00 12,38.00 20.00 24,76.00 42 PCC D.A. 208 SF 2.20 631,60 2.00 516.00 5.00 1,440,00 2.00 96.00 5.00 1,440.00 41 Salvage Gul& i Lump Sun L.S. 935.00 L.S. 500.00 &.S. 1,000.00 1 .S. 1, OUL).00 L.S. 6300 Bid Oy Beryl - Hellman Storm Drain Page 3 44 Salvage Gall Ing Stet. Iunp Sum 4i Raise Se.cr Mnnnole 3 FA 45 Aver 1 me C..,. Fsmt. 2 W 47 Type L or N Markus 5 EA 48 yen. Gale, Side 2 FA 49 Hydro- seeding Loop Son W Beloc. 12• Water l uw Loop Son 51 Raise Mater Valves 3 FA 52 pipe Clmuro I IA TOTAIS • Brvrnido (:��mt_ Nrl«_nt 8 Snm Cnl ¢6_F el lon BID AMODNI BID AMOUNT BID MOUNT 1 1. 700.01 LS. 15U.00 I.S. IO,UW.00 IbU.1N1 180.W 206.W 6W.11) 500.00 1,500.00 115.90 4SD.00 I OD. W 200.") 500.00 1,000.00 l.ixt 13S.IN) 50.01) 2533.") IW.UO 1,000.(X) 1,100.011 :,200.1X3 4W.W aou.00 I,Wi1.W 2 }X03.0) I .l. 3,100.OU L.S. 10,000.00 L.S. 10,000.00 I.S. II,HDO.OD L.S. 5,OW.W L.S. S,OW.W 05.00 255.00 IDCTOG 300.00 3OU.00 900.01 u0.00 170.00 IW.W IW.W I, OXI.DO I,000.W 898,904,50 1,028,671.08 1,100,295.00 • Granstron Consl. K.F.C. Comp any BID AMOUNT BID AMOUNT I.S. I,OW.00 L5. 2, OW.00 300.00 900.00 240.00 720.00 200.00 400.00 725.00 1,450.00 20.00 IW. DO 65.00 325.00 400. DO 801).00 1.000.00 2, 010. DO L.S. 2, OW. DO L.S. 5,500.00 L.S. B4OUO.OU L.S. 14,40D.DO 200. DO 600. DO 40.00 120.00 500.00 500.00 700.00 7W.00 970,161.00 1,077,916.40 r BILL MANN & ASSOCIATES Civil Engineering • Drainage — Flood Control • Special Studies • March 28, 1984 •• File: 84 -15 Mr, Monte Prescher Public Works Engineer City of Rancho Cucamonga _ 9320 Baseline Road, Suite C " Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Subject: Beryl Street - Hellman Avenue Storm Drain Improvement (Phase I) - Construction Staking and Consulting Services Dear Mr. Preacher: In response to the letter by Richard Cora and subsequent conversation, we have separated the proposal for the subject project into two separate proposals. This proposal is for construction staking and engineering consulting services. The following services will be provided: • Item Description (1) Construction Staking (a) Rough grades - slope stakes for channel. (b) Final grade stakes for channel. C (c) Right -of -way staking and lathing for contractor control. (d) Curb and gutter and street staking. (e) Storm drain conduit and appurtenances staking. (2) Engineering Services (a) Design and drafting services during construction as necessary, and preparation of "as- built" drawings. The fee schedule for the above items will be as follows: Item (1) The construction staking will be on an hourly basis at the standard hourly fees of: 1814 COMMERCENTER WEST • SUITE A • SAN BERNARDINO, CA. 92403 • (714) 885.4309 2' March 28, 1984 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page two Principal (Surveyor) $66 /hour 2 -Man Survey Crew $98 /hour 3 -`fan Survey Crew $128 /hour Estimated construction survey costs $23,500.00 (2) Design and drafting services during construction at the hourly rates of: Principal (Managing) S62 /hour Project Engineering $50 /hour Field Review S46 /hour Drafter $35 /hour En¢ineering Aide S24 /hour Clerical /Delivery $23 /hour Mileage, Materials, etc., at cost. All field survey work will be provided by Linville - Sanderson 6 Associates, the firm that provided the preliminary survey. Linville - Sanderson S Asso- ciates will be solely responsible for the technical aspects and accuracy of the field survey work, and 9111 Mann 6 Associates will not assume any liability as a result of the field survev. A standard rate fee schedule is attached. Sincerely, Consulting.5ngineer 3CM:sw Attachment as noted cc: Linville - Sanderson actn: Gary Sanderson Zb • • • (.JLL MANN & ASSOCIATL- Civil Engineering • Drainage — Flood Control • Special Studies STANDARD RATE SCHEDULE September 1, 1983 Principal Consulting Meetings with Client, Agencies and presentations to Boards, Councils $80.00 /hour and Agencies, and related work Planning and Engineering Principai Engineering, Project Managing $62.00 /hour Project Engineering, Designing $50.00 /hour Research, Field Review $46.00 1hour Report Preparation $42.00 /hour Designing and Drafting enior Designer $40.00 /hour Senior Drafter, Design Drafter $38.00 /hour Drafter $35.00 /hour Technician, Engineering Aide and $24.00 /hour Junior Drafter ?(iscellaneous Services and Expenses Court Appearances, Preparation, Despositions and Meetings $125.00 /hour or By Agreement ($400.Min. Clerical Delivery S 23.00 /hour Mileage $ 0.32 /mile Materlais and other expenses Cost plus 15% Outside Consultants and Services Cosc plus 10% NOTE: Unless other arrangements are made, a 159'. retainer will be requested ($500 minimum). Overtime will be 135' of standard hourly rates. Statements will. be presented bi- weekly. 1814 COMMERCENTER WEST • SUITE A • SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408 • 17141885.4809 4 �' 0 0 0 RICHARD MILLS ASSOCIATES 9624 Mawr ewnw • Romho Cucamonga. Cabromia 91730 • p14) 959.1951 April 23, 1984 City of Rancho Cucamonga 9340 Baseline Road, Suite B Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701 Attention: Monte Prescher Subject: Proposal for Soils and Materials Testing Beryl - Hellma- Storm Drain - Phase I Gentlemen: In response to your request for proposals on March 20, 1984, we propose to provide soils and materials testing services for the subject project in accordance to the attached worksheets. Our estimated project budget for performing the indicated scope of work is $12,600.00. • Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal, should we be selected, we can begin the preliminary report phase of the work within 5 working days of receipt of your notice to proceed. If there are any questions regarding our proposal, Please feel free to contact us. Respectfully Submitted, RICHARD MILS ASSOCIATES E. Duane Lyon, Vice President waogr 3ounaluR o,owsww nma 99 PROPOSAL ITEMS 1) Compaction Tests (Based on 4 tests per callout) 2; Pie- Jroduction P.C.C, Plant inspection 3) P.C.C. Cylinder Breaks 4 °aterials Tests ]) ^R" :clue Tests Yie'a (Cement Factor) Tests 7; Earin Fill Observation Unit Price $ 36.50 (1) Limp Sum 1750.00 (2) Unit Price 23.00 .;nit Price 7a5.On (3) ';nit ?rice 240.00 '.,'nit Price 140.00 Per Hour Price 40.00 EST:MATEC TJTAL 512,600.00' - -- JTE: = .m:•1de cc-aact �on tests dill pe rep:. Leo .,eery 253 f.,et. JYl -ors will be taken 3 for every 25 yarns eer c, 'l',nde ^s a day when P.C.C. is aoured. :;nf prTan ce test; shall consist of t..o sampl =_s for aac^ a, aaa - (1) Unit cost for compaction tests assumes that the tests will be taken at grade and do not include anv costs for excavating test holes in excess of one foot. (2) Lump sum costs include 51000.00 for testing of Portland cement for conformance to ASTM C150. Normal practice on a job of this nature is to have the cement manufacturer to certify their cement. Most batch Plants use more than one cement supplier and on any day they will no through several loads of cement; consequently, samples of cement taken prior to the commencement of construction do not assure that the cement tested represents the cement that will he used on the project. We recommend that crab samples of cement be made on a random basis on days that concrete is being Placed and that the samples be retained for testing if the compression strength tests do not comply to specifications. (3) R -Value tests are not performed on asphaltic concrete; therefore, our unit costs includes: 1) Sieve analysis on aggregate after extraction. fl 0i1 content based on extraction test methods. Hveem stabilometer values. • • 0 7 vra a yr r Is Xv uUid Vrvivva GUCnAi MEMORANDUM °i 1977 DATE: May 23, 1984 TO: Members of City Council and City Manager FROM: Mark Lorimer, Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR FUND TRANSFER The Community Development Department recently requested that certain equipment be purchased for employee use in the employee area of the Community Development Department. The equipment is to include a sink /cabinet unit, two tables and ten folding chairs. Additionally, the Community Development Department has requested purchase of two cabinet units to be used as storage and counter space in the Community Development copy room. This request is necessitated by IBM's demand that the City allow for more service access to the existing copier. After conducting a cost -- comparison of the equipment requested, staff has determined the most cost effective pricing for the above - mentioned equipment, that being $1100. Since the City Facilities Equipment account does not allow for the purchase of such equipment at the present time, it is recommended that $1100 be transferred from the Community Development/ Administration Travel and Meetings account (01- 4313 -3100) into the City Facilities Equipment account (01- 4245- 7044). ML /kep 90 • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Blane Frandsen, Associate Civil Engineer 19%' SUBJECT: Engineering Services Contract Change Order for Street Reconstruction for San Bernardino Road from Vineyard and Archibald Avenues At the request of City staffing, the firm of GPS Consulting Civil Engineers has p- "ared the following change order agreement and description of extra workir to be performed to complete plans and specifications for the noted project as well as combine this project with the Church Street Reconstruction Project for both projects to be completed under the same construction contract. Contract fees will be increased 54,840.00 for a new contract total of 524,140.000. RECOMMENDATION It is hereby recommended that the attached Engineering Services Contract Change Order to GPS Consulting Civil Engineers be approved for the completion of design services for the reconstruction of San Bernardino Road from Vineyard and Archibald Avenues. Respectfully submi LB11:r.jaa Attachments WA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER CONTRACT FOR Order No.: 02709 Design of San Bernardino Road _ Vineyard to Archibold 5 -30 -84 Date: TO: GPS Consulting Civil Engineers Engineer You are hereby requested to comply with the following changes from the agreement for engineering services. DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES DECREASE IN REASE in Contract Price In Contract Price 1. Additional Design Services per attached -0- $3,340.00 2. Additional Field Survey per attached TOTAL $4,840.00 JUSTIFICATION . Additional work as requested by City, see attached. The amount of the Contract will be (Decreased) (Increased) by,the sum of: Pour thousand Eight hundred forty Dollars ($ 4,840.00 ) The Contract Total including this and previous Change Orders will be: Twenty -four thousand Seven hundred forty Dollars ($24,740.00 } The Contract period provided for completion will be (Increased) sixty (60) Days. This document will become a supplement to the Contract and all provisions will apply hereto. Requested: L oyd B, Hu bDS, Ci4—Engineer Date Accepted: Engioeer Oa to Approved: Mayor, City of Rancho Cucamonga Date This information will be used is record of any changes to the original engineering agree- ment dated: 9;L- CITY OF RANCHO CJC,. SGA SAN BERNARDINO ROAD ENGINEERING SERVICES EXTRA WORK ITEM NO. 1 - Orangewood Drive Intersection • Original project concept includes no construction at Orangewood Drive In- tersection. Final project concept as approved by staff added reconstruction of inter- section and 100 LF of curb to the west to eliminate low point. ITEM NO. 2 - Centerline Grades Initial project concept called for an asphalt concrete overlay on majority of the street. This would not require the design of new street centerline grades. Due to the final concept of pulvorizing, regrading and paving, it will be necessary to de- sign new centerline grades in the pulvorizing areas. ITEM NO. 3 - Additional Improvements Initial project concepts did not include construction of improvements on the southside, between station 36+ 00 to 37 + 60; and on the north side, between station 17 + 25 and Spinel Avenue. These were added during final project review. ITEM 40. 4 - Lion Street Initial project concept included design of improvements on Lion Street to 100 feet north. Additional curb and gutter and pavement construction was added during final project review. ITEM NO. 5 - Nuisance Water Drain A nuisance water drainage system was added from Lion Street to Hellman Avenue during final project review. This requires the addition of one plan and pro- • file sheet to the plans. ITEM '.0. 6 - Klusman Road Improvement Addition of curb and gutter and pavement an west side of K i.sman to about 200' south of San Bernardino Road. ITEM "10. 7 - Combining Project with Church Street Project Coordination of plans, construction notes, specifications and bid items. Preparation of combined title sheet. ITEM NO. 3 - Field Design Survey Additional field survey is required to prepare the requested additional work as follows; a. Stations and elevations at various existing joints for join purposes. b. Survey for nuisance water drain including elevations of exis- ting catch bains and junction structure at Montara Avenue. C. Additional topo, on southside at Station 49 + 50 as requested. d. Additional topo, on westside Klusman Road as requested. e. Additional survey for Items 1, 3, 4, and 5 above. f. Additional elevation on some of the existing driveways to • provide suitable paving joins. 93 Is El El STAFF REPORT �nr DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Joe Stofa, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Traffic Signal Maintenance Contract Supplement to Purchase Order No. 2588 One August 11, 1983, the City Council awarded the contract for Traffic Signal Maintenance to Computer Service Division of Anaheim. The Traffic Signal Maintenance Contract Purchase Order prepared for the "monthly service only" and failed to include funds for replacement, wind damage, and any other unexpected problems which can occur. The City Council had approved a budget amount of $60,000 for traffic signal maintenance. Purchase Order No. 2588 was prepared for only $9,900. Staff is requesting approval of a supplement to Purchase Order No. 2588 for the amount of 550,100, which totals the budgeted amount of $60,000. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council approve a supplement to Purchase Order No. 2588 for the amount of $50,100. Respectfully submi ed,y L H. aaa 9I/ • RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, NAMING THOSE TMDIVIDUALS WHO WILL BE ALLOWED TO SIGN SMALL CLAIMS COURT DOCUMENTS RELATING TO BUSINESS LICENSES The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does resolve as follows: In order to comply with the requirements of the municipal small claims court of the County of San Bernardino, it Is necessary to name certain individuals as those persons authorized to sign court documents as required on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. THEREFORE, the following named individuals are authorized to sign all necessary court documents relating to Business Licenses: Sandra D. Matlock, Business License Inspector Betty M. King, Account Clerk Harry J. Empey, Finance Director Resolution No. 81 -154A is hereby rescinded. PASSED, APPROVED. and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 9 7S Jon D. Mikels, Mayor • l RESOLUTION NO. q N A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING CERTAIN CITY EMPLOYEES TO ENFORCE CITY ORDINANCES AND ALL PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CODES REFERRED TO THEREIN SECTION 1: Pursuant to Ordinance No. 54 the following city employees are designated to enforce city ordinances, in all primary and secondary codes referred to therein: Gary Richards, Community Code Representative Jerry Grant, Building Official Richard Gomet, City Planner Timothy Beedle, Senior Planner Sandra Matlock, Business License Inspector SECTION Z: Resolution No. 81 -30A is hereby rescinded. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: • NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 11 1(a Jon D. Mikels, Mayor • • PlT nV n A XTPUn PT TPA Twnw }nn SUBJECT: Agreement for Engineering Services to C G Engineering for Preparation of Plans, Specifications and Estimates for Archibald Avenue FAU (Street Resurfacing and Rehabilitation) Approval by District 8 of the State of California Department of Transporation (CalTrans) for the use of FAU funding for the proposed street reconstruction on Archibald Avenue has just been received. The fee of 513,900.00 to C G Engineering includes Engineering Services to complete engineering drawings begun under an earlier contract to review the limits of pavement distress and to reset the actual construction limits to complete specifications, estimates and contract documents in accordance with funding requirements of Federal Aid for Urban Arterials (FAU). An hydraulic report pertaining to street drainage will also be completed as a FAU requirement due to Arch i1ba7d Avenue serving as a drainage course and being subject to localized flooding as shown on existing flood hazard mapping. An existing agreement with C G Engineering with workings yet to be completed in the amount of 53,959.80 will be replaced or otherwise cancelled by virtue of this new agreement, RECOMMENDATION It is hereby recommended that C G Engineering being duly licensed engineers located in San Bernardino, California be engaged by contract to complete plans, specifications and engineers estimates for the Reconstruction of Archibald Avenue from Fourth Street to Base Line Road. Respectfully subm Jted, LSH :j1p 5% STAFF REPORT? C > Y" 19': GATE: June 6, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd 8. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Blane Frandsen, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Agreement for Engineering Services to C G Engineering for Preparation of Plans, Specifications and Estimates for Archibald Avenue FAU (Street Resurfacing and Rehabilitation) Approval by District 8 of the State of California Department of Transporation (CalTrans) for the use of FAU funding for the proposed street reconstruction on Archibald Avenue has just been received. The fee of 513,900.00 to C G Engineering includes Engineering Services to complete engineering drawings begun under an earlier contract to review the limits of pavement distress and to reset the actual construction limits to complete specifications, estimates and contract documents in accordance with funding requirements of Federal Aid for Urban Arterials (FAU). An hydraulic report pertaining to street drainage will also be completed as a FAU requirement due to Arch i1ba7d Avenue serving as a drainage course and being subject to localized flooding as shown on existing flood hazard mapping. An existing agreement with C G Engineering with workings yet to be completed in the amount of 53,959.80 will be replaced or otherwise cancelled by virtue of this new agreement, RECOMMENDATION It is hereby recommended that C G Engineering being duly licensed engineers located in San Bernardino, California be engaged by contract to complete plans, specifications and engineers estimates for the Reconstruction of Archibald Avenue from Fourth Street to Base Line Road. Respectfully subm Jted, LSH :j1p 5% AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES • This agreement is made and entered into this day of 1984, between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a Municipal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY ", AND C G ENGINEERING, duly licensed engineers of 2627 South Waterman Avenue, Suite E, San Bernardino, California 92408, hereinafter referred to as "ENGINEER ". WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the CITY has need for engineering services, consisting of preliminary surveying, the preparation of hydraulic study, improvement plans, estimates and other professional services for ARCHIBALD AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION AND OVERLAY BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND BASELINE ROAD, herein referred to as "PROJECT ". WHEREAS, the CITY has invited the ENGINEER to provide required engineering services for the CITY; WHEREAS, the ENGINEER has specialized knowledge, training and experience in street design, and construction; AND, THEREFORE, the CITY AND ENGINEER, for the considerations hereinafter named, agree as follows: ARTICLE I The ENGINEER agrees to furnish and perform the various . professional services, pertinent to preparation of said Plans and Cost Estimates as follows: A. Location Hydraulic Study 1> Prepare a Location Hydraulic Study for Archibald Avenue from water flow information provided by the CITY from their Storm Drain Master Plan. The study will conform, in general, to the provisions in Appendix J of the Local Programs Manual, Volume III and will contain four or five hydraulic sections of the proposed new street. 2> Complete the Summary of Floodplain Encroachment form in accordance with Appendix J. 3) Submit items to CITY for review, comment and submittal to Caltrans. 1 9 S B. Preliminary and Final Design 1) Prepare the plans and details utilizing the seventeen • different typical sections shown in CITY'S letter of April 16, 1984. 2) Prepare plans, specifications and estimate in accordance with State requirements for FAU projects. 3) Contact all utilities to obtain locations of their facilities and plot said facilities on the plans. 4) Field survey crew will review the project site to note any changes since the area was surveyed by ENGINEER in 1983. 5) Field review the site to obtain precise limits of overlays as recommended in the seventeen typical sections. 6) Process plans through Caltrans, in addition to CITY, for approval. C. Construction 1. At the option of the CITY the ENGINEER shall provide all required construction staking when authorized by the City Engineer. 2. ENGINEER shall be available for consultations during • construction on any needed plan revisions. 3. Make recommendations on contract change orders. D. Reproduction Original tracings shall become property of the CITY upon completion of this contract. Costs for reproduction of plans and specifications will be borne by the CITY. ARTICLE II The CITY will provide ENGINEER at no cost floodplain limits information and, if necessary, the Flood Insurance Maps. The CITY will handle Right -of -Way Certification and overall goals for DBE's /WBE's. ARTICLE III The CITY agrees to pay the ENGINEER, as compensation for the above named professional services: A. For all items listed Sections A and B of Article I, the CITY will compensate the ENGINEER at the hourly rates attached as Exhibit "A ". The total of these hourly charges $13,900. shall not exceed 2 yy • H. For all items listed in Section C, of Article I, the CITY will • compensate the ENGINEER at hourly rates in accordance with said Exhibit "A ", provided the CITY elects to authorize such work. C. For section D, of Article I and for any other prints or documents the CITY will compensate the ENGINEER in accordance with Exhibit "A ". D. The hourly rates attached as Exhibit "A" are effective through June 30, 1984. E. The ENGINEER will submit with his billing, a monthly summary of the hours worked by each classification, the hourly rate, and the total charges for each classification. ARTICLE IV If the work is suspended indefinitely or abandoned prior to completion of the Engineering Services set forth in this agreement, the CITY agrees to pay the ENGINEER, at the rates set forth in Article II above, to the time of said suspension or abandonment, which payment is to be the full and final settlement for all the work performed by the ENGINEER to said time, and such work shall become the property of the CITY upon said payment. ARTICLE V The PROJECT shall be completed within sixty (60) working days after receiving authorization to proceed. • ARTICLE VI The Consultant shall hold harmless and indemnify the City, its officer and employees and acents against liability (bodily injury, including death and property damage) arising out of negligent acts of the Consultant or his employees in the perfo rniance of this Agreement. The Consultant shall maintain combined single limit general liability insurance covering bodily injury and property damace in an amount not less than $1,000,000 or the equivalent thereof. The Consultant shall furnish evidence of compliance with Worker's Compensation laws or Certificates of Self- Insurance for employees satisfactory to the City. ARTICLE VII All terms, conditions and provisions hereof shall inure to and shall bind the parties herein, their successors and assigns. /p 0 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement the day and year first above written. • APPROVED AS 10 FORM City Attorney, RanChO"Cuca¢onga RCUC -014 RC- 014 -1(16) /o/ CITY OF RANCHO COCAHORGA BY Mayor By: City Clerk C G ENGINEERING By: President r�L CG ENOINEERINI Planning and Engineering • PREVAILING HOURLY RATES July 1, 1983 - June 30, 1984 OFFICE 30.00 /9r. Principal Engineer $75.00/Hr. Project FHnager 58.00 /Hr. Associate Engineer 52.00 /Hr. Real Property Specialist 50.00 /Hr. Principal Planner 50.00 /Hr. Landscape Architect 46.00/11r. Senior Designer 42.00 /Hr. Designer- Draftsman 40.00 /Hr. Planner 39.00 /Hr. Senior Draftsman 34.00 /Hr. Draftsman 30.00 /Hr. Computer Operator 30.00 /9r. • Engineer Aide 25.00 /Hr. clerical 18.00 /Hr. FIELD Resident Engineer (Professional) 58.00 /Hr. Inspector (Unlicensed) 40.00 /Hr. Field Survey Supervisor (Licensed) 50.00 /Hr. 2 Man Survey Party 98.00/Hr. 3 Man Survey Party 125.00 /Hr. Electronic Measuring Device 70.00 /Day MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES AND EXPENSES Mileage 0.225/Mi. Prints, Copying, Reproduction and Miscellaneous Materials Cost + 106 Outside Consultant Services Cost + 106 Equipment Rental Per Caltrans Publications ® I CGFY84 2627 S. WATERMAN AVE,, SUITE E • SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92408.17141 824.2420 ORDINANCE NO. 227 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ENTITLED "TERRA VISTA PARR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT N0. 1" BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ON THE ONE HAND AND LEWIS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., WESTERN PROPERTIES, LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA AND LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY ON THE OTHER RAND The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows; SECTION It The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. Government Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5 authorise the City to enter into binding Development Agreements with persons having legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of such property. B. Three copies of the proposed Development Agreement between the City on the one hand and Lewis Construction Company, Inc., a California corporation, Western Properties, a General Partnership, Lewis Homes of California, a General Partnership, and Lewis Development Company, a General Partnership, hereinafter collectively "Lewis" on the other hand are on file in • the office of the City Clerk, and the same are public records of the City. C. The proposed Development Agreement, which is entitled "Terra Vista Park Development Agreement No. 1" pertains to real property situated in the City known as the Terra Vista Planned Community. The planned community includes an area of land beginning at the intersection of tiavea Avenue and Foothill Boulevard; thence traversing north along the centerline of Haven Avenue to the south right of way of the Pacific Electric Railroad; thence east to the easterly boundary of the Deer Creek Flood Control Channel; thence southwesterly along said boundary to the centerline of Base Line Road; thence east to the centerline of Rochester Avenue; thence south to the centerline of Foothill Boulevard; thence west to the beginning point, being the intersection of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. D. The City Council has held a public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement and notice of that public hearing has been given for the time and in the manner prescribed by Government Code Section 65867, E. The provisions of the proposed Development Agreement are consistent with the City's General Plan and the Community Plan of the Terra Vista Planned Community. SECTION 2: The proposed Development Agreement between the City and Lewis, referred to in Section I above, is hereby approved. On the effective date of this Ordinance the Mayor shall sign as many copies of said Development Agreement as are necessary for the parties; and City Clerk shall attest to the same and shall deliver one fully signed copy to Lewis. /,'�3 Ordinance No. Page 2 SECTION 3: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the ame 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 Cucauonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of 1984. AYES: NOES; ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk boy Jon D. MSkels, Mayor • • • rrmv nc V e vrvn rTTr a nrnxTr n STAFF REPORT �s�. qc y � 7 197 � DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd 8. Hubbs, City Engineer SUBJECT: Alta Channel Assessment District 82 -2 June 6, 1984 is the date of the final formation hearing on Assessment District 82 -2. As explained in my memo of April 30, 1984 (attached), Staff has proposed a revision to the District eliminating those properties which have not submitted some type of development proposal. On May 22, a workshop was held with the property owners to explain this option. Representatives of the PARA Group were present and several of the active developers. Only one objection to the proposal was raised by Philo Biane. Mr Biane processed a Parcel Nap recently to divide his 20 acres for sale. The remaining 6 acre parcel which is the site of his home he feels should be exempt from assessment. The conditions of the parcel map required inclusion in the District are consistent with the philosophy of the development inclusion. All other input on the new proposal was positive. Based on the support of the revised District, it is staff's recommendation that Assessment District 82 -2 be abandoned and a District within the revised boundaries be inititated with a tentative construction schedule for early Spring of 1985. Development of the new District will require modification to the plans and bid documents, revisions to the Environmental Impact Report and additional Assessment Engineering Services to establish the new district. If Council wishes to proceed with the revised district, you should approve the attached contract revisions as listed below: Associated Engineers - Design - $29,000.00 Don King and Associates - E.I.R. - - 5 5,625.00 Don Owen & Associates - Assessment Engineer - $14,000.00 The two key points to consider about the proposed District revision are the fact that the City contribution to the District may exceed $500,000 and the immediate effect of the revised project will be increased growth with no mitigation of increased runoff to Hermosa Avenue. Even considering these two factors, staff feels that the revised project is the most expeditious alterntative and should be developed, /05, CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Alta Loma Channel Assessment District 82 -2 June 6, 1984 Page 2 RECOPWROATIOR It is staff's recommendation that Council adopt the attached resolution abandoning Assessment District 82 -2 and rejecting all construction bids. Adopt a resolution reinitiating proceedings on Assessment District 84 -2 and approve consultant contract changes to proceed with formation of a revised assessment district. Contract changes are specified in the attached contract documents in the amounts as specified above. Respectfully submi ted, 4 aa Attachments `J • /OG 0 • 7 t MEMORANDUM Y� F 2 Y DATE: April 30, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer SUBJECT: ALTA LOMA CHANNEL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 82 -2 The purpose of this memo is to summarize the restructing of the Alta Loma Channel Assessment District. This restructured district will be presented to property owners on May 22, 1984 at 7:00 pm in the Forum. If there appears to be no si5.iificant opposition, the current district would be abandoned on June 6 and the process of formation of the subsequent district begun. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 82 -2 DESCRIPTION Exhibit A shows the boundary and key elements of District 82 -2 which is currently in process. These key project elements and cost estimates are delineated below: io7 TOTAL 13,380,000 Project Element Estimate Cost 1. Storm Drain 33 and 3B Basin E 414,000 (Serves exclusively Tract 10088) 2. Alta Loma Basin 3 Construction 141,000 3• Alta Loma Basin at Hillside 111,000 4. Channel Crossing at Hillside 75,000 5. Channel Crossing at Wilson 125,000 6. Alta Loma Channel and Spillway from Basin 3 to Basin No.2 1,426,000 7. Excavation of Alta Loma Basin No. 2 190,000 3. Construction of Equalizer Box and Outlet Works 150,000 9. Storm Drain 3E (Wilson Avenue) 37,000 10. Hillside Road and Storm Drain 3D 161,000 11. Engineering (Design A Construction) 550,000 io7 TOTAL 13,380,000 Alta Loma Channel Assesa .ant District 82 -2 April 30, 1984 Page 2 • Under the existing proposal, the construction costs plus financing total $4,650,000 to be assessed to 602.68 acres resulting in a $7,715 per acre assessment. REVISION PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION It is proposed that the scope of improvement and District boundaries be reduced to allow currently approved developments to continue at approximately the assessment level originally noticed (see Exhibit B). In order to accomplish this will require the City to contribute funds to the Distict and enter into a reimbursement agreement with the County for engineering costs. The revised boundary is shown on Exhibit B and the new project elements and deletions are shown below: Project Element Estimate Cost 1. Storm Drain 3B and 3B Basins Deleted 2. Alta Loma Basin 3 Construction $ 141,000 3. Alta Loma Basin 3 Excavation Deleted 4. Channel Crossing at Hillside (75,000) • 5. Channel Crossing at Wilson (City Contribution) (125,000) 6. Alta Loma Channel and Spillway from Basin 3 to Basin No. 2 1,426,000 7. Excavation of Alta Loma Basin No. 2 Deleted 8. Construction of Equalizer Box and Outlet Work 150,000 91 Storm Drain 3E (Wilson Avenue) 37,000 10. Hillside Road and Storm Drain 3D Deleted 11. Engineering (City Contribution County Loan) (550,000) Cost to District 1,554,000 City Contribution 500,000 County Loan 250.000 TOTAL $2,304,000 The total cost to bond for the project including construction contingency, bond discount and reserve would be approximately $2,000,000. Total acreage within the reduced boundary would be approximately 260 acres. The resulting • assessments would be approximately $7,700 per acre. iC3 Alta Loma Channel Assess .ant District 82 -2 April 30, 1984 Page 3 F, 1 L J It should be noted that Tentative Tract 10088 has been deleted from the proposed District Boundary. This tract would be held responsible for Storm Drain 3B and 33 Basin and excavation of Alta Loma Basin No. 3 at time of development (total cost $555;000). Staff feels that a City contribution to the project in the form of Drainage and Systems Fees for road crossings is justified based on overall City benefits of the project. Approximately $250,000 of City contribution has already been expended in engineering and associated costs. These funds have been drawn from the Drainage Fee Fund. It is proposed that the County loan the City $250,000 in the form of Engineering and Inspection Services. The costs would be repaid with future Drainage Fees. This general concept has been supported by the County and it would be proposed that a standard reimbursement agreement for drainage be utilized. This will be worked out as the project continues. Those properties not included in the District would be expected to pay the current prevailing drainage fee and complete excavation of the Alta Loma Basins prior to issuance of building permits. It should be pointed out that development in process under the restructured program will be relieved of potential flood hazard but no mitigation of • increased flows to Hermosa /Turner will be affected immediately. Staff will continue to vigorously pursue the basin expansion in the future as funds become available. PROCEDURES If the proposed restructuring meets with Council and Community approval, the current District would be abandoned and a new District developed. Development of the new District will require revision of the Plans and Specifications, Environmental Documents, a new Engineer's Report and new advertisement and postings. The estimated cost of this work is $40,000 to $45,000. Refined figures are currently being obtained from consultants for the project. If you have any questions, please call. Respectfully submitted, LBH:jaa cc: Nackensie Brown, Bond Counsel Jack Lam, CDD Director Robert Dougherty, City Attorney Chuck Laird, S.B. County Don Ring, EIR Consultant Larry Rolapp, Financial Consultant Don Owen, Assessment Engineer /C5 li BASIN.... LEGEND TBA T No �,'I�I ••• IIp••••• DISTRICT S' • BOUNDARY •I 3B • STORM i BASIN 3 —� EXISTING DRAIN ExCAVAPION � DEVELOPME • NOTASSESSED • •I • I i —•" (0 NISTRUCCI M a �M NILLS -.0 M UHILLiIGE CHgNNEL 1 c SING •' j L1 LSON CHAN����' -^� i • CROSSING '. EXIST. ASSESSMEN BASIN 2 E %OA il'E0UAL12E BOX j_ -- HAVEN CHANNEL OUTLET NORTH r- ALTA LONG CHANNEL RANCHO CUCAMONGA EXHIBIT "A" . ^ .;rye• I I i _ L w LEGEND 09000 PROPOS DISTRICT BOUNDS AREAS TO BE ASSESSED i r�syrVJtU (,ASSESSMENT �l 1.ZOUALIZE BOX 'HAVEN CHANNEL NORTH I'I ALTA LOPA CHANNEL RANCHO CUCAMONGA EXHIBIT "B" nra�rl „ -N w LEGEND 09000 PROPOS DISTRICT BOUNDS AREAS TO BE ASSESSED i r�syrVJtU (,ASSESSMENT �l 1.ZOUALIZE BOX 'HAVEN CHANNEL NORTH I'I ALTA LOPA CHANNEL RANCHO CUCAMONGA EXHIBIT "B" nra�rl „ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER SFNTRACT FOR Order No.: ALTA LONA CHANNEL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 82 -2 6/6/84 Date: TO: Con Owen & Associates ngineer You are hereby requested to comply with the following changes from the agreement for engineering services. DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES DECREASE INCREASE in Contract Price In Contract Price Preparation of revised Engineer's Report, Not -to- exceed Public Hearings, District Map and other $14,000.00 supporting meetings and documents at delineated in Exhibit A attached TOTAL 514,000.00 District revision requires new documentation The amount of the Contract will be (geaneasd) (Increased) by the sum of: Fourteen thousand and 00 /100------------------ - - - - -- Dollars ($14,000.00 -- T— The Contract Total including this and previous Change Orders will be: Fifty-six thousand and 00/ 100----------------------------------- - - - - -- Dollars Ouu.UU . The Contract period provided for completion will be (Increased) (Decreased) (Unchanged) Not specified Days This document will become a supplement to the Contract and all provisions will apply hereto. Requested: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer Date Accepted: Engineer Date Opproved: Mayor, ity of Rancho ucamonga Dale This infomation will used as record of any c anges o the original engineering agreement dated: // ? CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER CONTRACT FOR Order No.: • ALTA LOMA STORM DRAIN PROJECT 82 -2 Date; TO: Mills and Lill Associated Engineers Engineer You are hereby requested to comply with the following changes from the agreement for engineering services. DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES DECREASE N R AS in Contract Price In Contract Price Addendum No. 3 to Agreement for Engineering Services per attached document S 29,000 TOTAL $199,000 JUSTIFICATION Project litigation required rescoping of the project. Project to be rebid after plan We revision. Engineer to support and project coordination during rebidding. The amount of the Contract will be (9emased) (Increased) by the sum of: Twenty-nine thousand and 00 /100 -------------------------- - - - - -- Dollars ($29,000.00 The Contract Total including this and previous Change Orders will be: One hundred ninet - nine thousand and 00 /100 --------------------- - - - - -- Dollars ($199,0 The Contract period provided for completion will be (Increased)(BeaKUaed) (yeahaeged) through the time required to rebid and award the construction contract. This document will become a supplement to the Contract and all provisions will apply hereto. Requested: LIoyd B. Hu bus, City Engineer Date Accepted; Date Approved: ow Mayor, City o ga Rancho ucamon Date - - -� Wfs n orwat on w us as record a any changes o original engineering agreement dated: DECEMBER 2, 1982 / 2 n u ADDENDUM NO.3 Vt.] AGPYMU NT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES By this addend= to "Agreement for Engineering Services ", entered into on the 2nd day of December, 1982 between the CITY OF RANCFD CUCAHOMGA, a municipal corporation located in the State of California, County of San Bernardino, hereinafter referred to as "City" and HILLS MID LILL ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS, INC., with office located at 316 East "E" Street, Ontario, California 91764, hereinafter referred to as "STORM DRAIN ENGINEER" has proposed to complete such services as outlined below. City proposes to revise the ALTA LOMA STORM DRAIN PROJECT to delete Line 38 and Line 3B Basin, Hillside Road street and storm drain improvements be- tween Archibald Ave and Amethyst St.; to reduce the excavation of Alta Loma Basin No. 2 to that necessary to construct the inlet for the Alta Loma Storm Drain and to drain the basin toward the new equalizer culvert; and to include street improvements to Hermosa Ave- between Banyon St. and Coca St. The revised project will include improvement of Alta Loma Storm Drain with culverts at Hillside Road and Nilson Ave; construction of a storm drain at Nilson Ave. between Archibald Ave. and Amethyst St; construction of Alta Loma Basin No. 3: construction of an equalizer culvert under Hermosa Ave. between Alta Loma Basins No I and 2; improvement to Hermosa Ave: excavation of Alta Lama Basin No 1 and 2 as necessary to drain; and alteration of the inlet to Haven Ave. Storm Drain. The proposed services to be completed by the ENGINEER are as follows: Item No, Item 1 Prepare revised final plans as necessary to accomplish the changes set forth above, except that the design and preparation of plans for the street improvements to Hermosa Ave will be done under a separate engineering services contract. 2. Prepare revised final specifications as necessary to accomplish the changes set forth above. iT ADDENDM ND. 3 • Page 2 Item N0. Item 3. Recompute construction ruanlities and prepare a cost estimate based on the revised final plans. a- Coordinate the revisions with and ar- range for approvals by the Flood Control District. To compensate for the increased scope of work the fee set forth in Arti- cle I1 A shall be increased by $29,000 to $199,000. • • /i S� • CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This agreement made this _ day of , 1984, by and between the CITY OF RAN6q CUCAMONGA (hereinafter called the "City ") and DONALD G. KING i ASSOCIATES, 9375 Archibald Avenue, Building 200, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730 (hereinafter called the "Consultant'). WHEREAS, the City solicited proposals for professional services related to their proposed Assessment District No, 84 -2, Alta Loma Flood Control Channel, and the Consultant, by letter dated 3 May 1984 • submitted a proposal; WHEREAS, the City has reviewed said proposal and finds It acceptable to meet the needs of the City; WHEREAS, the City has, In its possession, a petition signed by over 60% of the landowners by area from within the projected benefited area of said public work. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS, TO NIT: A. The City hereby employs the Consultant and the Consultant hereby accepts such employment to perform the services as generally described In the proposal of 3 May 1984 "Attachment A" hereto. B. The Consultant shall be an Independent contractor and not an employee nor shall any of Consultant's employees, agents, or subcontractors be employed by the City. /tic C. The Consultant shall perform in a diligent manner the • following services: 1. Assemble, review, and analyze all necessary soils, geology, hydrology, erosion, blota, population, land use, aesthetic, economic, traffic and circulation and engineering data and Information which may have a bearing on the Tiered Environmental Impact Report for the Alta Lana Flood Control Channel. 2. Prepare a prellmlr.ery (screen) report for Staff review, a public rev Iew draft for the workshops, and a Final Draft after public review period has ended. FEE: Fee for services performed under this contract shall be paid monthly by the City upon receipt of an Invoice by the Consultant based • upon the fee schedule In the Attachment A. The fee for the work conducted pursuant to Items listed In Attachment A will trot exceed $5,625.00 and the Consultant will not proceed beyond this point without written Instructions to proceed from the City. The City, at Its option, may request the consultant to reproduce, bind, and transmit copies of the distribution and final drafts of this report to reviewing agencies and Individuals. If this option Is exercised the Consultant shall be reimbursed his costs, plus 15%. • C • The mailing address of the City Is as follows: CITY OF RANCHO QICANONGA 9320 C Baseline Road Post Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 The mailing address of the Consultant is as follows: DONALD G. KING 8 ASSOCIATES 9375 Archibald Avenue, Building 200 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 92730 1. CITY reserves and has the right and privilege of cancel Ing, suspending, or abandoning the execution of all or any work In connection with this agreement at any time upon written notice to CONSULTANT. 2. In the event of termination, all finished or unfinished data, • studies, maps, and report prepared by CONSULTANT, shall at the option of CITY become CITY's property. 3. In the event of termination CITY shell pay CONSULTANT for all services performed and all expenses Incurred to date of termination of this agreement on a time and materials bests In accordance with CONSULTANT's standard billing rate set forth In Exhibit "Aw attached hereto. 3 //I IN W17 NESS WHEREOF, said City has caused this contract to be executed and attested by Its proper of ticers duly authorizec and the Consultant has caused this contract to be executed by one of Its officers as of the date hereinafter set forth. "CI Ty" CITY OF RANM CUCA ONGA By Title Date Attest: • ^CONSULTANT^ DONALD G. K NG d ASSOCIATES By TI tie — Date ?' MAN • t //91 • PROPOSAL No. 84 -32 Tiered EIR, Alta Lana Drainage System Page I of 5 BACKGROUND The Alta Lana Drainage System, including Assessment District No. 82 -2 is Intended to provide public Improvements by developing flood control Improvements was reviewed In an Initial Study on 9 February 1983. This review determined that the project may have a significant effect on the environment If Implemented. It was determined, therefore, that a Focused Environmental Impact Report would be prepared to determine the extent of potential environmental Impacts and to develop suitable mitigating measures for all Impacts found. A Focused EIR was prepared and reviewed. Subsequent to certiflcatlon.the City determined that the entire project should be developed In phases, partially through project (Assessment District 84 -2) funding and partially through private contributions resulting from Individual development projects. The original project has, therefore, been significantly altered. The City determined that as a result a new Tiered EIR must be prepared to determine the Initial and ultimate Impacts, should this project be developed In segments. • This proposal Is to develop the necessary Tiered Environmental Impact Report In a timely manner. l"J The Initial Study found that potential Impacts could be caused by the proposed project In seven topic areas which are to be analyzed In the report. These seven topic areas ere; 1. Soils and Geology 2. Hydrology 3. 81ota 4. Population, Land Use, and Planning Considerations 5. Economic Factors 6. Aesthetics 7. Traffic and Circulation THE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT This proposal Is to prepare a tiered environmental Impact report with the express Intent of answering several basic sets of "what If" questions. While organized and presented in a straightforward four -part manner of defining the setting, Identifying any and all Impacts, suggesting mitigation measures, and Ilsting all unavoidable Impacts, this proposed report will provide answers to the seven topic areas as fol lows; /ao PROPOSAL No. 84-32 Tiered EIR, Alta Loma Drainage System • Pace 2 of 5 I. SOILS and GEOLOGY: The project could Initially or eventually create new erosion, siltation or deposition of various materials. When and If this should occur, the proposed debris basins will require periodic cleaning with removal of the debris by truck. Will Increased or new erosion occur to an extent creating a significant environmental Impacts What mitigating measures are feasible that would lessen or eliminate this Impact? 2. HYDROLOGY: The project is to Improve the hydrology of the project area by reducing the hazard of flooding within It. Will this project create a significant environmental Impact on account of any changes in absorption rates and /or rate of surface water runoff? What mitigating measures are feasible that would lessen or eliminate these Impacts? 3. BIOTA: The project may cause the removal of some trees, mainly In the northern area of Line 3A. Will a significant number of trees be affected? Are any trees of botanical or other significance affected? What mitigation measures are feasible that would lessen or eliminate these Impacts? is 4. POPULATION, LAND USE, PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: This project might Influence the development of land uses In locations and Intensities not previously foreseen. Will the project foster or facilitate development In a manner not anticipated by the adopted General Plan, and If so, what measures can /should be taken to mitigate or avoid this potential conflict? Large portions of an approximate 30 acre site In the northern section of Line 3A could be rendered undevelopable If a natural channel is used In this area. A natural channel can be or can become an (attractive) hazard to children during times of rapid water flow. What would be the precise extent of Impact upon the usability of this site If a natural channel were utilized? Would use of a natural channel create a safety hazard? What suitable mitigation measures are feasible that would lessen or mitigate any Impacts found? • / ?/ PROPOSAL No. 94 -32 • Tiered EIR, Alta Loma Drainage System Page 3 of 5 ECONOMIC FACTORS: The project could make large portions of land In the north section of Line 3A undevelopable. If this were to occur, then the City might need to acquire excess land In fee simple as opposed to the purchase of easements. This could add significant costs to this project. What specific Impacts will occur regarding the use of these lands with respect to the existing adopted planning and zoning controls? Whet alternatives or what specific mitigation measures are feasible that the City could utilize to avoid the purchase of excess lands while providing equity to the property owners so affected? Assessment District 84 -2 will Impact affected lands by adding economic costs to them. Certain other lands subject to future development are not Included within the project. How will these considerations affect the developabll lty of the properties? d. AESTHETICS: The project wlII Involve the construction of debris basins and channels. Some might consider this men -made construction as detrimental to the visual character of the area. • What will be the extent of visual Impact within the project area, and what can be done to mitigate these Impacts? 7. CIRCULATION: The project will Involve the construction of debris basins. A secondary Impact may result from the Improvement and maintenance of these debris basins by virtue of heavy equipment and trucks required to load and transport debris out. What will be the precise route for this truck traffic? NIII this use cause Impacts upon adjacent land uses, and If so, what can be done to avoid or mitigate these Impacts? 'T ;X PROPOSAL No. 84 -32 Tiered EIR, Alta Loma Drainage System • Page 4 of 5 THE PRODUCT This proposal Is to prepare a tiered environmental Impact report. For cost and administrative review efficiency only those topic areas identlf led as having the potential for a significant environmental Impact will be discussed. Topic areas where a determination has already been made that a significant Impact would not occur, will not be Included In the report unless specifically added by the City, based upon new information. Flood control projects of the type proposed by this pr- ect tend to have significant growth - Inducing Impacts and other Impacts , an Individually minor but cumulative nature. These potential Impacts may already have been analyzed, since they were not addressed In the Initial study. They are Included here as an overview only. OTHER SERVICES This proposal Is to provide complete project management of the EIR • process for this project. The CONSULTANT will be responsible for all notification from the Notice of Preparation to the Notice of Determination. The CONSULTANT will prepare any necessary recommended findings for use by the City during the certification process. The CONSULTANT will provide three (3) copies of a screencheck draft TEIR for staff review, followed by the Distribution Drafts (quantity to be determined) end, subsequent to certification a Final TEIR (quantity to be determined). The CONSULTANT will be present at two (2) public hearings on this Report and will respond to all questions and comments received. Throughout the analysis and report preparation process the Consultant will maintain communication with the staff liaison. Periodic meetings will be held as appropriate, at the convenience of the City. • IA3 PROPOSAL No. 84 -32 • Tiered EIR, Alta Lana Drainage System Pace 5 of 5 The fee for this effort Is Itemized as follows 1. SOILS and GEOLOGY S 200.00 2. HYDROLOGY S 525.00 3. BIOTIC ANALYSIS $ 250.00 4. LAND USE, PLANNING, POPULATION CONSIDERATIONS 51,025.00 5. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS $1,950.00 6. VISUAL ANALYSIS S 250.00 7. TRAFFIC /CIRCULATION ANALYSIS S 300.00 8. PUBLIC SAFETY ANALYSIS S 200.00 9. CUMULATIVE/ GROWTH INDUCING ANALYSIS N/C SUBTOTAL 14.700.00 10. MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES . a. Word Processing $350.00 b. Photography at cost $75.00 c. Project Management 5500.00 oft TOTAL $5,625.00 This proposal and fees include all meetings with the City Staff, outside agencies, neighborhood groups and Individuals. Attendance at two (2) Public Hearings Is also Included. The Executive Summary, Project Description, Community Descrlptlon and Alternatives sections of the Focused EIR are Included In the above fees. At the option of the City the Consultant will reproduce, collate, and bind copies of the draft /final EIR at actual cost plus 155 to cover handling and overhead. Should this option be exercised, the fee Is estimated to be: (for bound 135 page reports): printing $13.50 binding S 1.29 TOTAL S14.75 ♦ 15$ - $17.00 per copy. /ay SPECIAL COUNSEL AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT IS made and entered into this day of 1984, by and between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOnin, 77LIFORNiA, i public O�poretion (hereinafter referred to as "City "), and F. MCKENZIE B[ROMN, INC., (hereinafter referred to as 'Counsel "). NOM, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED by and between the parties hereto as follows: SECTION 1. That Counsel Shalt xrform legal services in correction with the proposed aSsessm4pt proceedings and bond Issuance In the natter of a proposed speCtal aSSeSSbeFt district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 40. 84-2 \I Such legal services shall not include any services in connection with the acquisition, by easement or Condemnation, of any easenrents or other interest In real property necessary for the propo Sed improvements, These services can be provided by Counsel, by Separate agreement, If desired. y (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District") under proceedangs conducted pursuant to the or ovlilp n5 of the "MUnlaoal ImOroyeam nt Act of 1913 ", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. Said services Shall include: A. Review of the dedication and acouisition of the streets and easements • or other property in Mm pe h proposed work it to be rformed; B. ;eamination of the plans and Specifications for the proposed work, the boundary map and asseSa,ert dle0ram of t<e ASSess vnt District, the assessment roll and bonds, and the giving of instructions and advice In connection with the foregoing; C. Recom- ndations as to procedure, schedules and actions that Should be conducted and taken: 9. Preoeratioo of all resohtians, notices, contracts, bond forms, and other papers and documents required in the Freceemngs; E. Examination of the proceedings, step by step, as taken: F. Appear at all hearings under the proceedin0s. and attend any vetinq where attendance is requested; G. wake recommendations AS to Sale of bonds, if desired; H. Perform legal services, if required, OurSUant to the provisions of the "Special Assessment Investigation, ,,station and Majority `the protest Act of 1931 ", belro Division a of Streets and Highways Code of the State of ;aliforma; I. :SSUance of an approving legal opinion ittesti'iq to the validity of the proceedings and the issuance of the bonds. \I Such legal services shall not include any services in connection with the acquisition, by easement or Condemnation, of any easenrents or other interest In real property necessary for the propo Sed improvements, These services can be provided by Counsel, by Separate agreement, If desired. y L2 SECTION 2. That the City shall perform as fal!ors A, Furnish to Counsel "Ch naDS, records, title searches, and other dxg ,ahts and Drpceealnps, or certified copies Hereof, as are avail- able and may to reasonably repulred by Counsel In the performance of the services hereunder; B. Gay to Counsel a fee computed on the confirmed assessment as follow: 'HO eE4CEN' '251 on the first 5500.00O: ONE p5PCEN' 1151 Rom $500,001 to 8,000,000: ONE -HALF REgCENT (.505) on the balance thereof, C. payment of the above- referenced fee shall be as follpws' All due end Dayable upon receipt of money frph the sale and delivery Of bonds to the successful underwater, SEC':ON J. That His Agreement may be terminated by either party hereto by mailing written notice thereof to the Dther party. :N W! -NESS bAEREOF, the parties hereto have Caused this Agreement to be executed on the Jay and year first herellbdve written. r.. • Y OF PAN:uO :OCAw046A 9y: CErr 7 pANCuO CJCA40NGA STATE Y :AL:FOR4:A A" ES'; Ca v K CI' r OF gANCHO CJCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA 'U S L I- 1.. VCKE92:E FROWN. :4C 9y'. K_4�j NN Ix_ - /.-.k C • • RESOLUTION No. '�`/ "[ov RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA ABANDONING PROCEEDINGS AND REJECTING BIDS-FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE "MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1913 ". WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, did, by the adoption of its Resolution of Intention No. 83 -220, declare its intention to order the construction of certain work and improvements to be done and made pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913" being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, in a special assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 82 -2 (ALTA LOMA FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District "); and, WHEREAS, at this time this Council does not desire to proceed with the project or the improvements, and is desirous of abandoning the proceedings. • NOW, THEREFORE, IT 15 HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. That proceedings had and taken under and pursuant to the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 ", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the work and improvements proposed by said Resolution of Intention in the Assessment District be, and the same are hereby ordered to be abandoned. SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall immediately record a certified copy of this Resolu- tion of Abandonment with the County Recorder. The certificate attached to said Resolution shall include a reference to the date of the adoption of this Resolution, the date of the original Resolution of Intention, and the date the map of the Assessment District was previously filed with said County Recorder. SECTION 4. All bids received for the works of improvement on the above referenced Assessment District are hereby rejected and it is hereby directed that Is all bid security checks be returned to the respective bidders. / 1 'l APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 1984. • ATTEST: Y CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMu NGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA /d P \J • U CERTIFICATE RELATING TO ABANOONRENT OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BEPNARDINO CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA l emn rx N_y (RMAN, under Penalty of Periury, CERTIFIES As `ollowA: That duri': all of the times herein mentioned. the undersigned was. One hoe is, the duly awointed, qualified and Acting CITY CLERK of the Q`Y OF RANCHO CUCARONGA, CALIFORNIA. That the attached Resolution Abandoning proceedinas for the construction of certain improvements in ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 40. 92.2 (ALTA LOMA FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL) was duly adopted on the day of , 1984. • Reference is hereby made to Resolution of intention No. 83-220 adapted on the 21st day of Decemer, 1987, for a further and complete description of the +arts of improvement within said Assessment District. That a map of the proposed boundaries of the Assessment District for these proceed. ings was filed in the Office of the County Recorder of the COUNTY OF SAN 9E0400I40 on the day of 19 BA, in Assessment District Maps Book ­7157geI s) Executed this day of , 1984, at Rancho Cacampnoa, California, K C;TY DF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA Is Pa /a9 TO: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA (hereinafter referred to as "City ") • PETITION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS AND WAIVER OF REQUIREMENTS OF DIVISION 4 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE, OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE UNDERSIGNED, constituting property owners within the area of the property as shown on the plat attached to this Petition, which property will be subject to the assessment for the improvements hereinafter requested, hereby request the institution of proceedings under the provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 ", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the construction and /or acquisition of certain public works of improvement, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work in connection therewith, generally described as follows: The construction and installation of certain storm drainage channel improvements, including a debris damn and spillway improvements, box culverts and road crossing improvements, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, in a special assessment district designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 84 -2. For further particulars, reference is made to the Exhibit attached hereto. THE UNDERSIGNED CONSENT to other appurtenant work and acquisition that is, in t� opinion of the legislative body of the City, necessary to properly effectuate sal improvements, and we hereby expressly waive the proceedinas and all limitations under the "Special Assessment Investigation, Limitation and Majority Protest Act of 1931 ", being Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. The property owners hereby further agree upon signing this Petition to dedicate all necessary rights -of -way or easements, as determined necessary for said works of improvement, and all said dedication shall be accomplished before the ordering of the works of improvement for this assessment district. We hereby further request that all efforts and attempts be made so that said proceed- ings and the Resolution of Intention can be adopted at the earliest time. The GUARANTEE OF PAYMENT AGREEMENTS, as previously executed for Assessment District No. 82 -2, are still applicable to these proceedings as applied to owners now within the boundaries of this proposed Assessment District. This Petition may be signed in counterpart and constitutes one Petition and Waiver, and may be consolidated with similar petitions and waivers for similar improvements herein mentioned. • /30 NAME OF PROPERTY TE OF OWNER AND STREET LEGAL DESCRIPTION OR SIGNING ADDRESS COUNTY TAX PARCEL NO. SIGNATURE • n L A /3/ _ � 1 - _ 1 1 1 it -~ - .•�-Y��M �lL�N�� A v 17� 131 ■ aammmum LEGEND 00006 PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUND AREAS aE ASSESSED I PROPOSED ASSESSMENT I )C 'MAVEN CHANNEL =--e IOU -LET NORTH Imo_....- ...�:r:=- �:.: -.::: ALTA WMA CHANNEL RANCHO CUCAIMONGA EXHIBIT "B" 0 u • FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK THIS _ DAY OF 1984. Said petition represents % of the assessable area, as shown on the attached map. CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA 133 CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY OF PETITION • STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN 8ERNARDINO CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA LLOYD B. HUBBS, the undersigned, hereby CERTIFIES as follows That I am the duly appointed CITY ENGINEER of the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. That on the day of 1984, I reviewed a Petition and Waiver for the forma —f on o7 an Asses—sment District or certain public works of improvement, together with appurtenances, appurtenant work and acquisition, where necessary, in a special assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 84 -2 (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District "), a copy of which is on file in the principal office of the City. That I caused said Petition and Waiver to be examined and my examination revealed that said Petition and Waiver has been signed by property owners representing more • than Sixty (60X) percent Of the assessable area of lands within the boundaries of the proposed Assessment District, all as prescribed by Section 2804 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California ( "Special Assessment Investigation, Limita- tion and Majority Protest Act of 1931 "). That Said Petition and Waiver did represent ( %) percent of the assessable area of property within the boundaries of the Assessment District, That said Petition and Waiver meets the requirements of Section 2804 of the Streets and Highways Cade of the State of California, Executed this day of 1984, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. CITY ENGINEER CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA / 3`/ Ls AGENCY: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PROJECT: ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 40, PI -2 INSrROCTIONS PETITION SIGNATURES The petition herein i5 prepared pursuant to the reauilellentS Of Division A Of the Streets and Hlabwayi Code Of the State of California, the 'Special ASSe$smint Invesuoatlon, Limitation and Majority Protest Act of 1931'. Section 2904 expressly provides that the provisions of Division A shall not Dc a pli"tile Wren all of the owners of Vre than 60% in area of t➢e property Subject to asses Smint for Said improvements nave signed aM filed with the legislative body a written Petition for Said improvements and Waiver of said investigation proceedtngS f280A0)1. Note that the signatures Shall be by owners of assessable acreage. Said Section defines 'Owners of land' as 'those AD. at the T3 A said-�etit,ii is filed with the City, appear to be such upon the assessor's Poll, or, in the case of transfers of land or any part thereof, appear to be such on the records in the County Assessor's Office, Mach the :ounty Assessor will use to prepare the next ensuing roll. If any person 5,90110 Said Million Appears on Said roll as an owner of Woofrty as a joint lnlM tGrant or tenant- in- con, or as a husband or wife. Said property Shall oe count• as if all such persons had duly sinned'. If the person signing the Petition apes not appear to be the Owner as shown an the records of the County Assessor, evidence should be Submittea to SuppoR the ovrer- Ship. If the person is signln0 on behalf of a corporation, etc., mcunentation should he presented to show that the person signtno the petition has the authority to do so. Please note that the Petition Should include the following information I. Property owner's name printed: 2. Signature of property owner: 3. Andress: a Legal description or County Assessor's descrption: S. pate of stanature, F, MACKENZIE 9RONN ATTORNEY AT LAN P. 0. BOX 9025 FCHO SANTA RANCH PLAZA 90 • RANCHO NE: ( FE, CA 92061 TELEPHONE: (619) 756.5991 i • RESOLUTION NO. Q4'I67 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA REINITIATING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF CER- TAIN ALTA LOMA FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the CiTY COUNCIL of the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, did previously initiate proceedings for the construction of certain public works of improvements, together with appurtenances in a special assessment district pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913" being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, said special assessment district known and designated as Assessment District No. 82 -2 (Alta Loma Flood Control Channel); and, WHEREAS, at this time this Council has abandoned those proceedings for Assessment District No. 82 -2 (Alta Loma Flood Control Channel), and has considered certain amendments to the boundaries of the Assessment District and modifications to the works of improvement, and is now desirous to reinitiate proceedings for the construc- tion of certain of the Alta Loma Flood Control Channel improvements; and, WHEREAS, a reduced map has been presented generally showing the boundaries and properties to be assessed for the works of improvement in what shall now be known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 84 -2 (ALTA LOMA CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District). NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. That the map attached hereto showing the boundaries and parcels to be assessed in a special assessment district is hereby approved, and said special assessment district shall hereinafter be known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 84 -2 (ALTA LOMA CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS) SECTION 3. That proceedings shall be initiated, and the staff is directed to proceed to take the necessary steps relating to the formation process for the special Assessment District. SECTION 4. That this City Council does hereby approve Agreements and /or amendments to the following consulting contracts as they now relate to services to be rendered to the new Assessment District: I. DESIGN ENGINEER: ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS 2. ASSESSMENT ENGINEER: DON OWEN 6 ASSOCIATES 3. ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES: DON KING 6 ASSOCIATES 4. BOND COUNSEL: F. MACKENZIE BROWN, INC. /3� The above contracts and amendments are hereby approved, and exeuction • authorized by the Mayor and City Clerk. SECTION 5. That the staff and consultants are directed to proceed to prepare a proposed boundary map in the manner and form as authorized by Section 3110 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, said map to be presented to this City Council at the earliest opportunity. APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 1984. ATTEST: CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA /37 • it --L=am R IV LEGEND - •.00• PROPOSED i� DISTRICT BOUNDARY AREAS TO BE ASSESSED it CHANNEL T NORTH I ALTA LON,A CHANNEL RANCHO CUCAMONGA EXHIBIT R B�� 8A t coy. ' f • WLL _ LSON C it --L=am R IV LEGEND - •.00• PROPOSED i� DISTRICT BOUNDARY AREAS TO BE ASSESSED it CHANNEL T NORTH I ALTA LON,A CHANNEL RANCHO CUCAMONGA EXHIBIT R B�� • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krail, Engineering Technician R /•fly 191-7 SUBJECT: Ordering the Work in Connection with Annexation No. 18 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 for Tracts 9399, 9400, 12414, 11915 -1, 12362, 12026, 12027, 11663 and D. R. 83 -17 Attached for City Council approval is a resolution ordering the work in connection with Annexation No. 18 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 for the subject tracts. The Engineer's Report for the District is also attached for final approval. This report shows the estimated costs of the District and includes a location map for each tract. Letters of intent to join the District have been received from the developer of each tract. Letters have been sent to the developers, posting has been completed, and the Resolution of Intent has been placed in the Daily Report Newspaper giving time and date of public hearing. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolution ordering the work in connection with Annexation No. 18 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 and approving the Engineer's Report. Respectfully submitted, *Bff�: aa At tachments i39 0 0 rI J Ll F, U Company �j March 13, 1984 ML /r City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attn: Engineering Department Re: Intent to Join Landscape and Lighting Districts To Whom it May Concern: Please accept this letter as our intent to Join the landscape and lighting districts of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. For further questions or information, please contact our office at (714) 980 -1243. Very truly yours, A -N CO. ANY �..e 111 L. ✓Ve11e Vice President Southern California Region PLV /Jsc Southern C Lj (omit O®cC: 96136wm Qaw,Dnre • SwwC • Rwrk.CunmogACA91790 • (714)96P1948 RefloaW O®en: Ada • CALM m • Colae.do 14/ 0 t LE'MS HOMES 11 se Mm111 Mullah Amma / PO. IN 670 / L"04 CA 017% / AA 9111114M April 19, 1984 City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department 9320 Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attention: John Martin Subject: Tract No. 11549 -1 Dear John: Hand'Delivered 4PR ;9�;C" CITY U RANCHO CUCAMONG.A E "TNEERAC D:YIS'9tl Please accept this letter as our notification of intent to join the exist- ing landscape and street light maintenance districts of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Cordially, LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA DOUGLAS R. WALKER Staff Engineer DRW:jgc iy/ 40 • E Tf' " Leibrett Homes Inc. 2102 BUSINESS CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 151 IRVINE, CA 92715 [7141 833 -2014 March 23, 1984 City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 -C Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ATTV: Barbara RE: Tract 11915 -1 Dear Barbara: Regarding the subject tract, Lebrett Homes Inc. hereby requests joinina the Lighting and Landscaoing Maintenance District of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, • Sincerely vours, Peter R. Hutinger ?resident 2RH: 1jh 4 /17(:1- RANCHO MEADOWS COMPANY • 0 7333 HELLMAN AVENUE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. 91730 DEVEIAPJIE \"r December 1, 1983 Mr. Lloyd Hubbs City Engineer City Of Rancho Cucamonga P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91730 Re: Tentative Tract 112362 Dear Mr. Hubbs We are the developers of Tentative Tract 12362, consisting of 22 buildings totaling 88 units on approx. 6.5 acres located on the southwest corner of Hellman and Baseline Rd. in the city of Rancho Cucamonga. We agree to have the tract included in the "Special Assessment District" for landscape and the "Special Assessment District" for lighting, as provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Sincerely, Bert Franklin BF:lc E 1,13 •7333HELLNLV.\.kN7E.. R. J.\ CHOCCC .- �L..N[O\G.3.C.UIFOR\La91730 o (714)989.1723- • BARM_1TA�, /JKIAN March 27, 198c City .mot Rancho r,ucamonga 93•,0 Baseiine Road Alta Loma, CA 91701 RE: De ve Iopnent Review 83-17 Rancho Villas Apartments Ramona at Foothill Gentlemen: • We 'hereby request that this project, 83 -17, be included in the lighting aid landscape district of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Sincerely, Andrew Barmakian President Ad /np L ement .na . G /'i5r MARLOGROL'GH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION • July 14, 1983 City of Rancho Cucamonga 9340 Baseline Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91101 Attention: Lloyd Hubbs Re: Tracts 12021 through 12031 Gentlemen: 'Ae agree to the inclusion of Tracts 12021 through 12031 in the city -wide Lighting and Landscape Maintenance District. Very truly yours, • MARLBORO jDEVE CORPORATION Paul N. Byrnes Vice President - Engineering P%B /s1 • ONE CENTURY PLAZA 1029 CENTURY PARK EAST SUiTE 559 LOS ANGELES CA UPORNIA 90067 1211] 550 5131 4'� PRRDO CORPORRTION 1156 North Tustin Hvenu40range,Co11tomia 92667 171416334672 March 7, 1984 City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Attn: Engineering Department Re: Intent to Join Landscape and Lighting Districts for Tract 9399 6 9400 Please accept this letter as our intent to join the landscape and lighting districts of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. For further questions or in- formation, please contact the construction site office at (714) 987 -9612. Sinc4ely, PRADO CORPOfj$T N / /John . Upton' / � V • • CITY OF RANCHO :OCAMONGA Engineer's Report for ANNEXATION NO. 18 to the Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 for Tracts 9399, 9400, 12414, 11915 -1, 11549 -1 12362, 12026, 112027, 1:663 and D.R. 83 -17 SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with 1, Division IS of the Streets and (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Description the requirements of Article 4, Chapter Highways Code, State of California This City Council has elected to annex all new tracts into Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. The City Council has determined that the areas to be maintained sill have an effect .00n all lots within Tracts 9399, 9400, 12414, 11915 -1, 11549 -1, 12362, 12026, 12021, 11663, and D.R. 83 -17 as well as on the lots directly abutting the landscaped areas. All landscaped areas to be maintained in the annexed tracts are shown on the Tract Map as roadway right -of -way or easements to be granted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. SECTION 3. Plans and Specifications The olans and specifications for the landscaping have been prepared by the developer and have been approved as part of the improvement plans for Tracts 9399, 9400, 12414, 11915 -1, 11549 -1, 12362, 12026, 12027, 11663 and D.R. 83- 17. The plans and specifications for the landscaping are in conformance with the Planning Commission. Reference is hereby made to the subject Tract Map and the assessment diagrams for the exact location of the landscaped areas. The plans and specifications by reference are hereby made a part of this report to the same extent as if said plans and specifications were attached hereto. SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for parkway improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on historical data, contract analysis and developed work standards, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will equal thirty ($.30) per square foot per year. These costs are estimated only, actual assessment will be based on actual cost data. The estimated total cost for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (including Annexation No. 18 comprised of 39,284 square feet of landscaped area) is shown; /v7 Total Annual Maintenance Cost . 5.30 X 465,513 square f =_et 139,653.90 Per Lot Annual Assessment 139 Hof, = 39.89 Per Lot Monthly Assessment 39.89 = 3.32 Assessment shall apply to each lot as enumerated in Section 6 and the attached Assessment Diagram. 'Where the development covered by this annexation involves frontage along arterial or collector streets, which are designated for inclusion in the maintenance district but will be maintained by an active homeowners association, these assessments shall be reduced by the amount saved by the District due to said homeowner maintenance. SECTION 5. Assessment Diagram A copy of the proposed assessment diagram is attached to this report and labeled "Exhibit A ", by this reference the diagram is hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment Improvement for Annexation No. 18 is found to be of general benefit to all lots within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each parcel. The City Council hill hold a public hearing in June 1984 to determine the actual assessments based upon the actual costs incurred by the City during the 1982/83 fiscal year which are to be recovered through assessments as required by the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. SECTION 7. Order of Events 1. City Council adopts resolution instituting proceedings. 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's Report, 3. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to Annex to District and sets public hearing date. 4. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to Annex to the District or abandon the proceedings. S. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. • 6. Every year in June, the City Council conducts a public hearing and • approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments. • ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 18 i ' I I i, I. I f . P I I I I �I e A� , CITY OF RANCHO CUCA,\ GA ION IR 9 TR 9400 400 ^, �> z ENGINEERING DIVISION T Il \`II min VICINITY MAP pa e F _ rclS ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 1S • CITY OF RANC140 COCA. \10 \GA "6 z ENGINEERING DIVISION 9n VICINITY \,,kP A1R 12414 N page _ — .: _< —�. ` , - t._._— + •Y „war li �, •t. < n CITY OF RANC140 COCA. \10 \GA "6 z ENGINEERING DIVISION 9n VICINITY \,,kP A1R 12414 N page ,ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 18 F M 194 ,{ 0`t�-4i01- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA A 'IR 11549 -1 ENGINEERING DIVISION m VICINITY N1AP page u F M 194 ,{ 0`t�-4i01- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA A 'IR 11549 -1 ENGINEERING DIVISION m VICINITY N1AP page ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 18 rTif ii9ig --i 0 CITY OF RANCHO CCC VNION'GA A1R 11915 -1 • lr' i ENGINEERING DIVISION A ron ' VICINITY MAP page ,ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM • LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 18 0«Cni^ CITY OF RANCHO CL:CA \10 \GA ENGINEERING DIVISION TR 12362 nn VICINITY �\I, \P 1 \ page ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 18 TR T2arr _ �.t ? TA 12022 { li TR 1203 r _ 't 663 3 TA. � a0 - 21 s _ � _114 r1•_ -_. r__ .._ .__. 10 ; \C-s�Oln CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 1R 11663 1R 12026 1R 12026 ENGINEERING DIVISION _ wn `' VICINITY NIAP N page • • E u E ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 1S ` r)`. CITY OF RANCHO CI:CAMONGA A S' F; 7 ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY NIAP _I- DR 83 -17 page . RESOLUTION NO. 46- 96+e6CR 8cl —I (a •P A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE 'WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION NO. 18 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR TRACT NOS. 9399, 9400, 12414, 11915 -1, 12362, 12026, 12021, 11663 AND 0. R. 83 -11 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the 2nd day of May, 1984, adopt its Resolution of intention No. 84 -119 to order the therein described work in connection with Annexation No. 18 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1, which Resolution of intention No. 84 -119 was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by law, shown by the Affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, headed "Notice of Improvement ", was duly and legally posted in the time, form, manner, location, and number as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk; and VEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the • Resolution of intention were duly mailed to all persons owning real property proposed to be assessed for the improvements described in said Resolution of intention No. 84 -119 according t0 the names and addresses of such owners as the same appears on the last mailing or as known to the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which said copies were duly mailed in the time, form, and manner as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Nailing on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, said City Council having duly received considered evidence, oral -nd documentary, concerning the jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquired jurisdiction to order the proposed work, SECTION 1: It is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga that the public interest and convenience requires the annexation to the District and the ordering of the work, and said City Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said Resolution of intention No. 84 -119 be done and made; and SECTION 2: Be it further resolved that the report filed by the Engineer Ts neleoy finally approved; and /SL SECTION 3: Be it further resolved that the assessments and method of • assessment in the Engineer's Report are hereby approved. SECTION 4: Be it finally resolved that said assessments shall not begin unti a ter 0 percent of said tracts have been occupied. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: 8everly A. Authelet, City ClerK jaa „on O. Mike s, '41yor 157 • isa - CITY OF RANCHO CliCAMONGA G%'GMo STAFF REPORTI' • IT DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hobbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Ordering the Work in Connection with Annexation No. 3 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and No. 2 for Tracts 9399, 9400, 12414, 11915 -1, 11549 -1, 12362, 12026, 12027, and D. R. 83 -17 Attached for City Council approval are resolutions ordering the work in connection with Annexation No. 3 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and No. 2 for the following tracts: District No. 1 District No. 2 • art Fria oca ights Tract 9399 Tract 9399 Tract 9400 Tract 9400 Tract 12414 Tract 12414 Tract 11915 -1 Tract 11549 -1 Tract 11549 -1 Tract 12362 Tract 12026 Tract 12027 D. R. 83 -17 The Engineer's Report for both Districts are also attached for final approval. These reports show the estimated costs of the Districts and include ! a location map for each tract. Letters of intent to join the Districts have been received from the developer of each tract. Letters have been sent to the developers, posting has been completed, and the Resolution of Intent has been placed in the Daily Report Newspaper giving time and date of public hearing. ® continued..... isa CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Annexation No. 3 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and No. 2 June 6, 1984 Page 2 REC"ENDATION it is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolutions ordering the work in connection with Annexation No. 3 to Street Lighting Maintenance Districts No. I and No. 2 and approving the Engineer's Report. Res ectfully subm�itted,/ �— i LBN: Attachments /S9 • • C� MIN CORP®RRTION 115fi North Tustin Ruenue,Orange, California 926fi7 1714103.7072 March 7, 1984 City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Attn: Engineering Department Re: Intent to Join Landscape and Lighting Districts for Tract 9399 6 9400 Please accept this letter as our intent to join the landscape and lighting districts of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. For further questions or in- formation, Please contact the construction site office at (714) 987 -9612. sincerely, PRADO CORPOF�TI N /John ,B. Upton i6O —wr-,aa. AoM Company March 13. 1984 Citv of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attn: Engineering Department Re: Intent to join Landscape and Lighting Districts To Whom it May Concern: Please accept this letter as our intent to join the landscape and lighting districts of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. For further questions or information, please contact our office at (714) 980 -1243. Very truly yours, I L I'eI p L, eUe Vice President Southern California Region PLV /jsc Southern Ca dornla O®ce: 9618 Busimn Cenat Dn.e . SunaC . R6ncho CucnnogaCA.91700. 1714OW1240 Nylo„ND61M:Aneana . Cakfemm . Colo,Wo /Co/ /r 0 • ILWI5 HOMES 'A as wnn NNua M /vo.I=em /Laor4 G w716 /714 9&S" April 19, 1984 City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Develooment Department 9320 Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attention: John Martin Hand Delivered CITY CG RANCHO COCAIAOND.1 E,- VIER". g Oiv'PIfl Subject: Tract No. 11549 -1 Dear John: Please accept this letter as our notification of intent to join the exist- ing landscape and street light maintenance districts of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. • Cordially, LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA DOUGLAS R. 'WALKER Staff Enaineer DRW:jgc 11 /(c� abrett H- canes Inc. 2102 BUSINESS CENTER DRIVE. SUITE ISI IRVINE. CA 92714 [7 141 833 -20 14 March 23, 1994 City of Ranc]:o Cucam.cnaa 9320 -C ?ase Line Road Rancho Cucamonga, C:, 91730 ATTN: Sarhar3 RE: Tract 1191 -i Dear Sarcara: Regardina the subject tract, Lebrett Homes Inc. hereby requests joining the Lighting and Landscaping Maintenance District of the Ciby of Rancho Cucamonga, Sincereiv vours, • Peter R. Hubinaer ?r es, den . 2 RH:.jh 143 RANCHO NEA00WS COMPANY ORP 7333 HELLMAN AVENUE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. 91730 December 1, 1983 Mr. Lloyd Hubbs City Engineer City Of Rancho Cucamonga P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91730 Re: Tentative Tract '12362 Dear Mr. Hubbs: • We are the developers of Tentative Tract 12362, consisting of 22 buildings totaling 88 units on approx. 6.5 acres located on the southwest corner of Hellman and Baseline Rd. in the city of Rancho Cucamonga. We agree to have the tract included in the "Special Assessment District" for landscape and the "Special Assessment District" for sighting, as provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Sincerely, I�� l Bert Franklin BF:lc /6.y •733311ULNLAN.WE. • RaXCI[OCCG%..NIOXG.%.C.UIFOIL \L \91730 a (714)989.1725• March 27, 19d. City or Rancho "iaanonga 93 +6 Sas,; inc Ro',d Alta Loma, �A 916)1 RE: De ve lopment 'devLew 83-17 Rancho Villas Apartments Ramona at roo t'n ill Gentlemen: '.:e hereby request that this project, 83 -17, be included in the • lighting and landscape district of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California• Sincerely, n .Andre-, 3armakian President Ali /np /GS • SARMAKIAN March 27, 19d. City or Rancho "iaanonga 93 +6 Sas,; inc Ro',d Alta Loma, �A 916)1 RE: De ve lopment 'devLew 83-17 Rancho Villas Apartments Ramona at roo t'n ill Gentlemen: '.:e hereby request that this project, 83 -17, be included in the • lighting and landscape district of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California• Sincerely, n .Andre-, 3armakian President Ali /np /GS • 0 0 • NSARLBOROLGH OEVELOPME%T CORPORATION July 14, 1923 City of Rancho Cucamonga 93;0 Baseline Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91101 Attention: Lloyd Huhhs Re: Tracts 12021 through 12031 Gentlemen: 'de agree to the inclusion of Tracts 12021 through 12031 in the city -wide Lighting and Landscape Maintenance District. • Very truly yours. " RLECRO DEVEL 1.1C'T CORPORATION �� Paul Y. 3yrnes Vice President - Engineering P71B /sl ONE CENTURY PLAZA 2029CENTUPY PA RN EAST SUI TS 'i -. LOS AI, a-�SS CALI, OR WA 90067 (1131557.513( /GG • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Annexation No. 3 for Tracts 9399, 9400, 12414, 12362, 11915 -1, 11549 -1, 12026, 12027 and D.R. 83 -17 SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General 0escripti0n This City Council has elected to annex the tracts enumerated in Exhibit "A" into Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1. The City Council has determined that the street lights to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within said tracts as well as on the lots directly abutting the street lights. Work to be provid =_d for with the assessments established by the district are: • The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operating and servicing of street light improvements on arterial and certain collector streets. Improvement maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas in the District and cost shall be divided on a per lot basis. In the case of condominiums with airspace ownership only, and apartments, a dwelling unit shall be considered to benefit the same as a lot, SECTION 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for street lighting have been prepared by the developers. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division, Reference is hereby made to the subject tract map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street lighting improvement on the individual development is nereby made a part of this report to the same extent as if said plans and specifics were attached hereto. Detailed maintenance activities on the street lighting district include: the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, providing for the illumination of the subject area. SECTION 4. Estimated Costs Is No costs will be incurred for street lighting improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on available data, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be as indicated below. These costs are estimated only, actual assessments will be based on actual cost data. /6? The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 (including Annexation No. 3 comprised of 397 lots and 3 9500L street lights . and 34 5800L lights) is shown below: 1. S.C.E. Maintenance and Energy: Lamp Sfze* Quantity Rate ** 5800L 95 8.75 *High Pressure Sodium vapor Lamos Rate Mo's Total 102 X 9.90 X 12 12,11 ,,.jO 95 X 8.75 X 12 9,975.)0 2. Costs per dwelling Unit: Total Annual Maintenance Cost 22092.60 =8.47 /year /unit No. of Units in District z33F- 8.47 divided by 12 = .I1 /mo. /unit Assessment shall apply to each lot as explained in Section 6. SECTION 5. Assessment Diagram Copies of the proposed Assessment Diagrams are attached to this report and labeled "Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 ", Annexation No. 3. These diagrams are hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment Improvement for the District are found to be of general benefit to all dwelling units within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each unit. Where there is more than one dwelling unit per lot or parcel of assessable land, the assessment for each lot or parcel shall be proportional to the number of dwelling units per lot or parcel. It is proposed that all future development shall be annexed to the District. SECTION 7. Order of Events is 1. City Council adopts resolution instituting proceedings. 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's • Report. 3. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to annex to District and sets Public hearing date. 14� 8 4. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and • determines to form a oistrict or abandon the proceedings. 5. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. J 0 6. Every year in June, the City Council conducts a public hearing and approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments. /49 EXH131T "A" • Properties and improvements to be included within Annexation No. 3 of Street Lighting Maintenance District 1: Tract 9399 -12 SF 2 (5800) 9400 12 SF 2 (5800) 12414 92 SF 7 (5800) 11915 -1 44 SF 8 (5800) 11549 -1 27 SF 4 (5800) 12352 3 (9500) 2 (5800) 12026 24 Condos 2 (5800) 12027 30 Condos 4 (5800) O.R. 93 -17 58 Aots. 3 (5800) 79T— 3T-- • /'70 0 0 0 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 3 sic io CITY OF RANCHO CIICAMONGA � title; _' •r m COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO TR 939989400 STATE OF CALIFORNIA IT" N3 L10Y0 MU885,CITY ENGINE =R R ..23889 O4T page ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.I ANNEXATION NO. 3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA w COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO / \ STATE OF CALIFORNIA im LLOYD MU88S. CITY ENGINE =R RCE.23B89 DATE- N title; page ���. • „ Y u nr -in,n n, � • - Ali ....�._.. - -_ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA w COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO / \ STATE OF CALIFORNIA im LLOYD MU88S. CITY ENGINE =R RCE.23B89 DATE- N title; page ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM • STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 ANNEXATION NO. 3 • n U ,I via �1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA N title; TR 12362 vase. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 ANNEXATION NO. 3 .Te a" ^O's CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA title; c.- n COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ra i li t STATE OF CALIFORNIA - -Im LLOYD NUBBS. CITY ENGIN= -R R ^E.23B89 OoTE N P °6e I ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM • STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. I ANNEXATION NO. 3 J. 4 , M m F- crff OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA title; COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO A TR 11 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 1wr LLOYO HUNS, CITY ENrjltgE�:R R C E 238" -5A—TE N ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. I ANNEXATION NO. 3 mw� TA 12027 2 ------------ "0 4 jR4 . TA 1203 -:r R, 3 1 63 2P0 T a v1 3�028 � ....... ---- -- 2, 10 rol': CITY OF RANCHO CUCAmONGA " Sr COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO A BE TR 12 :RN STATE OF CALIFORNIA N 0D LLOYD 11 R Rc c 2 238" R—C—ITY ENGINEER --7F; -FA—TF page E • 0 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 3 n rr=t5� ^ / I c J'\a tea. e 4, a ^',� �'' 310 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA w "`IP; COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO / ` DR 8383 y STATE OF CAL.RNIA N _ ��� LLOYD HUB BS CITY ENGINEER RC .239e9 oAT — P2Se RESOLUTION NO. 46- 06 -04GR ?V - /`iP 9 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION NO. 3 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND ACCEPTING THE FINAL. ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR TRACT NOS. 9399, 9400, 12414, 11915 -1, 11549 -1, 12362, 12026, 12027 AND D. R. 33 -17 WHEREAS, tie City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the 2nd day of Nay, 1984, adopt its Resolution of Intention No. 84 -120 to order the therein described work in connection with Annexation No. 3 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1, which Resolution of Intentiod No. 34 -120 was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by law, shown by the Affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of intention, headed "Notice of Improvement ", was duly and legally posted in the time, form, manner, location, and number as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the • Resolution of Intention were duly mailed to all persons owning real property proposed to be assessed for the improvements described in said Resolution of intention No. 84 -120 according to the names and addresses of such owners as the same appears on the last mailing or as known to the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which said copies were duly mailed in the time, form, and manner as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Mailing on file in the office of the City Clerk; and • WHEREAS, said City Council having duly received considered evidence, oral and documentary, concerning the jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquired jurisdiction to order the proposed work. SECTION 1: It is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga that the public interest and convenience requires the annexation to the District and the ordering of the work, and said City Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said Resolution of Intention No. 84 -120 be done and made; and SECTION 2: The Report filed by the Engineer is hereby finally approved; 'a -- SECTION 3: The assessments and method of assessment in the Engineer's eport are hereby approved. SECTION 4: The assessments shall not begin until after 60 percent • of said tract�ave been occupied. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk jaa Jon D. Mi a s, Mayor /74 • • . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 Annexation No. 3 for Tracts 9399, 9400, 12414 and 11549 -1 SECTION 1. Authority for Reoort This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and iighways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting .Act of 1972), SECTION 2. General Description This City Council nas elected to annex the tracts enumerated in Exhibit "A" into Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2. The City Council has determined that the street lights to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within said tracts as well as on the lots directly abutting the street lights. are: Work to be provided for with the assessments established by the district • The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operating and servicing of street light improvements on local residential streets. Improvement maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas in the District and cost shall be divided on a per lot basis. In the case of condominiums with airspace ownership only, and apartments, 3 dwelling unit shall be considered to benefit the same as a lot. SECTION 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for street lighting have been prepared by the developers. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as aoproved by the City Engineering Division, Reference is hereby made to the subject tract map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street lighting improvement on the individual development is hereby made a part of this report to the same extent as if said plans and specifics were attached hereto. Detailed maintenance activities on the street lighting district include: the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, providing for the illumination of the subject area. SECTION 4, Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for street 'lighting improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on available data, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be as indicated below, These costs are estimated only, actual assessments will be based on actual cost data. /?a The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 • (including Annexation No. 3 comprised of 143 lots and 48 street lights) is shown below: I. S.C,E. Maintenance and Energy: Lamp J11t. 4uantity Rate ** 5800L 252 8.15 *Nign Pressure So ium 'Vapor * *SCE Schedule LS -1. All night service per map per month, effective January 1, 1983. Lamps Rate Mo's Total 252 % 3.75 X 12 26,460 2. Costs per dwelling Unit: Total Annual Maintenance Cost = 26,460 34.63 /year /unit No. of Units in District 7bT-- 34.63 divided by 12 = 2.39 /mo. /unit Assessment • shall apply to each lot as explained in Section 6. SECTION 5. Assessment Diagram Copies of the proposed Assessment Ciagrams are attached to this report and labeled "Street Lignting Maintenance 51strict Yo. 211, Annexation No. 3. These diagrams are hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment Improvement for the District are found to be of general benefit to all dwelling units within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each unit. Where there is more than one dwelling unit per lot or parcel of assessable land, the assessment for each lot or parcel shall be proportional to the number of dwelling units per lot or parcel. It is proposed that all future development snail be annexed to the District. SECTION 7. Order of Events 1, City Council adopts resolution instituting proceedings. 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's Report. • 3. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to annex a District and sets public hearing date. /Q/ • 4. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to form a District or abandon the proceedings. 9 • 5. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. 6. Every year in June, the City Council conducts a public hearing and approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments. W ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 ANNEXATION NO.3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA tile; ..= r COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO S TATE OF CALIFORNIA IR 939' nn 11.0V0 NUBB9 CITY ENGINEER R ^E 2'3889 PATE page ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM • STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 ANNEXATION NO.3 e �,a��'-- -•O�� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA � title; sr COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO I R 12414 c STATE OF CALIFORNIA T Im LLOYO HUNS, CITY ENGINEER R C.E.23889 DATE page ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 ANNEXATION NO. 3 4 F7 A I - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO °=( n�kr A STATE OF CALIFORNIA ZE yj 19r N page LLOYD HUBBS, CITY ENGIN�ER RC .23R DATE • RESOLUTION NO. 06 -46-eW eq—/,?0 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION NO. 3 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 AND ACCEPTING T4E FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR TRACT NOS. 9399, 9400, 12414 AND 11549 -1 ''WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the 2nd day of May, 1994, adopt its Resolution of Intention No. 84 -123 to order the therein described work in connection with Annexation No. 3 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2, which Resolution of Intention No. 84 -123 was duly and legally Published in the time, form and manner as required by law, shown by the Affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clerk; and ''WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, headed "Notice of Improvement ", was duly and legally posted in the time, form, manner, location, and number as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the Resolution of intention were duly mailed to all persons owning real property • proposed to be assessed for the improvements described in said Resolution of intention No. 34 -123 according to the names and addresses of such owners as the same appears on the last mailing or as known to the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamorga, which said copies were duly Tailed in the time, form, and manner as required by law, as appears fr,m the Affidavit of Mailing on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, said City Council having duly received considered evidence, oral and documentary, concerning the jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquired jurisdiction to order the proposed work. SECTION 1: It is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga that the public interest and convenience requires the annexation to the District and the ordering of the work, and said City Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said Resolution of Intention No. 84 -123, be done and made; and SEC -011 2: T'ne Report filed by the Engineer is hereby finally approved; and SECTION 3: The assessments and method of assessment in the Engineer's Report are hereby approved. SECTION 4: The assessments shall not begin until after 60 percent of said tracts have been occupied. l86 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: is NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Aithelet, City Clerk jaa Jon 0. Mike s, Mayor /87 J EAJ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA O.r -Amo STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 19$4 f9:' TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ENDM N ;4_01 - RI_W 00 - A Development District Amendment Me um Residential (8 -14 du /ac) to Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) for 16.3 acres of land, located on south side of Arrow Highway, north side of 9th Street, between Baker Avenue and Madrone Avenue - APN 207- 261-02, and 07, 207- 132 -01 through 37. (Continued from the May 16, 1984 City Council Agenda.) SUMMARY: The attached letter from the property owner, Mr. Alvin Musser, requests a withdrawal of the zone change request for the northerly 7.85 acre portion located at the southwest corner of Arrow and Madrone. As • you are aware, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract 12621 on this 7.85 acres contingent upon approval of Development Districts Amendment 84 -01 by the City Council. Therefore, if the zone change for the 7.85 acre portion is not approved, Tentative Tract 12621 will become null and void. Attached for your review and consideration is a revised Ordinance describing only the southerly 8.45 acres of land. Staff recommends that the amendment on the southerly portion be approved so that non - conforming lots will not be created in the existing Tract 9658. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council open the public hearing and conduct first reading of the revised Ordinance. Respectfully submitted, i Rick, Gomez City Planner RG:DC:jr 'Attachments: Letter From Property Owner Revised Ordinance 226 /82 r 1 L� E May 30, 1984 Mr. Rick Gomez City Planner City Hall Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Related File T.T. 12621 - Richwood for 7.85 acres located at the southwest corner of Arrow and Madrone. Dear Mr. Gomez: The owner of the above described parcel, J. Alvin Musser, at al, is out of state and his planned return has been delayed due to problems beyond his control. Mr. Musser and I are business associates and have been for many years. He has instructed me telephonically to prepare the following request as his authorized agent. Please withdraw the northern portion (described above) north of the Richwood Development, from the request for zone change to down zone said parcel from 8 -14 du's /acre to 4 -8 du's /acre, Thank you for your cooperation in this withdrawal of zone change. Sincerely, J. Alvin Musser By Jacquelyn B. Holz Authorized Agent / smb /JBH ✓ /P5 INVESTORS REALTY SERVICE .3. NO SICONO .vC . u.LAND CA x 1116 • JACQUELYN I. wOLZ C.C.1.M. ........ .n......... r 1 L� E May 30, 1984 Mr. Rick Gomez City Planner City Hall Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Related File T.T. 12621 - Richwood for 7.85 acres located at the southwest corner of Arrow and Madrone. Dear Mr. Gomez: The owner of the above described parcel, J. Alvin Musser, at al, is out of state and his planned return has been delayed due to problems beyond his control. Mr. Musser and I are business associates and have been for many years. He has instructed me telephonically to prepare the following request as his authorized agent. Please withdraw the northern portion (described above) north of the Richwood Development, from the request for zone change to down zone said parcel from 8 -14 du's /acre to 4 -8 du's /acre, Thank you for your cooperation in this withdrawal of zone change. Sincerely, J. Alvin Musser By Jacquelyn B. Holz Authorized Agent / smb /JBH ✓ /P5 INVESTORS REALTY SERVICE .3. NO SICONO .vC . u.LAND CA x 1116 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAVONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 1984 TD: 'Mayor and Members, of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner ,tp °uG' NO�c � yn x: } Z SUBJECT: EENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND OEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS AMENDMENT 84 -01 - RICH'AOOD - A Development Districts Amendment from Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac) to Low Medium Residential (4- 8 du /ac) for 16.3 acres of land located on the south side of Arrow Highway, north side of 9th Street, between Baker Avenue and Madrone Avenue - APN 207 - 261 -02 and 07, 207- 132 -01 thru 37. SUMMARY The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on April 11, 1984 to consider the above described project and recommended approval of the Negative Declaration and Development Districts Amendment (Zone Change). In addition, the Planning Commission approved the related Tentative Tract 12621 for the development of 29 duplexes (58 units). Please find attached a copy of the Planning Commission staff report which fully describes the proposed Development Districts Amendment. The or000sed Development Districts Amendment and project are consistent with the City's General Plan and related ordinances. The project site is iporopr; ate in size and shape to accommodate_ the proposed develooment. No adverse environmental impacts are anticipated as a result of this Development Districts Amendment. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Development Districts Amendment request through the adoption of the attached Ordinance and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Res tfur y submitted: Rick Gomez City PTanner ,Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report - ODA 84 -01 Planning Commission Resolution Proposed City Council Ordinance 4 /yo R-'-NC7—"OC—CA-',TONC-.A cz 7 F7 0- T- 22, C R V', 7': :6airman -1. "alca^s tie 'i-1719 C=iiissitn P7rnar —rt Is sc 7 Inn— L A's �Cell.l ocrlen', -is. 13-14 du's'ac) to Res4-.nntial (4-5 du's/ac) for 16.3 acres i' Ian, located on the south side of Arrow Highway, norti s1 -e of Itn Street, tatieen Sake, ;venue and !•!adrsne A,ense �4*-02 and 07, 207-132-91 tnru 37. FILE: 7-"7A7-,E 7RAC7 ,7621 - 0?0J7^7 1,N0 Si�= �EscR:p7-,,j: A. Action ;ecuested: Aoorovai Of a 2evelcri7ert Dist- ano issuance or a Negative Declaration. 3. �,jroos-?: —he de,ejop�ent o og �jojexes jn:,S). C. - Locat4in: South of Arrcq, west of Aadrone, ':orth of 9t,,, east 0. Partal Size: 16.3 acres. E. 'xis"-o Zonina: '4ed4Un-ReSj4et4.jj F. Exjst4,s '-and '!se: Vacant G. Surrvindina Land '.'se and Zoning: North - Sing le- —ra-TY and -Iu1t4-f3-ii!v units, vacant prcoerty, zoned '-Residential. -�es'iden,t4al. South - Cuo -ex Al's 4itnil tract 9652. C`iurcn, zonial esitani:IaT. a a a- "-as, 0112Q !!eJ 4 Jii-zes ider - 4 a'1 ^,maneral �.es, Y scinol, zoned ITE'l G PLANN''13 ;,C'1N I SS 1"N ST APP REPORT DDA 84- 01 /Richwooa . Aoril 11, 1984 Page 2 ^c: o.0]e_• S1 :? 5100=5 un:ro r:n .y ac aooro (;fate .y 2 112e. Veget3 ran 1s °' - :ed = indigenous s'n ruDS and ,aeds. ';o strut n:r =5 exist •n property. II. A'lA :_vSi S: A. Gen On l: This Develoorent District Amenuaent .vas SJn7'.'ted in cond'Jnt-ion with Tentative Tract 12621, also on ';niant's aaenaa. ;ne original aoo iication submitted by the 'eve �opar included only tie 7.35 project site for Tentati•.a -- • '12621. The toundaries of the A.iendr„ent Here exoanced ci s -a- :ic'ade the southerly church, and 7r3ct 9653 3150 ej by RichY1000 Hltn identical units as or000s2, wlt'1 T 7 ?he intent of expanding the wnencment .vas :o -r2v r? consistency of zoning regulations for notn Ricnm000 _. cts and the adjoining church. Aooroval of DDA 34 -01 is necessary to allow tie aocli -ant -3 deve'co -T 12521 under the 3otion3l De_ve_iopaen: S:anca of tie 7istrict. Develooment standars of the *tedium .Residential District, Such as lot sizes and d'riensi_r.s, "oen space reauirements, and setbacks, d "fer from the betausa they Here 'mitten to apply to multi - family crcjects witn nigher densities. Since the Ricn•sood projects are s'.nale- famiiy in character, the Low- ledium standards a - =_ rpre_ app licaole. In addition, develoosient of TT :2521 1nae^ the stanaards is consistent Hitn Tract 9659 and : :- ,pa : :c', e_ viti' other adjoining prooerties. 3• " "'� " ^" ASS es smen :: Dart I of tie Iiltiil StAl a; —2n cy tpe aCpllc -an *. Staff :7 m.012 ted :12 3T11 r ^iren :a' Ghec<iist and found no significant ad'Jerse envl°cn ^,en :2' impacts 3s - -esult of :his z ^ne mange. If the m•m ss'.on concur, wi:n 'nese findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be aoorooriate. /9` t en Desi�n a i on s: ?ro; =tt 3'z3 Mort^ - Potential parx site, Sou'i - !�eo +•:m -.es i dent i ai (t -_t 1;'s a:;, 3as: - __•_ ^ -Rav t=rial (i -'= cu's ?ac;. __--_. .._ ., °' Scu —east I' :aSk and eiv°r Res' =J rar •', 'des2 - _0.1- Residentlal (2 -4 d'J'S /ac). ^c: o.0]e_• S1 :? 5100=5 un:ro r:n .y ac aooro (;fate .y 2 112e. Veget3 ran 1s °' - :ed = indigenous s'n ruDS and ,aeds. ';o strut n:r =5 exist •n property. II. A'lA :_vSi S: A. Gen On l: This Develoorent District Amenuaent .vas SJn7'.'ted in cond'Jnt-ion with Tentative Tract 12621, also on ';niant's aaenaa. ;ne original aoo iication submitted by the 'eve �opar included only tie 7.35 project site for Tentati•.a -- • '12621. The toundaries of the A.iendr„ent Here exoanced ci s -a- :ic'ade the southerly church, and 7r3ct 9653 3150 ej by RichY1000 Hltn identical units as or000s2, wlt'1 T 7 ?he intent of expanding the wnencment .vas :o -r2v r? consistency of zoning regulations for notn Ricnm000 _. cts and the adjoining church. Aooroval of DDA 34 -01 is necessary to allow tie aocli -ant -3 deve'co -T 12521 under the 3otion3l De_ve_iopaen: S:anca of tie 7istrict. Develooment standars of the *tedium .Residential District, Such as lot sizes and d'riensi_r.s, "oen space reauirements, and setbacks, d "fer from the betausa they Here 'mitten to apply to multi - family crcjects witn nigher densities. Since the Ricn•sood projects are s'.nale- famiiy in character, the Low- ledium standards a - =_ rpre_ app licaole. In addition, develoosient of TT :2521 1nae^ the stanaards is consistent Hitn Tract 9659 and : :- ,pa : :c', e_ viti' other adjoining prooerties. 3• " "'� " ^" ASS es smen :: Dart I of tie Iiltiil StAl a; —2n cy tpe aCpllc -an *. Staff :7 m.012 ted :12 3T11 r ^iren :a' Ghec<iist and found no significant ad'Jerse envl°cn ^,en :2' impacts 3s - -esult of :his z ^ne mange. If the m•m ss'.on concur, wi:n 'nese findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be aoorooriate. /9` ODA 34- 01 /Riciwood Aoril 11, :934 Page +re=_ .n_ Jeveloo"lent ° District nmen072nt is ccnslste1c I1:'1 :ne ;eneral Plan, ant the or000sed .rac- ,+th density sf atprom-nacely 7.4 units . acre is consistent th G'.stY 4-t. :n addition, the cn3nte of Zone for Tract '6 ^. a,c the clu"I s ccns it ant .Ji to tle existing ;ses on :he orooen-v ano - t ^03:1JIe ml t9 the iurrCUnG'.na lint Uses. 4- or -, /al Distrct .vill not creata any adverse inoacts on . :ne environren: or 3e detrimental to properties or inorovements 'n the vic ini:y. s item has been adverb s =_a as a Public '-eirina in -' ,a' :�, _Teo^ newsoaoer. Noticas were sent to ill orocerty ownens .r-- +:n•�n J.iJ feet of the sub;ect prooerties. in a-"li "on, Public Healing notices .mere oohed on the site. To ;ate no corresoonaenc=_ 'has heeh received either for or 3G•ins• this ;t is recd- ri_nden that the Planning ^orm+ssion CGnauc: 3 to lc :searing to Consider public 'input and ele -er :s of • this oro,•ec:. ' after such consideration the Co^nission nnc,:rs with the facts rcr findings, adootion of the attached 7estkrtttn and - eco-.-e nda t'cn of a Pleg3tive Jec Ura'idn to t ^e ty cc,i woo .d be aoorinriita. Rez Gtfal'y.1gj C- 11i:t2d, Rick Gomez city, Planners RG:CJ:ns Attachments: 'exhibit "A" - Loc3'ion '4ao Ezhib4- "3" - ueneral ?Ian and Zonis; +acs Exhiti: - Detailed Site Plan for T; :'621 !nit'.a: Stadv - Part I Res.',^tf;n of Aooroval ii /91 I r- M . f Nv GC W cT �, •'... _„i•• _. •. I ` �I`__' 'll ill ��I / I �` I; / CITY OF Film _> 11A \CIIO CUC:\ \IO \(;:\ TITLI: �M il4CC -4TGw OF PLANNING DIVISION LM IMIT 4 SCALE r f /9y t.V�w:'L� I��lw•i� ArroN 134:7 :•::.•p =�i�• ..:�,r- ' Y/�/t�` � �. District alJ129 JNq Cl 3 Do GC p ---,= C Y TT}}VZ= CIT V OF ITEM ® IZ. -1\CHO CUCAMONGA TM.e. ��ragzss= ,�.Ad PLANNING DIVLSION LM M',IT. �_ _ SCALE- ^ ~or i NOR T I I 1tANCI:O CUCAN1U \'G:1 rITLI I'L. \\ \I \C Di\'ISION' LXIIIIIIT: _SCALE �4' - Li 17 NOR T I I 1tANCI:O CUCAN1U \'G:1 rITLI I'L. \\ \I \C Di\'ISION' LXIIIIIIT: _SCALE �4' PRO:--CT SHEZ - To be co-mo'etea En*.,ironz.ental Assessnent Review See: 537.� 7or all prc)eczs req--"rIn= review, tr-z fo= -,USt be Co-:=Ieted and submitted to zne Review Committee throuoh the department where t-_ ' a project application is made. Upon receipt of tt-'s -, app'icaton, the ErMrsnmental Analysis staff wi-- Part II of the Initial Study. The Develo=menz Re%,Law Co=ittee will meet and take action no later t' an t_:. (10) days before the public meeting at w.i-z.h time =e pro3ect is to be heari. The Cc,-,rit-.ee will make one cf three determinations: 1) The project will have no s-,ani- ficant environments" 4mpact and a Negative Declar--, will be filed, 2) The pro3ect will have a sian"'2--7.- environmental im➢act and an Environmental :nloact Rezzrz will be nrevared, or 3) An additional info=aticn r_ ;2rt should be supplied by the applicant civing f,irtnez ticn. concerning the proposed pro3ect. CIINCZ -His -ROJECT: LOCAT:C:: Or P��:ZZT (STF-2--T ;DD?Z3S ASSE-S-3:," FE:ZRAL-AGENCZES ;,';Z) THE ArFNCY :SS:'I�;G SUCH PE%"!:-S • ::ESCR-?T7l:: ESQ CV ACRZ.%ZT ^F PR:.7-C7 AR-A AN2 mzz=CS_z BUIL-1:NGS, IV AM: /,,';ll 7,7M C-_E2R:BT_ THE r_N*.'_R2:X.Z:T-.ZL SETTI�:- CF THE PRC­EZ7 INFCRMATI-�N ON T-CPOGRAPHY, PLA:;TS (TRZEESI ANIX%LS, ANY HISTORICAL OR SCE';:C ASPECTS, :S= Or SURRC_CNDING PRDP--RT:--S, AND THE DESCRIPTION Or ANY Zx:S_LNC; STRII:=, S A_ND TH7-:R US-- (ATTACH, :S t-e =r-:ez- part o-' a larzer C- "e ser--s act_J ns, whic- alt vjcra r.a-.., as a whzle have sig-ificant envi-onmental impazt7 w 1-2 — 117 -xolanau^ n c: anv Y_5 answers -]ncve; • crc�ect 4nlllc!7qs the C� res-,dent-�al un-Its, the f�= on tna next pace, CzRT:T:::ATlCN: : hersb%, cert'f-.- that the statements f --rnis ed above an-� _n ,he attacne-4 emni--its nrazent tha data and in-,o rmatlon Y-S NO this �..izial to the best c� I 'Create a chance in inf-=at-c-. =-esent=c are tr,-,e �rea-e a v=stant-,all �han�a i.-. ex—,--- ana belle'. : f�rtn%-r cr qn-*c=a----. -av oe re= -*-r� tc tc o-- 3�mittad be:ire a.. eva I.: car, . za cps_.._ h RevLaw sawace, etc—'? Date Create cnzn�as -4� the exlstLn� zzn Cr -It-le 5. Remc•js an... exist;- z trgeS2 '.!Cw =anv? 6. Create tne need use or dispc5al of pczent-all• hazar--c--,s •a-erials s.a- as �---rznaz-es c. e*..,-Ic-, —s- -xolanau^ n c: anv Y_5 answers -]ncve; • crc�ect 4nlllc!7qs the C� res-,dent-�al un-Its, the f�= on tna next pace, CzRT:T:::ATlCN: : hersb%, cert'f-.- that the statements f --rnis ed above an-� _n ,he attacne-4 emni--its nrazent tha data and in-,o rmatlon f�r this �..izial to the best c� and -hot the 4acts, s atemen�s, and inf-=at-c-. =-esent=c are tr,-,e ard Tsrre_ t t-- t:-.e . =es _- z: - ana belle'. : f�rtn%-r t.. qn-*c=a----. -av oe re= -*-r� tc tc o-- 3�mittad be:ire a.. eva I.: car, . za cps_.._ h RevLaw Date -It-le an-.ima 3-4. 'Slon -�r t� alz l-.. assss !.-- of alst to a�cz, O-ata t:le zr=oseC _ese�ena o Ze"-Zoaf and Ten�atz-.-e �za�lcn o� =rc:e�t: =_ er C� f aZ --er C- to anz �n�at 1-4 � l • RESOLUTION NO. 84 -29 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMNGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DISTRICT CHANGE No. 84 -01 REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM TO LOW-MEDIUM FOR 16.3 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF .ARROW, NORTH SIDE OF 9TH, BMIEEN BAKER AND MADRONE. WHEREAS, on the 6th day of January, 1984 an application .vas filed and accented on the aoove- described project; and WHEREAS, on the 11th day of April, 1984, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: 1. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and • 2. That the proposed district change would not have significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and 3. That the pr000sed district chance is in conformance with the General Plan. SE" "ON 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project� —not Create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration on April 11, 1984. "10'4, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65351 to 65355 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 11th day of April, 1984, District Chance No. 34 -01. 2. ?laming Commissiun hereby reco,-.menas that the :ty Council approve and idoot District ^'mange No. 94 -J1. 3. 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 :1T4 OAY OF APRIL, 1984. .COMMISS131 OF THE CITY OF 2ANCHO C'UCA ?TONGA BY oenniS L -�tout, :.nairman - ATTEST: 2D4- Oe putt' �edr =tart' I, Ric'4 Gomez, Deouty Secretary of the Planning "•+mission of tre City of Rancno(Cucamonga, do herehy certify that the foredo : Resolution was duly and regul&ly introduced, passed, and adooted by the inning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of April, 1984, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: CCMMISSiONERS: McNIEL. BARKER, JUARE", P,E "PEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: TONE A35E'iT: CD ?iMISSIONERS: NONE • 0 ORDINANCE NO. 226 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CCTV OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 207- 261 -02 and 03, 207- 132 -01 thru 37, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 9TR, BETWEEN BAYER AND MADRONE AVENUES, FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8 -14 DU /AC) TO LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4 -8 DU /AC). The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION is The City Council hereby finds and determines the following: A. That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, following a public hearing held in the time and manner prescribed by law, recommends the rezoning of the property hereinafter described, and this City Council has held a public hearing in the time and manner prescribed by law and duly heard and considered said recommendation. B. That this rezoning is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. • C. That this rezoning is consistent with the objectives of the Development Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. D. This rezoning will have no significant environmental impact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed herein. SECTION 2: The following described real property is hereby rezoned in the manner stated, and the Development District Map is hereby amended accordingly. Assessor's Parcel Numbers 207- 261 -02 and 03, 207- 132 -01 through 37, approximately 8.45 acres of land located on the north side of 9th, between Baker and Madrone Avenues, is hereby changed from Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac) to Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac). LZ03 Ordinance No. 05- 16 -01CO Page 2 • 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 Dail Re ort, a newspaper of general circulation published in t e ity o ntario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Jon 0. Mikels, Mayor Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk aoY • • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CiGMo STAFF REPORT 4V „p Z DATE: June 6, 1984 ' 1977 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Jan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT - AR H BALD ASSOCIATES - The development of ill zero lot line homes an acres in the Low- Medium Residential District, located between Archibald and Ramona Avenue at Monte Vista Street - APN 202- 181 -05, 06, 15, 16. Related File: ODA 83 -01 SUMMARY: The Planning Commission, at its meeting of April 25, '984, hee d a public hearing to consider the above - described project. There was considerable discussion by the Commission regarding the design of • the proposed project and the compatibility of the project with the surrounding neighborhood. The revisions made by the applicant include: (1) widening the public right -of -way to 50 feet; and, (2) increasing the setbacks on a majority of the lots to accommodate parking of cars in the driveway behind the sidewalk. The Planning Commission approved ;2 -1 -2 vote) the project based upon these revisions. Attached for your review and consideration is the Planning Commission staff report which fully outlines the policies and issues applicable in j this case. Also attached is a copy of the Commission .Resolution and Minutes of the meetings of April 11, 1984 and April 25, 1984. i RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends denial of the appeal request based upon the findings contained within the Resolution. RespL.tfu l l y.- submitted , l� R i c'<; Gomez City Planner RG:DC:jr Attachments: Appeal Letter Planning Commission Staff Report - April 11, 1984 Planning Commission Resolution of Approval Planning Commission Minutes - April 11, 1984 Planning Commission Minutes - April 25, 1984 .ZOO 0 • • MEMORANDUM, c *rr F DATE: June 6, 1984> 19 %7 TO: Members of the City Council FROM: Pam Wright, Councilmember SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF TRACT 12532 - ARCHIBALD ASSOCIATES My serious reservations about this project added together with the community displeasure with the project and the fact that this project was approved by a 2 -1 -2 vote have moved me to appeal this item for further consideration by the City Council. I propose two ways of dealing with the problems: PROPOSAL 1: Note: City staff has indicated that the Planning Commission has been directed to adjust the standards on the Low - Medium density to limit single family residential detached units in the 4 -6 units per acre range of the Low Medium (4 -8 du /ac) category. I believe if this project had been reviewed again by the Commission in light of their new direction they would require it to adhere to the low end of the Low - Medium range. Listed below are all of the problems with the project which could be mitigated by requiring a lower density: o Incompatibility with existing neighborhood density o Narrow streets 0 Narrow lots o Narrow sidewalks /parkways o Inadequate on- street parking o Short backyards o Inadequate garage setbacks from street o Streetscapes dominated by garages RECOMMENDATION: Uphold the appeal to deny Tentative Tract 12532 and require the applicant to reapply and revise any future tentative tract to adhere to the low end (4 -6 du /ac) of the Low- Medium density range (4 -8 du /ac), and require standard residential streets. aor A Appeal of Tract 12532 /Archibald Associates Page 2 • PROPOSAL 2: Proposal 2 is a compromise position in which the following requirement will mitigate, the density impacts. A. Deletion of Plan I, single story model, because of its length and dominance of the lot which eliminates utilization of the residential open space for recreational purposes. B. Require increased landscaping in the front setback in addition to the minimum requirement in the current Development Code (i.e., number of trees and size of trees). C. Screen the rear of lots 63 through 65 from London Avenue by providing dense landscaping (i.e., minimum 15 gallon trees at 10- feet on center), and providing a 6 -foot high masonry block wall along the entire northern property line (i.e., lots 1, and 63 through 73). D, Require additional landscaping on lot 35 along southern property line and lot 44 along the northern property line and additional architectural treatment along the rear of lots 38 through 44. E. Require standard street requiremens (i.e., standard curb /gutter and • driveway approaches. I will be presenting additional oral comment at the meeting regarding these two proposals. Since I made the appeal, I have heard from numerous residents regarding the project. They all indicate the builder has been most cooperative, that they still are not satisfied with the density, and that they .^e afraid the builder will build the duplexes for which he already has approval PW:jr • .i 0 s 13 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • = e • \ NMrJOn D. Mikels vrn�.wil�rnam _ � F Z lhada J. M. B.q.et D.h II lames f Pr.., r Rirhard M. Dahl Phillip D. Sr hlos ar lu__ Hay 2, 1984 F TO: City Council FROM: Pamela J. Wright Councilmenber SUBJECT: Appeal I hereby request that the following item be appealed and sec for a I by the City Council at the earliest opportunity: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12532 - ARCHIBALD ASSOCIATES - The development of 111 zero lot line homes on 14,5 acres in the low- medium residential district, located between Archibald and Ramona at Honte Vista Street - APN 202 - 181 -05, 06, 15, 16. PJW:baa �OL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: April 25, 1984 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner �J G%)CAMQL ' vroZ IF SUBJECT: - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12532 ARCHI ALD A SOCIATES - The development of-7171- zero lot line 'nomes on 14.5 acres of land in the Low - Medium Residential District, located between Archibald and Ramona at Monte Vista Street - APN 202 - 131 -05, 06, 15 and 16. BACKGROUND: This item was continued from the April 11, 1984 agenda to allow proper notice to be given for the related Development Districts Amendment 83 -07. The Planning Commission received public input and continued the public 'nearing. The Commission discussed a number of issues including (1) streetscaoe appearance, (2) garage setbacks, phasing (3) access, and (4) drainage, The attached staff report addresses these issues. A new Exhibit "M' has been included that snows garage setbacks based upon a site plan alternate with a street connection to Ramona. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission ra -open the public hearing and review and consider a�' ma—ial and inout regarding this item. If after such consideration tn; ^ommission can support the facts for finding and Conditions of Approval, the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. If the Commission cannot support the facts for finding, a Resolution of Denial has been provided. Tit 6an bmi tted, 1r RGr7C :jr Attachment: April 11, :904 Staff Report X0,7 ITEM D - CITY OF RANCHO Ci:CAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: Aoril 11, 11984 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner CC4CAMp! 107- SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12532 - ARCHI3ALD ASSOCIATES - The development of . zero tot ie homes on 14.5 acres in the Low - Medium Residential District, located between Archibald and Ramona at '•lnte vista Street - APN 202 - 181 -05, 06, 15, 16 RELATED FILE: ZONE CHANGE 83 -07 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Apprc:al of site plan elevations and • subdivision map. 3. Purpose: Development of 102 zero lot line homes and 9 single - family detached homes. 9 .. Location: Betneen Archibald and Ramona at Monte Vista Street Exhibit A). D. Parcel Size: 14.5 acres. E. Exist in Zonin Low- Medium Residential and 'tedium- Residential one Change to Low- Medium pending). F. Existing Land Use: Easterly half vacant; westerly half consists of hristmas tree farm. G. Project Density: 7.7 dwelling units per acre. H. Su rroundin Land Use and Zonino: North - ing e- ami y tract and Burp le xes; '_11 and '1 Residential. South - Single - family residences; .'I and '1 Residential. East - Single- family tract; Low Residential. lest - Single- family residential, '"edium Residential. ,Z o 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12532 /Archibald Associates April 11, 1984 Page 2 I. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Medium Residential North - Medium Residential South - Medium Residential East - Law Residential West - Medium Residential Site Characteristics: Site slopes to the southeast at approximately a grade and is traversed by an ephemeral stream channel subject to periodic flooding. The easterly half of the project sita consists of Eucalyptus windrows and two existing residences to 'oe removed. The westerly half consists of a Christmas tree farm and beehives surrounded by a chain link fence, as shown in the attached Exhibit "C ". The remainder of tie site is covered by native grasses. • K. Cpl icable Regu lotions: The Loa :tedium Residential District options development standards permit single - family and zero lot line development; no minimum lot size; 5% common open • space; .25 guest parking spaces per unit. 1I. 4ALYSIS: A. General: This project requires approval of Development District Amendment 33 -07 to Low - Medium Residential. The Amendment change was inadvertently not advertised for the April 11, IgBa agenda. Therefore the Amendment request must he scheduled for the next available agenda. This project, in conjunction with the adjacent tract 12320, will install a storm drain oipe to carry storm water from Victoria Street to Ramona Avenue south of the railroad tracks, which is intended to provide short -term mitigation of flooding problems on Ramona Avenue north of the railroad tracks. Ramona Avenue is currently subject tp severe flooding during the rainy season. The long -term mitigation would be the completion of the City's master plan of storm drain system, Exhibit " which includes a storm drain in Ramona Avenue south to Base Line, and east to the Tuner Avenue storm drain. 3ecause the Project is lower than Arc'nioald Avenue, tie entire project will be graded to drain to the storm drain in Ramona. • SOS • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12532 /Archibald Associates April 11, 1984 Rage 3 Access to the project site would be provided from Archibald Avenue. A secondary point of access could be provided to Ramona by street connection with Monte Vista. 4owever, the Applicant is proposing an emergency -only fire access lane to connect with Ramona per the request of the surrounding residents. The Engineering and Planning Divisions recommend a paved street connection to Ramona to reduce traffic demand upon Archibald Avenue per the attached memo. This project will generate increased vehicular traffic -- approximately 600 trips per day. During peak morning hours, approximately 26 cars will be added to Ramona and approximately 39 cars added to Archibald. The increase on Ramona Avenue is not considered significant and traffic volumes would not exceed the capacity of Ramona Avenue. The interior private streets are planned at a reduced right -of- way width of 50 feet. This allows for a standard 36-foot wide street. However, this reduces the overall right -of -way area generally needed for utilities, sidewalks, and street trees. • The 50 -foot right -of -way does allow for a sidewalk adjacent to curb on botn sides of the street; however, additional easements will be necessary for utilities and street trees. Desion Review Committee: The Committee was concerned that the uniform lot width an uniform building separation, together with the relatively narrow lot width of 40 feet, would oroduce a monotonous streetscape dominated by garages and driveways. Therefore, the Committee recommended that the Applicant prepare the streetscape drawing of a typical group of lots as viewed from the street, as shown in Exhibit '114-511. The attached Exhibit "I ", illustrates the result of uniform lot width and building separation upon the streetscape. The majority of lots have small driveways too small to park a standard car on without blocking the sidewalk. This places an additional demand for on- street parking. The typical distance between driveways available for parking is 22 feet. The optional development standards contained in the development code require variation in lot width as shown in Exhibit "J" By interspersing wider lots with standard 40 foot lots, greater building separation and open space can be provided between units and side entry garages and Combined driveways can be used to improve the streetscape appearance. .D,/ 0 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT • TT 12532 /Archibald Associates April 11, 1984 Page q The Design Review Committee also recommended that on corner lots such as Lots 84, 97, 98, 111, etc., the garages be reoriented to front onto the corner side of the lot to reduce the visual impact of garages and driveways upon the streetscape. The Planning Commission should determine whether the ;oplicant 'n as adequately mitigated this concern by providing a variety of setbacks from the street and a wide variety of elevation treatments throughout the project. In addition the optional development standards require frontyard landscaping consisting of a minimum of one (1) 15- gallon and one (1) 5- gallon size trees and turf that can further mitigate a monotonous streetscape. The Committee was also concerned with the neighborhood compatibility and transition of density along Ramona Avenue. The Committee worked with the Applicant in revising the site plan to include 9 single - family lots along Ramona ranging in size from 6,100 sq. ft. to 8,000 sq. ft., Exhibit "H -7 ". The Design Review Committee was concerned with the timing of the construction of these lots in relation to the overall project • and recommends that full street improvements along Ramona Avenue, including street trees, be installed with the first phase development. Further, the Committee recommended that if these 9 lots along Ramona are not constructed witiin a reasonable length of time, that they he temporarily seeded for aesthetic reasons. C. Environmental Assessment: Based upon the initial study, see attached, the project wi 1 not have a significant effect upon the environment because of the mitigation measures described below. Impact: Construction will increase surface water runoff, reduce absorption rates, and alter drainage patterns. lditi ation: Storm drains and inlet structures .vi 11 be provide a—. impact: The project will generate additional vehicular traffic on Archibald and Ramona. 'litigation: This project will include new street construction and widening of Ramona and Archibald avenues, • 2 // • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12532 /Archibald Associates April 11, 1984 Page 5 III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Before approving the Tentative Tract Mao, the annin�l g Commission must find that this project is consistent with the General Plan and Development Code regulations. Further, the design of the project must not be likely to cause substantial environmental damage or be detrimental to adjacent properties. In addition, the proposed use, building design, and site plan, together with the Recommended Conditions of Approval must he in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Development Code and City Standards. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a Public 4earina in The Dai v Reoort newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were sent to oroperty owners within 300 feet of the project site. Enclosed for your review and consideration are letters from surrounding property owners either for or against this project. The Applicant conducted two neighborhood meetings with the surrounding residents to receive their input and discuss potential changes to the project design. The residents were concerned that a • project of this nature (increased density) .would affect their property values, and add to the flooding and traffic problems on Ramona Avenue. V. OPTIONS: The Planning Commission may select from the following options: A. Approve the project. D. Continue the project to allow for revisions. C. Deny the project, ';�I} PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT • TT 12532 /Archibald Associates April 11, 1984 Page Six VI. RECOMMENOATIO "7: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider all material and elements of this project. If after such consideration the Commission can support the facts for finding and Conditions of approval, the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. If the Commission cannot support the facts for finding, a Resolution of Denial also has been provided. Resp tff1 y/sy /u��mitted, Rick Gomez CityiPlanner RG:DC:ns Attachments: titters from Surrounding Residents 'emorandum - Traffic Study Analysis • Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "8" - Site Utilization '4ap Ex'nibit "C -1" thru "C -4" - Site Photographs Exhibit "D" - Subdivision Map (Proposed & Alternate) Exhibit "E" - Landscape Plan (Proposed & Alternate) Exhibit "F" - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "G" - Grading Plan Exhibit 4-1" thru "H -4" - Zero Lot Line Elevations Exhibit "H -5" - Typical Zero Lot Line Streetscape Exhibit "H -6" - Single Family Elevations Exhibit "H -7" - Ramona Streetscaoe Exhibit "I" - Standard Lot 'Width Examole Exhibit "J" - Variable Exhibit "K" - Previously Approved TT 11014 Exhibit "L" - Drainage Exhibit Initial Studies, Parts I & II Resolution of Approval with Conditions Resolution of Denial Exhibit "M" - Garaee Setbacks .2/3 za, e7f'� C -7 7/"4 1. rut- 0 L tLa /w. [ <C �. C _ aa�a. C L Jam' �'] K l.a�.' -il�cr � /.<• L( / L�..- C..ra. C•C�'l.a. �:C- .a..t� C." aL �4C4]r [ (( C 3 Lc_. �"; "cL�E, ��CL.t «- wC' r.C..LC. x_ ✓lam Le X. 4.0 rct ,.c C.!.G� ..CrC (.rt✓ LtC =G- _4�.�i %/ .iLrG� ".`.c:'<•<•Cll �C�� Ct /.1�.:CCf L:.LC� ..Grt4•<' +1` /V�CG� LLL!CCL.JO G.G, L• 'Z :l. LC�t• LL L'?L�aLC.✓• 7 , J %,- A , kCHC • OV 18 i3c,5 MA 7,8,90illil-i I 1213AA6 J' i 44 are Paul A. Rougeau Senior Civil Engineer City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: Pacer Homes Development - Morth of R.R. Tracks between Archibald and Ramona Dear `[.r. Rougeau: Thank you for attending the public meeting regarding the above project, which was held on January 17, 1984- I am sorry you • missed the meeting of January 3, 1984, where the modifications of Pacer's original plans were initially discussed, resulting in access to the bulk of the project being Limited to Archibald rather then both Archibald and Ramona. The people who attended were so Teased with the outcome that attendance at the subse- cuen*_ neeting on 1/17/84 was no longer considered essential to the survival of the neighborhood as we know it. I sneak with first hand knowledge, for my wife and I live on Remona, attended both meetings, and discussed the results of both meetings with our neighbors. Tle purvose o£ this letter is to encourage you to recommend the modified plans. As you no doubt recall, a traffic flow study was performed which indicated that traffic from the project would have a relatively nominal affect on Archibald's traffic flow. On the other hand, traffic from the project would be nearly disasterous for the residents of Romona and its immed- iate environs. Your decision will affect literally hundreds of people in the neighborhood, so please give this matter your utmost care. Respectfully, T1,as wBradfo • TWB /kay CC: Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission, c/o Paul A. Rougeau ,.,Ilan Coleman, Associate Planner Pacer Homes, Attn: Randy Toss ,/I STRAN'TZ, SOBELSOHN & ELKIN 4iiOwry ErS wi [nw Le.: nL 9 179wr[ •x SOe [LS OeM1 °LE -VSE REPLY TO • c 9.i4 3 ( :niM SC V[x•L :]ux]LL SC /L N:x [t009 [Cr `.•no J Li[5 [e '' -.i5 •x 4[L[5. L•L(O9 n'x �JaiS']e91 iCi . 5[ .'.9][ •x C9i 'C SS N09'• u.iN s'9CLr •ns xVe Jr09'J C.viJ • o•xL3 s•xi• •LL iM O n .E)C116E9 run,o -• s -"LOON 3 CO �LN xxc c .ac• ,r•- ssae•So - 4v ... -s •m J v oLnr nxu i:[. ALL ti,c = '.ONC - •x =S.x ; _11 January 20, 1984 ]•]SV C -•� !l •C 9VCL V Paul A. Rougeau Senior Civil Engineer City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: Pacer Homes Development - Morth of R.R. Tracks between Archibald and Ramona Dear `[.r. Rougeau: Thank you for attending the public meeting regarding the above project, which was held on January 17, 1984- I am sorry you • missed the meeting of January 3, 1984, where the modifications of Pacer's original plans were initially discussed, resulting in access to the bulk of the project being Limited to Archibald rather then both Archibald and Ramona. The people who attended were so Teased with the outcome that attendance at the subse- cuen*_ neeting on 1/17/84 was no longer considered essential to the survival of the neighborhood as we know it. I sneak with first hand knowledge, for my wife and I live on Remona, attended both meetings, and discussed the results of both meetings with our neighbors. Tle purvose o£ this letter is to encourage you to recommend the modified plans. As you no doubt recall, a traffic flow study was performed which indicated that traffic from the project would have a relatively nominal affect on Archibald's traffic flow. On the other hand, traffic from the project would be nearly disasterous for the residents of Romona and its immed- iate environs. Your decision will affect literally hundreds of people in the neighborhood, so please give this matter your utmost care. Respectfully, T1,as wBradfo • TWB /kay CC: Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission, c/o Paul A. Rougeau ,.,Ilan Coleman, Associate Planner Pacer Homes, Attn: Randy Toss ,/I CITY OF RANCHO CliCAMONGA CCCAA42, MEMORANDUM'��' = v f DATE: April 4, 1984 TO: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner iv FROM; Pau' Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: 7entat•ve Tract 12532 Traffic Study A traffic study aas prepared for this project for the purpose of assessira its iTDact on surrounding streets. Traffic from the project site was distr4bute2d to the adjacent streets using two alternatives, 1) with a connection to Ramona Avenue and the main entrance onto Archibald Avenue, and 2) .with only one entrance -exit onto Archibald Avenue. Background traffic, on the adjacent streets was assumed at a level which incbudes the increase for all newly built and approved projects, as well as an assumption for the vacant 10 acres immediately to the south. TRAFF;_ IMPACT 'AITH aO^1NECT ION TD RAMONA • Existing traffic volumes on Ramona Avenue are of the order of 70 -75 venicles oar hour X44 northbound and 28 southbound) during the morning peak hour when most work trios would he leaving the site. During this j morn °,ng peak hour, 16 vehicles will turn right, or south, out of the site i and will yield to 29 through vehicles. These volumes equate to one vehicle every four minutes yielding to one vehicle every two minutes. An anticioated 'eft turn volume of 10 vehicles Der hour (one every six urinates; will turn left and must yield to 70 -75 vehicles per hour, or slightly more than one car every minute. It is obvious, therefore, that there will be ro congestion, delay, or capacity problem at this inter section. Retuning travel in the evening peak hour will consist of 19 vehicles turning left in conflict with 40 -45 vehicles per hour, sout,.'ound. Volumes of this magnitude are very minimal and would not require left turn lanes. In neither case, Torn ing or evening, will the increase in traffic be perceptible to the residents along Ramona Avenue. During the morning peak hour, approximately 60% of all project trios will enter ;rch'bal' ; venue, r terms of autos, it is anticipated that 36 will ^;r, '�1 d 7 will turn r4 .It. Durinq this same morning peak ho•.ir, :rr,hoai. traffic will be of the order of 375 vehicles southbound and ;gD ^,rthcound. cont'roued... • Ala Memo to Dan Coleman Re: Tentative Tract 12532 Traffic Study April 4, 1964 . Page 2 EFFECT OF ELIMINATING RAMONA ACCESS Naturally, with no access to Ramona, the exiting traffic in the morning onto Archibald Avenue would increase by 16 left turning cars and 10 right turns. This would not materially increase the impact on Archibald but would increase the delay in project residents being aole to exit. This will be aggravated when the 10 acres to the south develops since it will have to use the same access to Archibald. Further effects of restricting all access to Archibald could be an increase in the number of accidents at that point, increased circuity of travel for residents headed to easterly destinations, and, if delay at Archibald were severe enough, use of the "emergency" Ramona connection during normal times. It should be remembered that with only one other entrance, the emergency connection must be kept clear of gates, chains, etc., for evacuation and alternate "normal" use in case of an accident or construction at Archibald, not just fire and police use. Thus, it must be easily traversible for any vehicle and if "cheater" use becomes common, the area will become an eyesore. • Ramona Avenue is a "collector" street, wider than normal, even though only two lanes, and is designed and master planned to accomodate over five times the traffic which this portion will ever carry, due to its northerly ending at 19th Street. Similar streets in the City extend far to the north and very adequately serve their purpose as traffic collectors. To defeat this purpose of the master planned street system by diverting traffic from collectors is contrary to good planning practice. RECOMMENDATION It shoud be recommended to the Planning Commission that the project alternative utilizing the full street connection to Ramona Avenue be required, PAR :bc C� J .X 19 1,113 Tile ", Tr, 31.0 FCo16GT 51T6 Ti 11111 INS!"; ; I ✓ V NORTH CITY OF ITENI: 7- 125 3 Z RANCHO CLE-MMONGA TITLE l.ya0"tQ I MA-P PL WINING DIVISION EXHIBIT: SGALE: j' *C=' _ .J>o 7 R-1 WEST ..... ... ... . R-3 .1-5 041Q Ll - --i -- - .41 R-3 R-1-5 NORTH CITY OF ITEM: - r/ ? cj RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: f I-TE PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: SCALE: E 11 wiN� s�o 'NCHile,AL V RANCHO CUC_�,,NIO \CA ITLM° ^ '2r2$2 PLANNING, D VSM TITLE:s> UvgrWT L'`LSGLE .�Z 1 0 W.e, r-A-ycra� C�-V N'MH CITY OF ITEM: �17,rO'252 • RANCHO CUCA-\IO-N;GA TITLE 1 PH PLANNING DIVISION LXHIBIT: r--?- SCALE: .123 0 �snnlc- CITY OF ITEM: "iJ" I Zv53Z RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE:AddT07 PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: CIE: �"' ut�G� NORTH �AVo'NA (S Moµ'Ir,- V lsi'r>< VgAlt4 A6C C 15TUCTT )FE n u NORTH n u CITY OF ITE \I rIZ '53Z • RANCHO CUCA`IONGA TITLE: RHOTO05 PLALNNNING DIVISION EXHIBIT:- C -4 SCALE: 1J' n..1 s/ /u uru(uan -ra nrr ruoJ I t _ -7,T. ! 'i;I ♦ �; r .« eu run u/ PPP • 1 !'• --`- -• �. ' ^ J�._'f_'_,w '_ � "'"f; = . . Imo_. -.�� I . r l e.i x 'F��t.'q ' +w.n w n •��n `n a..rn y J m.mrur/n r'Ir { . /kLTCRN ATE NORTH CITY OF ITE%lz 7F RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE 1��) l �orJ its PLANNING DIVISION EXHIIIIT ;--P-SCALE; - ` � J bf i 1 ,....... ........... .... ......................... ................... 1 s O '-'psi � a O .......................... 1 s t 4 >ai.? _ 3 9Ua 12532 -A AITBKWAT6 NORTH r� u 0 CITY OF ITEM: 12532 • RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: L�1Dg Age, PLhN PLANNING DIVISION E.XHIIUT: E SCALE 2 :. 7 0 CITY OF ITEM: 7E 125 ") -2- RANCHO CUC--k-NIONGA TITLE:- 51-If PLAN) PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: F SCALE: NORTH - CITY OF ITEM: 7E 125 ") -2- RANCHO CUC--k-NIONGA TITLE:- 51-If PLAN) PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: F SCALE: NORTH 0 NORTH CITY OF ITEM:— z 53z RANCHO CL.CA"IO.NGA TITLE: ��h� Nc ;; 4(� PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: ---� SGLEI — a:�.9 rl: _ ' : ! •= ��,, v� ; ..i. X11 � ;' —' V= 'Ir i • 11 n ��- .. 1S: xt! ,• `�;x� r' •rf r y__l - -i �T���- -It.L� i i 'i 1 �' 4 rtl '•� i 1 v w ITCR1A iO Sfc12lr! t�1A!N Tc }SECCw NORTH CITY OF ITEM:— z 53z RANCHO CL.CA"IO.NGA TITLE: ��h� Nc ;; 4(� PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: ---� SGLEI — a:�.9 RIGHT CITY OF RANCHO CL'G1N10 \GA PLANNING DIVISION ITEM: 11 I zs3Z TITLE; Pte' f� _1 ' FL,EVf -MJ EXHIBIT; SCALE: � '.3c NORTH �_'- RIGHT CITY OF RANCHO CL'G1N10 \GA PLANNING DIVISION ITEM: 11 I zs3Z TITLE; Pte' f� _1 ' FL,EVf -MJ EXHIBIT; SCALE: � '.3c NORTH LEFT m REAR RIGHT MMn CITY of RAN , CHO Ct:CANjoN'CYA PU,NNING MIS" 0 ? - IT-F—as-+ -L� 1211 SO, FT. NORTH 1 IT f \ 1: -7 TITLE% LXHIEUT: SCALE1 a3l 0 I LEFT REAR -- RIGHT • � ..• uuuIIII IIII ui •� '�ar�.o 1307 SO. FT. NORTH CITY OF ITE.N1: 'IF/ 2S�Z RANCHO CL"CVNIONGA TITLE ?Lz* J 3 nM (AA' CA) PLANNIM, DIVISION EXHIRIT H "3 SGLE: 33i LEFT yam. L.A N NORTH 0 CITY OF ITENI %r • RANCHO CLCA`IO\GA TITLE: ftkfJ 4 eL.Vuc c-no PUNNING DIVISION EXHIBIT -+ ALE: REAR RICRT yam. L.A N NORTH 0 CITY OF ITENI %r • RANCHO CLCA`IO\GA TITLE: ftkfJ 4 eL.Vuc c-no PUNNING DIVISION EXHIBIT -+ ALE: SOON- COUNTRYSIDE , ARCHIBALD ASSOC - - - -IN NORTH CITE" OF ITEM: -trI25:7L • R,A,NCHO CLCA`IONGA TITLE+ Q/r'1t a)A- ftrevn-no►�S PLANNINi DIVISION EXHIPIT k -6 SCALE% 1'� S Wl(I I— f�E oo�V/A LAE!L AT HEAOINGI NORTH CITY OF ITE%I: -7 ri t,57, Z RANCHO CLC MONGA TITLE: WtdMM A !PM! 7=,.r�f� PLAi�1[VI, \G DIVISION EXHIfitT t H-! SCALE: 13(, 0 1 x'- V • S _I I I STANDARD 46' LoT WIOM NORTH CITY OF IMM: _7:I ZS�7Z RA,, CHO CL'C lN'IQ \GA TITLE; r;=> 1QA-20 LC7 Ie )ICL- N • PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT:_ T- scALEI ., ? 17 0 0 VARM%e LoT w" NORTH CITY OF ITE.NI: 1 (% RANCHO CLCA`IONGA TITLE: VAIN A15LE I.,a7Wj G7N PLAiNN[% DIVLSION EXHIBIT: T ALE: aid r 11614 �AfFr.ve.l 9 A / 4 I ) 0 Mocfr %AM • NORTH CITY OF ITEM: IF I ZS3 z RANCHO CUC-kNIONGA TITLE M6VIOUS RPFRoVAJ -Tl / #4 PLANNING DWISION EXHIBIT:- 15- SCALE1 34 i I _ f rte. I 1 1 6S6S =dO�L4 N./M'• °.3° =JVJ -cIIC• _. I sr...• oa .r I�ro.eti� ceA;� } R-1 Qp -- • t 1 � I sfORM CRAi^� -- _. R -1 ±i \qq I title; CITY OF RANCHO Cl.'CA�lO!IGA z ✓�- yid;;, _ TT 12532 ".yt1r' j ENGINEERING DIVISION -� Nor DRAINAGE MAP page TRACT 12532 site plan /(Y .. ... tir •A rr; rs o • :. ►� :mac 1 },,_�, �� x , II (III YR /C! . / IA . N /( /((DI I •. a' Ix 1= I i _ - ILL1f IILII" �LL IIIJJJ C ,A f I -1 t 3 • ca fbES NOT MEET IS' Film MGk of SIDE (a50 LafZ) vaP%� la' FPnu� P � SIpEP,1M�YiZ�i LnTS o Illy I�t•�� t�Y "� L• Iirn /IrI /.... l.... ....... / /I(I //U a r • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT 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 Part II of the Initial Study. The :•elopment Review Committee will meet and take action ..o 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 signi- ficant environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have a significant environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further informa- tion concerning the proposed project. • PROJECT TITLE: "Countryside" APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: J. Randoloh Poao Pacer Hnme<. !nr 801 No Parkcenter Orive, Santa Ana, CA 82105 -4 7- 771Z5- LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) AP Nos. 202 -181: 05: 06, 15: 16 LIST OT! -?ER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FECERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: I -1 a.4 1 r f PROJECT DESCRIPTION • DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: 120 unit '%12 homes - detached 1 and 2 sto ry residences - ortvate streets 8 recreational facility ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): i000graphy is a slioh tly southerly slope of approximately 3% ere are. no cultural or scenic asoects of the property Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have sicnificant environmental impact? This project is not a part of any other development, I -2 • Explanation of any YEs answers above: 3. Additi of I }1PORTANT; residential e units, complete theconstruction form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby :ertify that the states the e furnished above and in the attached exhibits p ment data and information required for this initial statement:. ..•- to the best of my ability, and that the facts, m best is - information presented are true and correct to the -'. knowledge and belief. I further understand that 1j_^:__ information may be required to be submitted before a.:: evaluation can be made by the Devel t Review C Dategnature + 1-3 !y4 • I WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO X 1. Create a substantial change in ground — contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing — noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for — municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or — general plan designations? X 5. Remove any existing trees? How many? 1,100 orange trees: 18 eucaly to trees �r �isposal of X 6. Create the need for use — potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? • Explanation of any YEs answers above: 3. Additi of I }1PORTANT; residential e units, complete theconstruction form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby :ertify that the states the e furnished above and in the attached exhibits p ment data and information required for this initial statement:. ..•- to the best of my ability, and that the facts, m best is - information presented are true and correct to the -'. knowledge and belief. I further understand that 1j_^:__ information may be required to be submitted before a.:: evaluation can be made by the Devel t Review C Dategnature + 1-3 !y4 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to accommodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL 1. Number of single family units: 40 40 40 2. Number of multiple family units: 0 0 0 3. Date proposed to begin construction.: 1stQtr84 3rd0tr84 4th0tr84 4. Earliest date of occupancy: 3rdQtr84 1stQtr85 2ndQtr85 Model and # of Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Rance 1 2 85,000 2 3 92,000 3 3 96,000 4 3 100,000 1 -4 0 .Z, V L� • CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.MONGA PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST APPLICANT: FTLTNG DAT 40 NUMBER:-7r I2 5�2 PROJECT: I15- Ze" —LDT L1X101A*ir5 eM114• S PROJECT LOCATION: �'yfS .Yi�TI?!!/L� VI S / ,1 I. ENVIRO>:MENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). 34(. YES MiAY3E ':0 _ 1. Soils and Geology. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? / _ h. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? d. The destruction, covering or modification / of any unique geologic or physical features? L e. Any potential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site conditons? .. 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. Hydrology. Will the proposal have significant results in: 34(. a r 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, any alteration of surface water quality? f. 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. Exoosure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? 3. Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Constant or periodic air emissions from 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 or temperature? +. 3ioci Flora. frill the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or number of any species of plants? b, Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? "q % YES MAYBE NO -L— — • 1 — L _ -1 _ -1 - -1 — 1 L — _ - 1 • M YES `tAYBE NO c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? — d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural — production? — Fauna. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? L 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. population. Will the proposal have significant results in: — a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of — 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 sign" icant results in: a. Change in local or regional socio- econonic characteristics, including economic or cocmercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? — b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buvers, tax payers or project users? Yee _. -- ,. Land '.'se and ?tanninc �onsideraticns. Will the proposai 'nave significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? L — 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 or non - consumptive recreational opportunities? L _ -+yp YES HAYBE NO ; 8. 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? — C. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? 1 e. 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 air traffic? 1 g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? / 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have significant resuits 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? I 1 e, Increase in existing noise 'levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? _ / g. The creation of objectionable odors? / • h. An increase in light or glare? __ Iv9 • 0 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 have a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? _ _ _L b. Natural or packaged gas? _ _ 1 c. Communications systems? _ _ d. Water supply? _ _ .G facilities? e. Wastewater _ Flood control structures? ,/ L g. Solid waste facilities? _ _ h. Fire protection? _ L i. Police protection? _ ._ _Z 1 j. Schools? _ facilities? k. Parks or other recreational 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? m. Other governmental services? L 11. Energv and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: fuel / L a. Cse of substan Cal or excessive or energy? _ b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing / sources of energy? 1 C. An increase in the demand for development of new sources of energy? L d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non - renewable forms of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are available? _ 3 7 Sf� 0 .)-S-/ ?d9I 6 YES `tAYBE NO e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? • 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? 1 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? II. DISCUSSION OF EMVIRONMN'TAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). ,�,,e e 0_4a.t_4ft64Uf 0 .)-S-/ . 0 gage 7 III. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: • I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION 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 RE PREPARED. I find the proposed project N_4Y have a significant effect on the envirnment, and an ENVIRMPENT I`PAC REPORT is required. Date / Srs acute Title Y • 17J As-1. 0 » • ATTACHMENT TO PART II - INITIAL STUDY FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12532 2. _H drology: a. TFie site is traversed by an ephemeral stream channel subject to periodic flooding. This project, in conjunction with adjacent Tract 12320, will install a storm drain pipe to carry storm water from Victoria Street to Ramona Avenue. The existing stream channel will be filled during grading prior to construction. This project will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage Patterns and the rate and amount of surface water runoff. Construction will reduce absorption rates and increase surface water runoff because of an increase in impervious surfaces, such as streets and buildings. The existing ephemeral stream channel overflows during periodic storms, causing sheet flow flooding of the adjacent property to the south. This project will be adequately graded and a storm drain installed to carry storm water to Ramona Avenue. c. This project will alter the course of flood waters affecting downstream properties. Mitigation measures are described above. Further, this project will increase surface water runoff onto Ramona Avenue, which is subject to severe flooding during the rainy season. Based upon a 10 -year storm analysis, this project will result in a 2.5% increase in the quantity of water on Ramona Avenue. This increase is considered • not significant; however, the existing condition on Ramona is hazardous during flooding. Short -term mitigation measures include construction of a storm drain from Victoria Street to Ramona and street improvements that will significantly reduce the amount of erosion and resultant debris in flood waters. Long -term mitigation of flooding on Ramona is proposed through installation of storm drains in Ramona to Base Line and Turner pursuant to the City's Master Plan of Storm Drains. u 4. Biota a. instruction of this project will include removal of 1,100 orange trees, Christmas trees, and 18 Eucalyptus trees. The project will include parkway trees and frontyard and landscaping. d. This project will eliminate potential for agricultural production, The City's General Plan EIR analyzed the impact of phasing out agricultural production and did not consider it a significant impact. 7. Land Use and Plann in Considerations a. a eve opment o this project will be a substantial alteration of the present land use as citrus groves, Christmas tree farm, and vacant land. The project proposes 115 zero -lot homes at 8 dwelling units per acre density which is consistent with the General Plan land use designation and zoning of Low - Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac). The City's General Plan EIR analyzed the impact of the change in land use. ;1s3 Attachment to Initia&tudy • Tentative Tract 125 Page 2 • 9. TrdnSDwr atj2n: The proposed subdivision would create 115 residential _ lots; approximately 40% would access from Ramona Avenue, and 60% would access from Archibald. This project will generate increased vehicular traffic approximately 600 trips per day (assuming 10 trips per house per day). During peak morning hours 26 cars would be added to Ramona and 39 cars added to Archibald. This increase is considered not significant and traffic volumes on Ramona would not exceed capacity. This project will require new street construction and installation of full street improvements on Ramona and Archibald. 12. Utilities and Public Services f. This project will require construction of a storm drain system for flood control purposes. See discussion under "Hydrology ". J. This project will create 115 residential units that will generate students to be absorbed by affected school districts. The school districts are experiencing overcrowding. As a mitigation measure, the project must obtain letters from the affected school districts prior to issuance of building permits certifying that adequate capacity does or will exist to accommodate students generated by this project. • 11 aS y 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. 34 -34 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12532 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12532, hereinafter "Map" submitted by Archibald Associates, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real prooerty situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential subdivision of 14.5 acres on the west side of Ramona, at Monte Vista Street, into 112 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on April 25, 1984; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Division's reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NO'W, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: • SECTION It The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 12532 and the Map thereof: 19 (a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. aSS Resolution '�o. • • Page 2 • (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a 'legative Declaration is issued. SECT= 1 2: Tentative Tract 'dap No. 12532, a copy of which is attacned hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: PANNING DIVISION Approval of Tentative Tract 12532 is granted subject to the aooroval of Development District Amendment 33 -07 by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The site shall be developed in accordance with the approved alternative site plans, which includes (1) a oaved street connection to Ramona Avenue at Monte Vista; (2) increased front setbacks on a majority of lots; and (3) reverse plotted houses to provide greater driveway separation. In no case shall the front setback be less than 5 feet from the right-of-way line to accommodate a public utility easement. 3. Recreational amenities are required in conjunction • with common open space areas such as, but not limited to, swimming pools and soas and court facilities. In addition, enclosed tot lot facilities with play equipment and large open lawn areas are ^equired. Details shall be included in final landscape plans. Solar access easements shall be dedicated for the puroose of assuming that each lot or dwelling unit shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use of a solar energy system. The easements may be contained in a declaration of restrictions for the subdivision, which shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation of the final map or issuance of permits, whichever comes first. The easements shall prohibit the casting of shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtires, or any other object extent for utility wires and similar objects pursuant to Development Code Section 17.^19.060 -G -2. 5. An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for all dwelling units and for heating any swimming pool or spa. Solar energy • shall be the primary energy system unless other alternative energy systems are demonstrated to be of equivalent capacity and efficiency. Details shall be included in the building plans and shall be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. • Resolution No. • Page 3 6. Front yard landscaping is required and shall include, at a minimum, one (1) fifteen gallon size tree, one (1) five gallon size tree, seeded ground cover and a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy, This requirement shall be in addition to required street trees. 7. Lots 1 -9 facing Ramona shall have priority and be constructed within Phase I. 8. Phase I construction shall include Ramona Avenue street improvements, including street trees. 9. The combination retaining wall and screen wall along the south project boundary shall not exceed an overall combined height of nine (9) feet, as measured from the existing grade on the south side of the wall. ENrMEERI,G DIVISIDN 1. A portion of "A" street from Archibald to "E" street and a portion of "E" street from "A" street to the southerly tract boundary shall be dedicated to the City as a public street. 2. A storm drain system shall be constructed from "E" street to "F" street along the southerly tract boundary. Dedication of an easement shall be offered to the City covering the storm drain. 3. The proposed storm drain at rear of Lot 59 shall be realigned along the property line between Lots 58 and 59. 4. Adequate erosion protection devices shall be provided along the drainage overflow easements, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 5. A portion of the master planned storm drain on Ramona Avenue shall be constructed from the project site to south of the Southern Pacific Railroad to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The storm drain fees for the project will be credited for this construction. ;L5? Resolution No. 84 -0 • Page 4 PLANN,fNG COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis i..Stou hairman ATTEST: Ri� ° mez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho C.icamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution .ias duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adooted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of April, 1984, by the following vote- to -ait: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, REMPEL • NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: JUAREZ, NCNIEL �3!R 6. All existing P.C.C. pavement on Ramona Avenue contiguous to the project boundary shall be removed and reolaced .witG aspnalt concrete pavement. The cost of constructing the easterly half of the street will be reimbursed by the City. 7. The aoplicant will be required to reconstruct Ramona Avenue from the southerly tract boundary to the railroad right -of -day. The cost of the construction will be reimbursed by the City. 8. Pavement taper shall be orovided at the southerly terminus of Archibald Avenue to provide for drainage and traffic control. Adequate right -of -way on Archibald Avenue shall be acquired to provide for the taper. 9. Street "A" shall be 29 -feet wide (curb to curb) from Street "E" to Street "G" All other interior streets shall be of 36 -foot width. 10. A 50 -foot wide offer of dedication shall be made on Monte Vista Street. . 11. A five -foot public utility easement along bath sides of all interior streets shall be reserved on the map. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25th DAY OF APRIL, 1984. PLANN,fNG COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis i..Stou hairman ATTEST: Ri� ° mez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho C.icamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution .ias duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adooted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of April, 1984, by the following vote- to -ait: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, REMPEL • NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: JUAREZ, NCNIEL �3!R Di PaRNEIr Of ciggen ll otvllolew STANDARD C011DITIBn$ .,,,: 7r(Z53 Z AIPIICAld, tocATIOF: ➢rode flea thicam are nrndniolu of approval_ 4 ICMaS ons: Sniff CUM TM flit 114n: ... W "I"" IINI fog 1-11.1 alld Till IDLICAI co A. lire 1 —ts _ L Rvelopent III lrw Appro -I shall expire, unless eatended by the planning Cm If I.n rblm{ per mil not uV o appr... J r hit not nl .nrn.r.,.d dub lrl .,ld.vn (19) moo Oil sTrw the mate of approval. f- Coed r l I...1 -11 Venoil npproval i, granted Inv a perbal of even' an. ApP.nr,l ..hill ¢.Pare. Hole, talented by li.e pinnn- tan.Is an If collie-] P.. -I;t% , not issued within eighteen Pe� Doti, free we oil, of epprural. J. ConJ tit rnrial "" Permrl npproval ,nail evprre. unless C ended by Ibe 'J -- pl.ri Cann Ion s In, A",.,.•" u:e bas eos "u,n M within llgnleen (IB) months f n Ibe date of approval. r �!. Tenlalne Trait alp approval shall evpare, Dili,, Mended by ON Planning CImmI'.slon. If Ill fine l ,cabal, umn nap Is nut ap,ree,.l and onkd within bent, -four (11) rnnlM Iran the appruwl of this prolecl. 5. This approval Snell r will' the Applicant and shell hxome Sold upon A change of nano nip or if the busman operallen ,A,e,. �le per!_Ipprenl T. life site shell De .Naelnp,d I irdmre with Zile approved site Ales on hle m line Pining urn loco and Ibe cundrlmns lonla IoeJ hermn. rg.A" 'sea s e P ors eml Inul.l l wig eleval Ions t- brporalmg all CondI in., of approval mall be suMltlA for rewlew and ADD,...I by the Plaroing 0rvur n poor to issmnce of building peris its. • Project No. R-6 L T. An site plans. ending plans. landscape and Irrigation plans, and stfeet hyruveeent Plun shall ee cwwllnrtrd for Inds.0 ,, pr for to trounce of building permits, prior to final map approval In the use of • ustan lot suEdvis ion, o approved use has consenting, U d, ,rh.rcrer con", `Ildst. ( e. Approval of this regnesl ,halt pt ,ran. .... ;lance wltI all I. filed, of Zhu Zoning Brilliance, all over applicable City OrJmances, and app lduble mmnanlV plans or specitte plans m effect at the line of Ilu Jding Permit Issuance. 15. Pr for to any u of the project site he WSlnesa actlrlly being nc"d thereon. UI caN plans of approval contained Therein shall be Cep It l Ad to the ubslest on of the City Planner. —/b. A detailed Bu-Site Ilghlilg Ilan shall be Submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division prior to Issuance of Building All PermI s. Such plan Shall Indicate Style, Illumination. IOOtIS , M lgnl and method of sfielding, as ml le adversely affect Nlaaent properties. g. All corner deve;life, shall nave the Side elevation racing the street upgraded wile add Rlonal wand brio around vrlmbn and wood siding by Plans.oni where appropriate, 100." to review and approval by the CITY II ..er. S. All conpouaon roof mg Shall be A tenable thick-cut architectural Style- A savele of The raa( material shall be suMitted to in- Planning 1) umn fur renew and approval prior to issuance of pull it m9 pen. S. 9. All four apPurt enancez, In[Inll mg al conditioners. %h ill be a cnileClural ly integrated, ibmlJeJ Ira. ry lee ant Zile saon.l bulferrd from elluenl propeftias and street, 11 myu re.l by the planning and Belong Buisies. Jetalls shall be I -Moll m Lu11Jn9 plans. _[ lo. All snoring Paoli Installed At the line or Initial Jevele,,fl shall be suppleacr ed with solar heating. 11. Teatunaed pe4es4 can pathways across Culallon aisles Shall be PrmlJeJ Ihrpugnaat a er le delignal to cunne,t dwellings .,to open Spares and recreational uses. la _11I. If p Cer"1111rol t�.lh r ,ptl,les are prii all trash plCLup Shall be for Ind,,d —1 units with all receplelles role W.-d from public rive. 13. Trash r.tapt,Cle(sl are required And shall be enclosed by a 6 fool btgh ..,.A,y wall with fee obstructing gales pursuant to City , land Vdi. Luc Lion shall be subject to appror al by the Planning Dln sire. u. 411 qro nJ a ..J u n., .". tenonis ,cn lranrnr than be IC la: at el ant at 1, l 1, cal the n nt on III not a an, er.pu le lv a 1 In , .r „r cunt shat inn nl I..,, I. lr In rrrat try .all♦ r..'I n....ern.l. a .1 I,n 1.1 ,n 1. 115. Sn -11 nn. Ill be rvr .awd and approval or lire CITY Planner, In a: ILwo c•. 1 - alrryl..t Street na.nlnq Pnlny. nr, r In a,,, and r..n J" as 1.1 .ill" f or 11 tract wP. 116. All bm la lnY'a n.. •• . and wo —dual units sha 11 he Wan[Itled In e e kar and con. zw.11n9 Proper nlmnmetlon. _ V. Inc al n,l 111 VI mn+J Cgnes tot Lra I is sna 11 be ......,q lorlal"a-1 v.e 1 cal In ,moan nano the f9veslnao Irnl Plan. A elnmcalsng Cwod • --1- .11 ,f.ulieJ 1, .1 plan .rlths, leis ,hones. pnat¢al c• Ion. Inq an;I control. In artordanc .Ion City rt er e9••e sir l.I ill, ri 11 It ...lent .Ir n. Ings, still] he Submitted for and rel nY In.• ;. e,n,n.. Ul,t.r,n poor to eV V ra vet and occur Jet... nr Iles boll trnJ I:,p. a,l in to In aVnro rat of ,tonal PO ol,r end and rad ml g It-, 11 —111V- Oall grade aM construct 0) t,411%. me bill., Ienc.ng ml u Li Isle d.r ores. ID. the Cw.nan l s, Cnn.b..... and Re,tr¢llons (CCLR•s) Shall Cut noun lbR Ina S..VInl or tol-re a malt, nnue final, requlreaenl, for the e.eptna of al.l a I,II ..I- I"o rM 1. Ind,. l.ld al lot O on tIll Snhd 1. II mu, l l l hall tint bpi mil of 6•cpw4 said —,.at, ..thus' one u le"Ity of aeV•,I lil.11 to bmnh of dorm furs m lumen.ner't n. 1I 6, a if rani I., .I o. o.. +II . to MR.'. Q ZIg. A n.py r.1 one Ctuvxanit, rood l inns and Rettncllans (CCAR•s) and Aa I cI" of InCnal•ur al low of few Hu—swariz Anou at tun, ..6,f,t in I So sl•Vraral .d 'I-- 1'Ianning and fuglneenn4 Ella ulnas aml tilt Clly Ali ara.'Y. vn.rll I.. r. ...I .l..l vIll. this wnp amt a c . . . I", odd lu line C sly C. Up.ln manaynee, �1. So 114 c are e.1., or .1 o,, Ill or a ly Jead bolls and locks shall be Iona 11. .1 nn . ,.n on if In LI. IS ,ruled. •__ 3. Srcu, I y . s u. , ...... et . ..... u. into, sna 11 oe Im le l I r J on each unit. J. All unllt within tout J.relo,ai shall be pfepl.M,d to he adapted (nr a to l lr .It r n.,l Io, I lt. �. Energy Lo ll ne mq ho l 1•1 m9 lia tar l A is and app l l ancea are re do l led to be .,I. rated i I lu si prnJrcl to Inc in.k soon Will'. &$ nut not I,mlf ed lu rn l.....1 wyt ,in Inn rewil. hell[ ...... of In to la Upn Jaun lr P , eteno'd orerhai", pllolesa in bunt; , eft. • Project No. ZS3Z S. This Jerellpnent shall provide an option to hone oyLri to pwchese A shier .ales heatlu.l unit. l6. puellmg units shall be costrualeJ .Ion fire rltarJant materiel and /on wuo.Ilmle rung uelen.11. All _ f All Parkways, open are .., ems hand saepuo thrall be permanently nla,i it Ivy A noeon.rls ....list on o Ines ails c plenle to the Su.n pone, of aamlenma• Shall be suMllled to one Plam ln9 0'11 eon poor I. n.Uahce of but Iding ",mat'. 0. Intl prnlert ,M11 prorlJe e n percent of affordable hmrsm9 IMI-I n•n ts, n 1.1.1 once— UIthInerJ Plan nasal, pn tics S end the hmnln9 cr ltv la Jet m..1 t the Growth hanab.nent Dnitnance. AlfunWhtlrty shall be Jelermliod by Current market rate,, eats 411.1 IrcJUn t rc tell 11 It the 111 of con5lructon of the prnl ecL An epreermnt to t c shell be appruaeJ by the City Planner pn or IG nsunce of nulidulgpefm its. L9, prior to approval and recordation of the final map, or prior to nsuance of building Do"Its, when no s.AJ'vls'on map IS Involved, 'tom rertl(Imum from all affected SWJU1 oistr lcli, shall be sudallled la the Delartmot of Lonauntly R•velopment which states that ulequete school faclblles ue or .ill be capable of Acromandaling stmlenls generated by Ina, pr.RCl. Still letter of cart location most have neon 'sued by the 1Jmnl District .Mien alnely (90) days prior to the I nil map aDprural In Ire use of Ine subdlri,lon r I SS.rence of p.tmilt In Lhe raze of all otn.r retr.lenllal proiecas. n �10. Prior to aDprural and rewrdallon or the final nap. or prior to I vtuan¢ of omlJmg p.rnlll .hen no map n Inca lreU. .mien er t iflultGn from one affected water dntrsct, that aJeWate Steel and water fecl''ties are or it be 1111111,11 to tar ee the proposed Pro lac 1, In, 11 he tinrc 11 L,11 lore I.`par the n of 1—.,nl ly d.re,uIl L Stn' lelUr nt mane I... I ,r,l be one ..... ,dish.. withlIS nin.iy (901 days prior to final map .....ISI In 'he LI" of SuOJdential prof ac t s,. to (n of permit, In IM air of all of her Druletts using septic link facilities a stowable by the Santa Ana Re,m al Water Control Rohl ILL the City, r;,t%n cerltl'calton of att.ptahtllly. ncluJtng all supportive i nlorulton, mall be ofla then and Subnitt.J t to I'll Cloy. 11. Iola orti 1Stan w S rof loch sad 11 A total Jev.lolownl packa, and Is required to reapply fur a point rating relaltre to tale design section of the Growth haro mint 0rl'n,nce prior to final approval and recordation of the map. D. timkirq L YMi.ular Access I. All Wind list IanJI-and Is lan•IS hell nave aids It, dLwnemn of 5' and shall con La'n an 10" .elk aJl em n[xito parking stall (incinding arbl. 0 0 j. Puking Idl Ve.v dull b, 15 la l l on S re, Dl so d if at In lervali of 10 Ir.•, I., In in the mature dloonter of the bee along the. perrw. ter nl aa. I, noel ing oaf. All pare I, spec -, ana 11 I., Itr 1p•'J per Csty it ano-ol Jra, ing(. �A. All on It, ana I ne P, -II 1 wl In mrsestII garage door oponers of IT eveway a Ira u... 16 feel In depth. R.•:Irn l,r.nt shall re,t,,,I live alnragr i' tile' nett the pr <,V I,• Sou al lr,I: no, to •rdl o I. I, snJ IIYUI. dn,l I.o,k o, • later ar 'is , E. lamdKa so, A drtal 1..1 Im.l +.a • hit figs(, m, plan, .unit, dupe Dlanllng. Slnll ne snPna .,1 .1 r en out J {,provil Iby the Planning division ono< lit Ine . e T 1............ pe.... is nr Son' To fern. SNp app. naa .n I, '<e... pf a <n on Inc tdo.l,v s, on. _ 2. L....... I. ere +.,II o• . nrdl w •vet post lnle. A master blab ul ou vlit ,nq 1,... . •dal 1 .. r p'e•d:a In[at ,on, Sian enl lip+. to ill oe Son ll•`J 10 a...l a {.I•,...•rl 'LY 11..• Pler.n ing Ill rli,nn pr... r to e, ravel of ibe on V. q. rluy plv.. Lnl plm (hill file ...In ..aunt ho p ea V..a of q. nl aide +. r 1 —.. a. • In It" -Ix—l. Inminq melon Ja. and I.ee•. ",cline pl.nr.nl Ine reV l.h r.n nl of r —I L-11,. el t. let, . ..n.n .,r IS .lall..n i o I.,, y.'.. that] b nil a lla+l per I Ity (Ileac url .n a, .,r.lJhde1 with , Ine Master plot, of tt reel beet L.r Ir.c bry ul RrnJm Curmm�ga and shall be Iddlid at an in, nl u f To an interior street, and 20' ran exterior 'cries,. a, A an m nl ,1, lr.rt To, 4r oft an Invol 4 of the Iollowmg 'I les, wine ll I,.• win, nshm lose develapmenl; bII44' box ur I irger,'1. 11g Ihow. net IM -5 qe 11.n. 5. A ne n u. nli.n _,2 of arc frsn planted wl thin the ".Jr,t, mall be , ,shim t, e... 16. All dole• 1•ed In of Itve (S) I,., a ert,ul ntignl ant nl ):1 nr grr OO, tl"'.• [hall be ].1..h. .1•••.l abed nl nqi O•J , a odso,h n .0 .Iln alnpe pl n.r ..nl ra.lu,d ran. nit nl r..a I.IY nl Ran. nu Cu<auxenga. Shen al,,. pL,nf ...J ,n , w n. 1, ,eel1 ]n.go, a tree p.v J[n 2s0 sq- ]t. d +Wp.. ,I e••I ,g lam ,ore large. Ilona per each IW to. fl. of ahme er t a. and approp, I ale vro n. se, er. 0 Project No. L 13Z. 11. All slope plantl.. +e1 vn ge t 1.n ina 11 ne con] maws Iy are in l n AM In itea li ivy and tar lv Vrg cond ll l on oy Ine J•ve Inner ran t 11 each ol lr lJuel unit It smJ u,it uc'rnp red ivy the burl,. Pnpr to - rating <upanry fur creme unet s, an mipecllan Shull he condncteJ by roe P lavers 1.q ory aeon to determine that it is In of nfactory covlwnn. B. All IendtmVal area mill be m intained In a health and thriving -- cpn.ht 1.n, I o from used(, bath and debris. 1. Inc Irunl Yro landscaping. and an ippropri.sle Irrigallm system Shall oe mtallM ivy the dveloper m accordlance wish s..bmisted plant prior to a¢uVanq. /lo. Ine final de t l gn of live pener, ter per k.ayt. .n l Ie, Ianal 1p Inq and s In.sI ks ina 11 be inc boded In tot rc•,o re.l Iimttope plans and shall De inb,I to approval ivy tn,• Plenuing My n wn Add [and enarrJ fer the.stency with any parkuaY landscaping plan which may The required by e Engm,,ro, B.'n'Ion. �11. Special Jousted features twh as Paundshg, fluvial rack• .p.. Imen e teen, aeeaM2r log skin.. Ike lomn vertical 1 non tnnla nangnl and 1.t... if rd landscaping, Is required s11., Rat @4 �_ . 112. Water and energy c nservation te<hni Wlet shall be u0lue•1, such AS ,penal Irrigat eon techniques (e.g.. drip Ireri,t on), draught / mle,anl plant specie,, alluvial raceswpe, etc. U. lanJ:reping and air r,at Ido Iy See as rx n'e lr rJ to be 1.511111.1 m puhl¢ rnirl -of -way on the penmler of this trod arne Soall be coal lnuwsIf IamlameJ by ilia developer until m[epted by lire City and annucd nto the IJnd,i maintenance d61r1<t. f. 5 y _/ 1. the signs indicated on the iobeitted plans are rut approved with Ibis +Vpr 1. MY lefts pr...SM fur Oat dive lnPaenl snail be designed In <pnfurmance with tree Sign Ordinance end shall regglre Soperale ,pirates, and epprnved by the Istion f Olvis.un aria, 1t lmlallatton Vf any signs. 2. A "dorm Sign program for this development Shall be submitted to me Planning division for their review end +pprmal prior la mush, of e" 5 &ei LLn9 Permits. ]. trailery ent ti,n(s) thall be provided far .,Sane. t, -_— <ordmmim or w tpwnnauu vieis[tl. 4. —.1111 aypm_IS Nrq.rrr y.l 1. P.e lupment pr. Ier ,oat he eccorpntNed poor to App,r.r,l of 1c 1alr.P I,.,I In,. (z`i ,N Ltert In the .LI. _-- .?'Atli SN6c @4'07 N. OfMr1 n_es 11. [m rymcy r J,r e e shell he provided in a,ur0,ne rlth (nnlnill Ivr Vrntr Urro mint[' Standard, �$. Inrry.n .. ,il h. prorrAeJ, nm nlerr.mre hee and 'fear, e i•rP ....... of a'ri'a. tl JI InmN JUnny cnntbu,t lmr m aur.lanve • nth (nu flu ll Irr. Ih ,tr rat111 awls. L]. `t p,i to flu I iin, Pn rut's tar ,wroIII rb le [ bn, l rnn. r• •I r r J e.1e i,ll nr lontlrill Fr, O o ni Fill Iv +npnre,Y •,ply lr,e V„+Ir.tlan t aeerlable, prnJrn9 to \V lc tilt •.Il r.- •1.,.. '.1 Irr a' I•. nt�rl rnn SY \l a'rnt 1a. fire applicant mall ..anti t I, U.S. P—lal Sn'rae to deleraine Inn ...... r rate t,p•' ar.1 1­11 iron of maul to ". S. Fort pr..l'•I 1,11, n P Nddal.. C,., —e4a FoOlialril Area. Lna V,r lrr rV rt l�.n 1./ Inl•'N r•.`M finenolt, Fl.h.— opn•nl .,oil on ",I, pro P•t,..If r. •t rr: ,r.ru and an",...1 of Lnc op- elnnm'nt Maul or the xl••nr'. 16. P- mr, bon fla pan. r•z ni 11 be ,n•pr lr ed at Inlluri: (�1 J 9. Lnrn1Y I••r .t alnlrr rvnt(r M1luirell - -yr for W -IS ZU ante of if yra Irr r V'r n 11. C. .an u' alit• I y Flnrrrl Innlrul biilr rc 1. Jl. Wall and t r 1•l m, i1u 11 he d".."'ed aml - eslrooled to —A ,r.lu.trout, u1 th r aria Cuun 1, 11 Ilrtlrrlt (IC.11), Foothill (ire 111 arnl it.. . In- ..u..e lfal t %'in la.partrn.nl ul file C-11t, of zarr &•r anbn.I A left,, of -..Vliarue Iran CCYU mill he "gil"PJ 'Irlct error to r n•.tl•nn. bop nlpG olvl sl ml 1. Sal< OPre lnp._nl 11 i the applicant % cell r mp is .,In the lateSl adopted leetl.,n G,11ding Cod•, lMalh•m cal Co.M. Un it prat 'I....u9 Corte. Nat iunal nur.lan .III (lectrr. Lr.h. ed Mr aVIII —ble Calm, arJman. -S all rrgnlnl inns in .t:. t rt liar tnu' of i.tnanre nr eelatrve Verattl, • Project No. �25aZ _ll Prior m a .f eu netny pe, rmu mr a eu nua Jrrr.0 m4 ant(l) 1. halm addition to an caking pnl(l).�the .penL.Il shat par Jeve loµernl I at the •at an I. SneA nl e. Such feel uy Inc Wd'. bnl a nm Irrrn f rat to -, City Peoitllrtuuan fee, Pert fee, Orehuge Fee are Wvelopn nl Fee, PI out aIII P n China m9 fi +5, m1 ].Iwo I I I I., . 1. Pr oar to of wild to, perrut for a on. C."Ia] urLntnal O- elnf'e -1, aJrliban to llfal Jeralonment, the I It...I Shall pay Jcvelo,mart lees eta the,rtlfhllSllcJ rate. Snch f(PS may uc11IJe, het not be limited to: SyspnS tivelopaent Fee, Urn magi fee, Permit Snit Via. CalCf m9 Foes. La. 5l reel e•1Jretzes sllall be p i—bed by In, Um IJIng Off,11.1. d. [usnJ St'.it..es I. P—We compliance rfth the llmf -an Blaild n9 Cade for praperlY line - cleeran. es .ontldenng use, area and tm- re\Islirtnels of Piielmg huildtn9s. $. Enstny bmlJing(SI shall be made to cot •rilh c rrtnl Sitidiny and ..__ mnlnv rcgn let ions for the intended use or the 'ibulbllnd Shan be deeotmed. _ J. Ear, ... ... age Jnp...I 4utbes 501.1 be i- cored, tiled and /or upped to Cmply .LLh be Uniform Floating Code Mend Untprn (holding Cale. a. linae..raond Vo -slle oil plus ere to be lied and ihom on burldrnq — plans labial for bur1JU:9 permit 1111111'mn. x. Lr_aA lny L Gradln9 of the ambler' property shall he in ictor,4n, •ilh One Umlo,m ambling Code, City Grading Suwludt anal an•pid qr ed lug praCtice loo. final gr edon, plan ah oil he in 5ol.il -I.al wn ine , utN tie se,raved Conceptual graJmg plan. A sni is repot dull be In,nne•l by a yiu 1111 cJ cnylncer lurnv'J ny the Stele of California to perform Sucn rnrl. J. A 9ealogical rep nil yra 11 he pupal eJ bI a 11.1+I II 111 en4 in r•'r or -- goo loo nt aoJ tub.It terl at lire loo• of aPV II at ton Ior gr en l n9 plan c he, 1. a. A rough grading plan shill be crel leleJ and approved by the CIA), YYY- -- Cwnuttle p,I., to ......lotion of the final snh.l lr It inn up. IIIe f InoI 4raN ny plans in.11 ne cute le l nl 1n.1 app: marl to mr to I, nano bf to l lJ l ng pentl t z. 0 • 0 • Project No. K32 5 of h...... In9«., to J e9i Iran MII De &d,,.led ve and s ter man. rml re•narr.nr.,l, loan Dr fort: _l 5. All rights n G 31Gfl4Uy_.SP_�T2_ Asa - nt„ -I.n t.n.lrn,...n, 6sL1'tfi -._ t....V h, and an agreed. e•tcu4Jm 9rue^ In _29...7kt it and wv ntencore a•peenealar....... q avr r o a. Sorr LY 9.r11 I.".A inn nl all ..... lte drelwge fac lllL lea rY ll✓ On11Jln9 and /b. „e eetrr'nit Rec+p'ocal a- awls. -Ares Zand Iplot al.,01n aM shall be nnplet I'll +II p•. riz, to Lne all roller imr rl tr all Da+«IS mall De provue DY''CCl0.'v11 Or DyrodeeJi ain Of Dmidrn9 1-1f, Selrly Dunn„ Vr un m «cm'JellM of the .nvv� parking +ren or prior Issmnle orJeJ cnncnrrenl .ilh [Le nep, re Jrtpmal of .1. um +qr eater t perN....here In N1, Is fnvolred. fur Bale p. Pppr aprr •1 J + f a•IJ -trim parrla. are In 1..• .IrllnvaLrJ l.l..1 ant SV,fy ••aaUSf sea 11 be wAd, for LM and Internal or Son" to cr to In, AC I1 of lee 01 l Y. LLL "'It. provmm.z fed for dellverl (fuLES wh¢h .111 M u and u`LI clrslat tan of anY o/ the prop,at. Wsl Dunr2 ^� (foe properly or I. the aperallan a -altt a, +rn l• I ^p ^• +•n "cot. nrretury , .dlJf,J ini lr be nz Lal leJ prior loo 1 all r prtrate drainage Nienenit for cuss -lot Jra lnage ,NII M «ymre rl Ilnal NaD• + Lect m9 um t..e lrndrd prupr. net, t e upon anY Da. eel U.al E. it De delineated or not Iced M the pro r s mc. of nnrldmt vI .n.,, for Innztrrctlon to Jra wage Ilo•s enter in9. fop.• and finale ri9M- pf -•aY a re to De • SuL lrrl tn. CnnLn4nles is Ip rnlcn a Dm IJm9 Mint is 9. rilhth All taut in9 tateNents IYin9 City Eng lnerr's the Nap 01 Itavm9 0 •rll�n a Va. "'1 ..I LLrvc L pus lclu.avJ or 1p M delineated M reryr:ztr regufrementt. Inr wain WrCrl a« en be soto to the derail for poDllc user snail In deJ dated to the City a. Final dr.Ally nl 1m I" aryl '.'IV 11 U.vnlon for apvroval pr iar [p Luua++[slLe nlal o coeW _L l0. Faseuents for it sidewalks heard" tl+rodgh ob+le properly. Dntltmq pia lJm•1 P" uo-.. IP..+ oaf Ce an an irn,, m •here Dat.s.) nI five (5) leeL in verUUl foepnl +nJ athill N. Slree[_1 vPeenit lrcludrn9. Dut ,^Dark.ay R. All slupr nln +t In u.• srrd ^rl .,In native 9rallal vDJ^ ' ^ n 1. (onsvuct fell street .nDrmerrenls I"", ,Ideate, dove aDproa+ nes 1 al..p• of 5:1 0. 9r. +l.r r zna. ntl..r el ternaa i +e.thud of errs n Dm 1Am9 and gutter, A.C. pavecenl, ReN.lrtnm nt of Lgntz M all mlermr WDI¢ ilrrrL i. Com.tsawr i' Iol lrI con n+ nralcoq 1.. cn.p lrtnl to the 'at" ac uan of Um d +Jntn1 And street De 9orerneJ by the prnvnlon pl plamm�9 wnVnl +loll pl.n.rrr. Irn.leln sWe•a le rill Dllu.r+l mil C.LY in,Alp r,.d.(v6 an yin. a o .^V Retolut+a+ To. 81 -80. g,rnrnalr W, sr.d an. .nanl wide p ... Men, vsth.n a 10 fort •ile &a"" !tu err+ot -If". Z, A umwN of 26 -foot be constructed /of all hall- secllon streets. nghl- of -.ay shall [OIW FPIIIL Olv1 ;1110 / .,g dprrr mints IrcIYA my, DVI =I e 1. (on.I...I the fallarin9 D•dlLilrM an] Y.91¢uly An.vv _f tailed to. _ L. pet <auons 11 o vd• eY renal rap of All Interior ttfeet rifts on lM lentat rve nap. - MEDIAN CURE l A.C. SID(- CPaYF STREET A.C. pVERLAI ISLAIID OtIIfR no 11 r , —nts az ,l,nrn 1 eY - y STREET MNIE LNIEA pYMI. YAte Apl'A, lIGI11S M snail De of U.e lot for In9 n9nls -of vuY the na.le ��/� - `/ X d in of F Ilo•rnq tVartL per' (� ARG±±ILIl �!!_- "I�jy.Yl.v - - -rE- - -- -� -r - - -- js a.11a renal Ir.•l •m - -- a.l.l.l •wa1 I..et ---- x x X _- - - ^ .- - - - -- - -- - - -- -- - -- - - -- - rpa•,waY e.,awenl It rlltr al Je.l,tat +nn /rr °fret .,d¢ -- -- -- - - — - - -- - - - j. lrrerrbeL or Jlive'. De wJr fur all pnrate ,Lretls -- tnan ri, ... d per City Standards and DrupvrtY Lm r.of+ns •ill De 0 -- --- 1. Cnrnrr dr a. mys- grcluaes Imdsuying ln9 and irrigation on Neter. 5 1A. A lien bym int : -M1rv: I,- .lnpnvl ,, II ne rrgwrrJ fur the 1.m r A MgDIAtJ._- 1hl.AalO m o.A"HIP,At.V __- _ :eo: t rJatim m,1 the .a. .I :LLny orma. hid .r I'aw., lvzl. S. Priam to any wok 1•c ulg Dvrlumed In lire Vu1. LC n90 t �o1 -way. feet n, I be pI Sat a • • a..at pernit mica ne ehtalnrd Iran the Crty En, me.r'. Ora r., li addition to any utller pennrts -'o-l. S. SVe+t ImOrurer rn clans nclmbnq parkway lives and street lights prepertJ be Pelli li- I fbJ Engineer and aVp'ored be the City In 11n mull 1 ..I .IO rJ for .:II public 11-11 orl r to 1 nl cat` .rte IlnaI Vim ail pro l s let sno l lz0 w Ibe lo, ullen .1 111 1- A II11, lac l IIta cs wllhn the rlgbt -of -way. �12. A .-hw,al. Iln.la I.. :.1 .I Iqa a nn pleb ]a- jam. - j'�1 nsI far Ih' Oar u en l..I Ion. .L In IInJZ•.IV lug a sLan he req•I II..1 l.v .cry le. al.a arnrar I tFe fly [Iglu er. _1a. Sur", all l.. 11.1 .1 -.1 n ulrr wit I •nM1e., in Ihr_ tatlirartI n oI 11.2 Cl a Illy 11 1 n 1 1'. CIIv Alitno"i "'. 'n'+'anlren" mien letlm nl Ire, poll lc ..In -t e, .11. V. 1.•r lu r +nlln.) of the mac or the I"ounce of but filing Vo n,A, nlL O.-1 rmnezr flftl. 9. Sara', L"" 'anent p11nz lea- a to- site yplans) foe the private i 511''1. n .nil to rcgnlrru for le "In w and appruml be the y Gtr Eny warn rv• �10. pr... IO any -rk belly p- forned M the private slreell Of dl lyc t, YY" ,re, (hall p.. pdi., an.l a nsl... arch perch sfall be obtained from -L 'we fit t1; v111r cI• l nun to r nu., .nm 111. 11 i.a. f reV btlnstcJa r Ji ynproieA;". 111. 11 , .:Vro+em -nn ball be to II 1. inn nzfactor. of the CITY Engne.•r. Vrinr In ua can an [Y_ pavement tic lV l'I'1. ...arson, ba1M1e and strain Or sign nn9 shall be Inualled Der Ihr ..:gm,.. enrutz .1 the Gly [wig Lie •�. 1l. Fa %nun city .III -1aIn wig recwn vac non shall remain open Ihr tnIl[c al all(n.mtn, with aJrgudlc Iklmrs during comliuction or It r eat clov... p•'11t may be ergo l red. A cash deposit shall be re•Im ml 1. v ass nr or+•I., and ,av ny. wh.In s h I 11 be r'I u n.le�l a u.y l et 1. 1. of 11.e ca..a t ro,I lW to be is t l t l a..11m .1 the C.[Y En r. I.- Y hulk w gm . ays null n a Ol m ldkJ between vt ew l lc slda l[z and M -s Ile prdeslrlans arms. IS. Conrenlralel bo:urlt, llnws sW11 wt rest Sldewalks. Anne, sldewala Jr a l ins shall M, mztall,d 1m, [It, SlantIldl- 1� 1 u Project No. J� 53Z x. Dra.npyp dlod _rmoJ f.s. -I �1. The a,ph,anl will be retxar1ble for c ,l roc if.. of all ov-s+te drainage facilities required by are City Le Inner. _ 2. Intefsnctmn drains will be required at the following loutlons: J. The ',opined protect falls within + Indicated at suboct to flood l no under the National flood Insurance Pi agram add IS sunj ecl to the nary...... of may prmym and fit, Nihoanr No. 21. _ e. A Jrdlnaye channel and /Or flood print,, inn mall .111 be regn lr•d to proleal the Stlnctm'e5 by •Innrinq sheet rnlm(f to Straits. or to a slur. dram. L5. surfaceedrprovisions magel enter ng ltr.e'properly far fret cdld,enl areasdnDOSaI of L6, letter ul at[eD l ante from down f beam prove, ty oi.e rl sea 11 be itgo l reel where ocaff flows .,.In pnyate DI.pe,tll. Drainage Krepunce Ea-mart Deed slull be reclulred (roan d, shall be de ,,god as • ml)or wiser carrying -- street regw nnq a ccm3inallon of special curb helghls• Coma -e:al ::ell Drive apprnechel, rolled slreel r « flans. 11.1 Droleal lea wills• and /car landscaped err ill berm, u.J Oroll:d driveways at property 1 nee �9. me lononnq 5them drub than be Installed to the satnfacunn of the CITY Engineer: iRQ�A DOTL.ET STROOVIE6 AT T"C-T o I Q9`_ - To. R1f!!IONl3 QC2'f!/ 1 10. A bid, of.91c and dradna,e a oily for Ibe pro, an t sb 111 be I.NA i t l Sad I the City Ingmcer for reyl.w. d. Jtllrlrs _11 Pro. file all uubty sery ¢es to each lot mCl lio, s nil,,, zcw rule system. water, electric Inver. gas and lehpl.nl.r In 4--dom,ae n11i ulilllr it mlmJS. lZ. All utln[Ies within the project stall be Insta l led underground Inc India, of IIt let along tla,or .,it, .1, 11 K9 mil less. • • 0 • Project No. AlZ_ _ Zl. ul,lllY „II 1.. - -h 11, un, sal lvleCl Inn nl to, v ry nq uu olY mw,n mS a•..t W. t;tr 1., newlapar 5bx11 Le "",00 I'll for U., re loC al ren of enstmy pobM1c ulart,et, S. 0..•Iota. v41111. -.. I'• "t,ri l.' In. 11N, Intlal ln[I;In nl tl.r..l 11�11,l rnrl In .... P'la..... Z. '.....l,n.1. C.Illurnre (.11v�n L.n;vanv ar;J (,IY S[an.b. JV. IN . III, dl, n..I ..... -rJ fmw .II u1, 11C,ev end otnrr I. ..V+ yr IN, al JI II. Ilr ,l 2.V rr, 11 Le SuLj /rl f0 .nY .•11'..,r a .IV Cl. rt m.rl LSr ,e. P,vt.l fr.vn llrr'.n. l I . y rn,l^ o....1-1 1 -1 ,.I, vaal room.. Na C., SI..JUJV od i. . I'.r rel n.n 1.- , ,rJ.l m n.n puae s.reelr nron to Pa. •...t ......no .t ..r.,. ......I I, -..I S. ). 11:N, 1.11 1. I.. 1... ,,..J Vol.", ers reun,rpa to Le ero—'d 1." tA` lao.l ., q.r ......n.,. ,..e nlµnu. _ 4. Vnor I5 ....nt l +n. u.1 r... of Inl..m ran m form —IM, wul 4 Cant S: +Va rI, -I 1 111. 1 r..lr 111. l r 1. l v .1, 111 Le II"A .r11r Illat Crly L C. —cI1. Ilr .1.r ...l tut It 1nv., I-,I 1. 11111, act furled I r.n S11a 11 Lt• W1rae LY IL„ J. I. 1..1'•'. • . Cocmiss Lner Juarez felt that the design of the car wan is nice but she did not want to see it located on .Foothill 3oulevard. � Cha'_rran Stout stated that Mr. West has done a lot to have the car washiKt or. that corner out Foothill is a Special 3oulevard and eventually "Sky scants to make :hat 5_.ee: more 3tt,-active. Chairman Stout stated that the basic problem is that piece seta 11 fo r what is prcposed and they are trying to mitigate of through design and landscaping. Chairman Stout d.d not .eel it fit on that cartfer. Motion: Mcvsd by Rempel, seconded arker, carried, to adopt Resolution 9o. 84 -11, denying Conditional Use emit 94 -01 - West. Commissioner Mcaiel dissent for his stated reasons. 8:15 5 P.7 he '' °'. ^.' or_•nission recessed. 9:10 p.m. ='::e .ann ing Commission reconvened. ♦ ♦ a ♦ .ir, L I p.m. Commissioner Juarez left the meeting due to a :`amity emergency. �. !. SSmA - -n T. :.ND '"3!- . ..? :iT ".oAC° ' 2512 - i3C; =ALD .ASSOCIA ?25 - :he deve- .Pzent of 111 zero lot .. e homes on 14.5 acres :n the Low - Med4.-- Residential Distri.t, located between Archibald and Ramona at Monte Vista Stree- - A" 202- 181 -05, 06, 15, 15. Chairman Stc.t stated that the Develooment District Amendment had not been advertised and t....s item would be cont'nued, but that testimony would be taken tonight 4' 'here were comments. Associate Kanner, Dan Coleman, reviewed the staff report. Chairman. Stout opened the public hearing. Mr. Randy Poag, 901 Park Center Drive, Santa Ara, reviewed the project relating to the recreation area as well as the lot sizes. He also explained all changes that sere made .n order to incorporate the 5 additional acres into :heir ".evelonmen: and felt they now have a plan which wow 17 sat is Pj the exis' n; c_. ^owners and P w".- C_ty's standards as well. Mr. Pons :a:ed ._] non]arn .. ... .e $lair report gard.ng 5atbacks. Mr. Aram '- assenean, cro'ent anon itec t, addressed t, ",e :oncerns expressed in the staff repert and "._s_r.bed the arenitecture and patio homes concept. • Planning Commission Minutes 9 April 11, 1984 .ir, L Mr. Poag stated tnat he is aware of the concern about drainage but his engineer has assured him that improvements will be made with the construction of the project. Mr. S. P. {app, project engineer, indicated that storm drains for 25 year capacity will be installed and this will cwt down on the ;rater north of the tract. Chairman Stout asked tine applicant if he has a ball park figure on the offs ite improvements t.`.at are required to be put in. Mr. 'app repa ed that construction on the storm drain alone is exoectad to oe $50,000. Mr. Rapp Stated that there dare a few items he would like to discuss relative to the :ond i =ions of Approval. Mr. Sac? requested tht Condition LC be allowed to be shown on the approved site plan to the satisfaction of the City En34 neer rather than the way it is shown on the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Rougeau stated 'hat this has to do with the difference of right -of -way and he does not see a problem with making this accommodation. Mr. Capp stated there was an additional condition requesting additional easeme. nt for utilities in excess of the .right -of -way and felt it was probably unnecessary. Mr. Rapp stated that the last item is item 8 under the Engineering Section of the Resolublcn relative to pavement taper. He ird Ecated that it would put a burden on 'his client for something that he does not he control of. He indicated that they do not have any way to guarantee the acquisition. Mr. Rougeau replied that a condition of that type is almost impossible to impose and if the right -of -way cannot be obtained, the City must provide the I within the project itself. However, Mr. Rougeau stated, it is felt that an attemot should be made by the applicant to procure it for the betterment of traffic services. Mr. Dougherty stated that the Subdivision Map Act has been amended to take care of the prob;am where the property line required acquis :t.cn outside or the tract hamdary. He indicated tnat the Subdivision Map Act does allow the imposition of a condition Of this sort and if the ]evelooer cannot acquire -,no property within the necessary time Crime, the City has the option of waiving the condition or acquiring it by eminent domain with the developer paying the ^.oat. He indicated that in a situation of this sort, the City only lends its support in the acquisition proceedings. Planning Commission Minutes 11 April it, 1984 .a.` % Mr. of Rougeau rsplied i_ ` is very likely necessary right -of -way and a sidewalk it becomes because when you have 50 feet very cluttered. Further, that the additional easement does not affect the design of the project but it means a '_ot to the property owner net to have their front yard dug up if work Dust be done on the utilities. He indicated that there is usually about 12 .feet from the curb to the property line. Mr. Rapp stated that the last item is item 8 under the Engineering Section of the Resolublcn relative to pavement taper. He ird Ecated that it would put a burden on 'his client for something that he does not he control of. He indicated that they do not have any way to guarantee the acquisition. Mr. Rougeau replied that a condition of that type is almost impossible to impose and if the right -of -way cannot be obtained, the City must provide the I within the project itself. However, Mr. Rougeau stated, it is felt that an attemot should be made by the applicant to procure it for the betterment of traffic services. Mr. Dougherty stated that the Subdivision Map Act has been amended to take care of the prob;am where the property line required acquis :t.cn outside or the tract hamdary. He indicated tnat the Subdivision Map Act does allow the imposition of a condition Of this sort and if the ]evelooer cannot acquire -,no property within the necessary time Crime, the City has the option of waiving the condition or acquiring it by eminent domain with the developer paying the ^.oat. He indicated that in a situation of this sort, the City only lends its support in the acquisition proceedings. Planning Commission Minutes 11 April it, 1984 .a.` % Chairran SYOUt asked if this condition could also be made in the alternative. Mr. Oougnerty replied that tie did not know if the City would do that. Cha irr.an Stout stated :hat we do 'want to make sure there is a taoer. ".r. Rougeau stated that the alternative would produce what the City wants and what is ..___ea. Mr. Birch ie Wilson, 707"' Ramona, property owner at the low end of this tract, arced apart the diagonal_ dra ih on the .northwest corner of his property and who hall planned i' as i_ is shown. ^r. Rougeau necked that two ways 'nave been proposed to do it and to take i to the east side of the street whic' would require 'less of Mr. 'Wilson's propertyy. Further, his records snow tnat what is cart of Mr. Wilson's front yard is really a part of the right-of-way. Mr. Wilson stated that the preoosal of the developer s t•at it cut across the corner and should not cone across his property, and that no one has said an' /thing about the prooiem of ingress and egress there. He also asked why _hey allow a storm drain or catch basin on the corner of the two properties in the process of bell ^.g developed. Chairman Stout stated that he did not know if the City could burden the e owners along Arcn:tald with the storm .rater when it is not associated with-ne:r project. w .lssicner ReInel suggested that a determination on this project earn;- be rode tonight that _ _asica take place 'between the applicant and ...e ^engineering Cepartment relat i;e to some of these prc'olems and prior to the next m__. ng. Cna :r. :an Stout stated that the right -of -way should he researched and located. Mr. Ro =geau replied that he was sure this could be done. M.r. 3assenian asked about another condition on page ? ilea 7 of '.230 iJt :pn relat J/e to side -on garages. He explained that plans 2 -3, be'n_aise Of t.__r floor plans, would be unable to acco=odate this rsquirament. 'here being no further comments, the public hearing was closed. :oa.;issioner 3arker stated at several things can be '_-cussed between now and when this re C:rns b t.._ Cs .:a ss ic1. He indicated 'n sat on the Oes —s-_g 3eview ,, .•�: :lee ,..is Fpro,ect was reviewed and expressed concern on yaw :ante, cr :nor, tf Lt, _.. __ oacXS and cols is one o;' „, ".e reasons that reetaaace has peen pr t•r a ell :or the .0^^ :sa :en'3 review toni'.n•t. � ='Isslrner 3arLer4 stated t'3t '^ n.cw sees what he 'was afraid i:e light see: that _5, a Lt of :ement, .. :llded Book, lack Jf 'warmt.n„ and Mack of 2lann ing COrmission Minutes 12 April 11, 1984 ae variable Should be project as 8aecer tel; there Support this Coeaissi��l� unable to Aidths•statad .ne 4ould he a pane ot`• _ var:ab` -e 'ot he , have a spot _. lot Width and pcysan Led• t each and ever,/ see 3n3h Des 60t a - -..A r0^ _ ;:e❑ -^' Chalrsan St and att Chet sa !d ahes4o ldynre3e +e nv col�en's unt" d the street �oaSe/ scat Co31ss'= ne' „a Co »caisaion. unan :.ous1 ?, - :0 sa,Ae^, cart Ted 3, "Pr_" 2:. again oe[or! seconded A _cWrt,SLon meet =n Yo, +ed ^ex_ rev �ne this ' • • • c.SSed. • • - ss:on r_ . �lanntag . -,v erred ^eaNt] to locate a o.n. c a light p, conjunct- S:fe t sa' :Ir_ . Soutn side q ao). ^aSS aS :e _ 3C a on -he .•:Ne. o 1 20f� tiC, 'rs Tsaftef3 0:, ^ty loca:!we^ 3oad area t car. tact. -< - 1 -age _ A 5.':a- St J. 'wG3a 3'-�er ",d�14ir'S as. an. 2 -.port. 1 tte :o�ss .^ • ,ss:sta ^.: uo 1, r.ear:r.4• advised ^ _. `•e P ..an :' +art nt opens Santa3,..r Pfo:! at. .. ' rase :f._s -e 3 Setter that 'AOU= . 4o': id • aed. :r.e :'.,o d ° -] ' :OOf Plan. 3' °3 -, e3 '' ".e 1p.G ?4 " hear, n6 Ora. ..tit^ -o„ens t' -• _art,. _. ]econded SY . ' „r� :� ^ 3arKer, Cond•: Tonal � •!c•re”- Sy a aPP roving ,_, +, :•;•: as. �rnef :F Sag yr e•IA' .tai .r• 1e. o� a'.c6 ,c• - aei :n e]' 'n] :a: n3 ;33Lea .AO a ^,: '.Lir.'.iC. .. .Se ^GV :e'Aad ' -.sots • - „le -r' ?,e 3rrC7 ^- Tended t. 0.1 7Y`he So deocn. 'A9A tSr stud'/ ” aPrtl 0. an ADrll t98u AeeKS tes-An", :OrS:331 ?laantr•3 t3 `. �1, Planning Coaaisaion ylnntes V It 1 DRAFT EXCERPT - PLAINING COMMISSION MIMMS - APRIL 2S, 1984 C. ENVIROMiENTAL ASSESSMENT ANO TENTATIVE TRACT 12532 - ARCMIBALO ASSOCIATES • e ve opment o zero of ne Homes On acres in the Low Medium Residential District, located between Archibald and Ramona at Monte Vista Street - APR 202- 181 -05, 06, 15, 16. 0. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT 0[STRICTS AMENDMENT 93 -07 - velODment istricts MN mom Medium esi ent a u /aC) to Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) for 4.5 acres of land located on Archibald Avenue, south of Victoria - APN 202 - 181 -15. Gan Coleman, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Randy Ooa?, representing Arcnibald Associates, addressed the Commission stating that the applicant had 'net with members of the City planning staff and had suomitted a revised Site blan which he felt addressed the concerns of tre Commission at their previous meeting of April 11. Tom gradford, Rancho Cucamonga resident. addressed the Commission expressing concerns with additional traffic on Ramona. Larry Lewis, Rancno Cucamonga resident, addressed the Commission exor.ssing concerns with the prOpOSed storm drain system, as well as runoff being • cranne'.ed dawn Ramona Avenue. ..ew Shr're -, Rancho Cucamonga resident, addressed the Commission stating that the :2rb ':t line homes were not compdtiole with surrounding single family ^e s'_ert2s. -here were no firther comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. = 7^misv2ne- Sark er stated that a good faith effort nad been made o/ the cevel:oer of tnls Jroject t0 mitigate the Concerns expressed at the '3St - eet'nd. - owever, ne stated, he was still not comfortable with the access Oe oointed out that the access had been Cnanced from Ramona to �r Cn•b317 in an attempt to appease the adjacent residents; noweve -, ArCni.bald is a heavily traveled street and he was not comfortable with forcing the traffic from this project entirely onto Arcnibdid. Commissioner Rempel stated that he shared these same Concerns, however 'Iring the street up with Monte vista would deter a lot of the traffic in the lower half of the development. we suggested that the City Council could ask the Sheriff's Department oatroi Ramona a little more to slow down the traff': on that street.. r�L 17 0 _ Chairman Stout stated that it would be easy to make the popular decision to close off the access at Ramona, however, there are 111 families to consider who will be living in this development and are not here to present their points of view. He suggested that lots 1 -9 be constructed in Phase I. He additionally expressed concern that there was nothing in the Resolution which referred to the revised site plan in the areas of setbacks and street locations and suggested that language be added. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, carried, to adopt the Resolution approving Development Districts Amendment 83 -07. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, BARKER, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: JUAREZ, MCNIEL Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Rempel, to adopt the Resolution approving Tentative Tract 12532 with the added condition that the approval was for the revised site plans regarding setbacks and street locations, and that lots 1 -9 be constructed in Phase I of the development. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, JUAREZ • Commissioner Barker stated he voted in favor of the Development Districts Amendment because he had no problems with a down -zone; however, could not vote in favor of the tract because there were additional problems he felt should have been mitigated. 9 �F� E e� f1T n V D A%TPVn l 17l A f.^.11n SUMMARY: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 25, 1984 to - consider the above- described project and recommended approval of the Negative Declaration and Development Districts Amendment (zone change). In addition, the Planning Commission approved the related Tentative Tract 12532 for the development of 111 zero lot line homes. The approval of the Tentative Tract 12532 was subsequently appealed and will be heard as a separate item on tonight's agenda. Please find attached a copy of the Planning Commission staff report which fully describes the proposed Development Districts Amendment. The proposed Development Districts Amendment is consistent with the City's General Plan and related ordinances. No adverse environmental impacts are anticipated as a result of this Development Districts Amendment. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City ouncit approve the Development Districts Amendment request through the adoption of the attached ordinance and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Rewctfuily "submitted, Rick/Gomez. City Planner �RG:DC:jr i Attachments; Planning Commission Staff Report - ODA 83 -07 Planning Commission Resolution Recommending Approval City Council Ordinance -,)r7__ STAFF REPORT G1 y ,,nom <, a s- jh DATE: June 6, 1984 T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner ay: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS AMENDMENT - AR H 3ALD A Ct S - A Develooment istricts Amendment from Med um Res- ential (8 -14 du /ac) to Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) for 4.5 acres of land located on Archibald Avenue, south of Victoria - APN 202 - 181 -15. Related File: Tentative Tract 12532 SUMMARY: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 25, 1984 to - consider the above- described project and recommended approval of the Negative Declaration and Development Districts Amendment (zone change). In addition, the Planning Commission approved the related Tentative Tract 12532 for the development of 111 zero lot line homes. The approval of the Tentative Tract 12532 was subsequently appealed and will be heard as a separate item on tonight's agenda. Please find attached a copy of the Planning Commission staff report which fully describes the proposed Development Districts Amendment. The proposed Development Districts Amendment is consistent with the City's General Plan and related ordinances. No adverse environmental impacts are anticipated as a result of this Development Districts Amendment. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City ouncit approve the Development Districts Amendment request through the adoption of the attached ordinance and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Rewctfuily "submitted, Rick/Gomez. City Planner �RG:DC:jr i Attachments; Planning Commission Staff Report - ODA 83 -07 Planning Commission Resolution Recommending Approval City Council Ordinance -,)r7__ n -7.3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA c�OAMO,b STAFF REPORT S �. • T J^ C F � BIZ I DATE: April 25, 1984 191-7 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS AMENDMENT - ARCHIBALD A OCI E - A Development Districts Amendment from a um Resi ential (8 -14 du /ac) to Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) for 4.5 acres of land located on Archibald Avenue, south of Victoria - APN 202- 181 -15. RELATED FILE: TENTATIVE TRACT 12532 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of Development Districts Amendment • to Low Medium B. Purpose: Development of zero lot line homes C. Location: East of Archibald, south of Victoria D. Parcel Size: 4.5 acres E. Existing Zoning: Medium Residential F, Existing Land Use: Christmas Tree farm G. Surroundin Land Use and Zonin North - -p exec; drum Kesiaential South - Single- family residences; Medium and Law Medium Residential East - Vacant; Low Medium Residential West - Single- family residential; Medium Residential H. General Plan Oesi nations: roject ite - Medium esidential North - Medium Residential South - Medium Residential East - Medium Residential West - Medium Residential n -7.3 0 Planning Commission Staff Report DDA 83 -07 April 25, 1984 Page 2 I. Site Characteristics: Site slopes to the southeast at approximately W grade and is traversed by an ephemeral stream channel subject to periodic flooding. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: This Development Districts Amendment is in conjunction with a related proposed tentative tract 12532. The proposed tract has been designed in accordance with the optional development standards of the Development Code for the Low- Medium Residential District. Therefore, this Development District Amendment request is to downzone the property from Medium Residential to Low Medium Residential. This is consistent with the existing zoning an the easterly side of the project site. • B. Environmental Assessment: Based upon the initial study, see attached, the project wi 1 not have a significant effect upon the environment because of the mitigation measures described below: Impact: The amendment will result in construction which will increase surface water runoff, reduce absorption rates, and alter drainage patterns. Miti ation: Storm drains and inlet structures will be provide . Impact: The amendment and subsequent project will generate additional vehicular traffic on Archibald and Ramona. Mitigation: This project will include new street construction and widening of Ramona and Archibald Avenues, III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The subject property is suitable for the proposed land use in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land ases in the surrounding areas. Further, the proposed District Change will not have a significant impact on the environment or surrounding properties and is in conformance with the General Plan. • ;�iY 0 Planning Commission Staff Report ODA 83 -01 April 25, 1984 Page 3 IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a Public Hearing in The Dai v Report newspaper, the property posted, and notices were sent to property owners within 300 feet of the project site. In addition, at a duly advertised Public Hearing, the Planning Commission received public input with regard to Tentative Tract 12532. No correspondence either for or against the proposed District Amendment has been received; however, the City has received letters from surrounding property owners either for or against the proposed Tentative Tract 12532. The applicant conducted two neighborhood meetings with the surrounding residents to receive their input and discuss potential changes to the design of Tentative Tract 12532. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission • conduct a ublic Hearing to receive public input on this item in conjunction with the Public Hearing continued for Tentative Tract 12532. If after such consideration the Commission can support the facts for finding, adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. If the Commission cannot support the facts for finding a Resolution of Denial has also been provided. 9 espect submitted, ell sr!� Rick Gomez City Planner RG:DC:ns Attachments: Exhibit ,A" - Location Map Exhibit "8" - Site Utilization Map Initial Studies - Parts I and II (see TT 12532 Staff Report) Resolution of Approval Resolution of Denial ass 0 FORTH 0 CITE' OF ITE.NI: ea?-07 • RA CHO CLCANIO CYA TITLE � I 1O+ PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT- SCJLE :4!!-� a 7( Fi ro R•3 C•7 — TMA ' - -- WEST R-1 -5 gT M DPAN R•1.5 R -3� R-1-5 Q �/ i_ NORTH CITY OF ITEM; RANCHO C[ CAMONGA TITLE SITE UT L.I2/iTl�kf PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: RV IL • RESOLUTION N0. 84 -33 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO C'UCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT NO. 93 -07 REQUESTING A CHANGE 14 THE DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL TO LOW MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL FOR 4.5 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF ARCHIBALD, SOUTH OF VICTORIA. WHEREAS, on the 25th day of October, 1983 an application was filed and accepted on the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the 25th day of April, 1984 the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Lode. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission i,as made the following in�gs: 1. That the subject property is suitable for the uses Permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and • 2. That the proposed district change would not have significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and 3. That the proposed district change is in conformance with the General Plan. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project will not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration on April 25, 1984. 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 approval on the 25th day of April, 1984, Development District Amendment No. 83 -07, 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Development District Amendment No. 93 -07. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. "78 Resolution No. 84 -33 Page 2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25th DAY OF APRIL, 1984. PLANNI:'1G COMMISSION OF-THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Dennis L._5tout, C airman ATTEST: Rick�Gamez, Deputy Secretary I I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancno. Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancno Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of April, 1984 by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, DARKER, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSEIT: COMMISSIONERS NONE JUAREZ, MCNIEL X79 • • • • ORDINANCE NO. A6- A6 -OiEq as $ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 202- 181 -15, LOCATED,ON THE EAST SIDE OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE, SOUTH OF VICTORIA FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8 -14 OU /AC) TO LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4 -8 DU /AC). The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council hereby finds and determines the following: A. That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, following a public hearing held in the time and manner prescribed by law, recommends the rezoning of the property hereinafter described, and this City Council has held a public hearing in the time and manner prescribed by law and duly heard and considered said recommendation. B. That this rezoning is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. • C. That this rezoning is consistent with the objectives of the Development Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. D. This rezoning will have no significant environmental impact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed herein. J SECTION 2: The following described real property is hereby rezoned in the manner stated, and the development district map is hereby amended accordingly. Assessor's Parcel Number 202 - 181 -15, aoproximately 4,5 acres of land located on the east side of Archibald Avenue, south of Victoria, is hereby changed from Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac) to Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac). The Mayor shall sign this Ordnance 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 t e— a Ulty of ntario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. ')$O 0 • 9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Counc• FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Gary Richards, Code Enforcement Officer • �w 19]" SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING CONDITIONAL U PERMIT -0 - HAR - A request to maintain a -400 bir aviary at Carrari Court in the Very Low Residential District. SUMMARY: The applicant has appealed the Planning Commission's decision end ying his request for a Conditional Use Permit to maintain a 350 -400 bird aviary within the Very Low Residential district. The Development Code allows the keeping and /or maintenance of five (5) birds per each 5,000 square feet of lot area up to a maximum of twenty -five (25) birds per site within the Very Low Residential district. More than five birds per each 55,000 square feet of site area may be permitted subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission, at its meeting of April 25, 1984, reviewed the request and denied the proposed Conditional Use Permit due to its inconsistency with the General Plan and Development Code guidelines and performance standards regarding noise. Attached for your review and consideration is the Planning Commission staff report which fully outlines the issues of this request. Also attached is a copy of the. General Plan guidelines for noise, the Commission's Resolution of Denial, and the Minutes of the meeting of April 25, 1984. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends denial of the ondiiona Use Permit request based upon the findings contained within the Resolution and the facts in the Planning Commission staff report. r ResoettfuLYyy�Submitted, Rick /Gomez City'Planner RG:GR:jr Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report - April 25, 1984 Planning Commission Minutes - April 25, 1984 Planning Commission Resolution of Denial CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA cvua+oyc STAFF REPORT , 'da ;z DATE: April 25, 1984 19" TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Gary W. Richards, Code Enforcement Officer SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -02 - HARP - A request to maintain a 50 -40 bird aviary at 9 0 Carrari Court in the "VL" District - APN 1061 - 781 -19. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of a Conditional Use Permit B. Purpose: To maintain a 350 to 400 bird aviary to conduct genetic studies on parakeets within the VL (Very Low) District. • C. Location: 9110 Carrari Court (Northeast corner of Carrari Court and Beryl Avenue). 0. Parcel Size: One -half acre E. Existing Zoning: VL (Very Low less than 2 du /ac) F. Surround in Land Use and Zoning: North - esi entia , zoned very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) South - Residential; zoned Very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) East - Residential; zoned Very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) West - Residential; zoned Very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) i H. General Plan te aetnion s: roJe a ; zoned Very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) North - Residential; zoned Very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) South - Residential; zoned Very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) East - Residential; zoned Very Low Residential (less than 2 • du/ac) West - Residential; zoned Very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) ITEM G PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 84 -02 /Harp April 25, 1984 Page 2 0 Applicable Regulations: In the Development Code the keeping ardlor maintenance of five birds per each 5,000 square feet of lot area up to a maximum of 25 birds per site is permitted in the Very Low Residential District. More than five birds per each 5,000 square feet of site area may be permitted subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Therefore, a maximum of 20 birds would be permitted on a 1/2 acre site without a Conditional Use Permit. 11. ANALYSIS: A. General: Because of possible environmental effects, aviaries consisting of more than 25 birds per site were conditionally permitted in the new Development Code subject to the review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission. The Conditional Use Permit process is intended to afford an opportunity for a broad public review and evaluation of the site development requirement and operating characteristics of certain uses which require special consideration in order to operate in a manner compatible with surrounding uses. The Planning Commission is authorized to • grant Conditional Use Permits to achieve these purposes and impose reasonable conditions to ensure that all site development regulations and performance standards are provided in accordance with the Development Code and General Plan. Typical conditions may include block walls for buffering or the reduction in the number of birds maintained. The primary issue associated with aviaries would normally include noise complaints. Therefore, a noise survey was conducted on the subject property and surrounding area to determine if such a problem exists (Exhibit "B "). The Rancho Cucamonga Development Code defines the basic noise levels for this area as follows: 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. - 60 Dba max. exterior 7:00 a.m, to 10:00 D.T. - 45 Dba max. interior 10:00 o.m. to 7:00 a.m. - 55 Dba max. exterior 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. - 40 Oba max. interior The survey noted in Exhibit "B" was conducted during the afternoon hours. The ambient noise level (noise level associated with a given environment) for the surrounding area at the time of the survey was noted to be between 32 -38 Oba's. The survey indicated that the nearer the readings were taken to the subject property the higher the readings became, increasing as much as 15 to 20 Dba's up to a maximum reading of • 57 Dba's at the property line or approximately 8 feet from the aviary. .183 • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 84 -02 /Harp April 25, 1984 Page 3 Complaints from adjacent neighbors indicate that the noise intensity of the parakeets is at its highest or is more prevalent during the early morning hours. This is true mainly because there is less intrusive noise (noise which intrudes over the existing ambient noise level) being generated in the surrounding area. As noted, the maximum basic exterior noise level for the residential area is 60 Dba's from 7:00 a.m, to 10:00 p.m. and 55 Dba's from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. The noise survey indicated that these maximum noise levels were not being exceeded. However, under "Special Noise Provisions ", Section 17.08.080(0)(3) Of the Development Code, states that "no person owning or having the charge, care, custody, or control of any dog, or any animal or fowl shall allow or permit the same to habitually howl, bark, yelp or make other noises, in a manner as to create noise disturbances. With this provision in mind, it could be construed that a 15 to 20 Oba increase in noise level at the property line could be defined as a noise disturbance. The noise level may be mitigated by implementing one or both of • the following alternatives: 1. Reduce the number of birds permitted to be maintained on the property; or 2. Require a 6 -foot block wall on the north and east property lines. 0. Environmental Review: Based upon the Initial Study, staff has determine that this project may have a significant impact upon the environment in terms of excessive noise generated by the parakeets. To mitigate this concern, the applicant has enclosed the aviary on all four sides with plywood and has planted approximately 50 to 60 Italian cypress trees along the north and east property lines to buffer the noise. However, the Dba readings noted in the survey were taken after the above buffering measures were taken. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Before approving a Conditional Use Permit, the anningFi Commission must •nake the following findings: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the District in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. :zav PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 84 -02 /Hart) April 25, 1984 Page 4 • 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. Further, the Planning Commission should consider whether the excessive noise generated by this use is appropriate for the residential district. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: A public hearing was advertised in The Oaily Re ort newspaper, the property was posted, and public hearing notices were mailed to surrounding property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. Some correspondence was received stating concerns regarding noise (Exhibit V. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission has two alternatives to consider: � deny the Conditional Use Permit if the Commission feels that the request is in conflict with the direction of the Development Code; or (2) approve the Conditional Use Permit with conditions to mitigate the noise concerns. If the decision is to approve the Conditional Use Permit with conditions, the Planning Commission must continue this item to its May 9, 1984 meeting in order for the Environmental Assessment to be advertised in the • local newspaper. A Resolution of Denial and proposed Resolution of Appr -1 are attached for your consideration. Resnaelfully submitted. Rick Gomez City Planner RG:GR:jr Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Plan Exhibit "8" - Noise Survey Letter from Applicant Exhibit "C" - Chronology of Events Exhibit "0" - Correspondence Initial Study, Part I Proposed Resolution of Approval with Conditions Resolution of Denial • .:tdt i I I I I I I I ; N r I J i y u N r13(Z;DhLTQRL t:.t)S emetirl i A �; ArtJ � I I -11 CAr`QAP- CT. G S as: r iN (ExHia;r 1; 3I-YO � v� 34 1 Nor, Iruct 140. y3550 M. 8. 1,35/58 -60 1 11� ., I Q of -t-Aj-% �ys • \ Nor, Iruct 140. y3550 M. 8. 1,35/58 -60 1 IJ62� Luc fo� I�A2'nRLL`i liJfND4 ., I L'ounlrioOS A7 -1 ie 'time of -t-Aj-% S.edeq, +-4e -bLbS Leue & srJo-oIJ Could 6. -- D" S LerUC �beLoi.? � ,va✓_wfuD4 -DAV. 7 , • 39 ;.;. `: v .' \ �� ,.. , 2 I M , • .> 42. +� 43 . . 44 - - --- Y -!a 3Y f!{RM I -ROAD °F o 22 g a 23 > 24 V 25 i 26 40('21 35 X qz-x 791 36�L SY 1C 8 1] 16 c X13 rJ 13 12 T °. 36 0 35 .y 33 32 °v w e 4 ` i i � I 60 Yfj t b 7u - -- °- 6ARRARi - -- ;� - - - -7 —`- — - - -- COURT- W , • 39 ;.;. `: v .' \ �� ,.. , 2 I M , • .> 42. +� 43 . . 44 • August 10, 1983 Planning Division City of Rancho Cucamonga, Ca P. 0. Bo= 807 City of Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91730 Dear slrst In studying the proposed revision of the zoning code I find the section for birds 1s very limited in the number which can be kept In a backyard aviary. Cnly 50 birds on an entire acre or five birds to the 5000 foot lot Is absurd. I could keep 5 finches In a two foot square oage. Perhaps a few facts and some information would assist in setting up a more equitable zoning requirement. I have been working with animals for over 50 years. I grew up on a farm where we had many of the large animals. Since 1946 I have been working with improvement and breeding of birds as a hobby, using genetics, and selected breeding methods. I have been president of the Bird Association of California, a member of The Avlc•iltural Society and the Cal'_fornla Game Breeders. . I worked for the Los Angeles County Pair for 15 years coordinating and producing the foreign bird show. 0 Birds have one of the greatest variations of size and sounds ,found In any group of animals. The smallest is about two Inches tall with the largest over seven foot tall. There are 27 orders (birds sharing certain internal characteristics). The sub groups consist of 155 different families of 8554 species (birds which look alike and Interbreed). Some of the larger birds, s•ich as the big seven foot tall ostriches, the I)gwitlful colorful flamingoes inn the ;raceful muted swans' sounds cannot be heard over a few feet away. Among other larder birds, Individual varittes of geese, macaws, parrots and peafowl can be heard a mile away under some conditions. The trumpeter swan can be heard up to two miles and theSouth American screamer can reportedly be heard three miles. Manv of the hummingbirds, finches, parrotlets, pl.bns, loves, and a great manv other small birds songs cannot be heard beyond 25 .feet ender the beat of conditions. A^ F l � l Some conures, lovebirds and guinea hens, which are smaller birds can be heard a block away. Bearing in mind the great many verities of size and the i sounds birds make, the total number of birds allowed to be kept Is not the answer to the proper control of them In the city. A great many verities of the quieter birds which many people have interests -in can be kept without attracting any notice of the nearby people, except by the bright flashing colors as they fly about. An example of this is the canary, diamond sparrows, straw- berries, and star finches to name a few of the tiny finch group. But, only one of the louder birds could be a big nusiance. An example is the peacock with his big beautiful tall feathers and his very loud call. Many of the birds raised and studied In captivity are virtually extinct or on the endangered list In their own native countries. A good example of this Is the recent controlled production of the California Condor, by the San Diego Zoo personnel. This has been the result from many years of detailed patient study by aviaculturists of the birds and the habits of simillar birds. Mate of the avlaculturists, keeping a few birds, have mastered the breeding of some of the very rare birds and can now continue the lines of the birds. Much of this activity has been done in the small 'backyard aviary'. Even with the varied interests in the birds, many of them • are kept only for their beautiful colors and melodious songs. If extreme liftted zoning conditions continue, very soon we will not be able to have any aviaries of birds because there wont be any place to raise them. Doubtlessly you know Importation of birds Is next to Imoosslble for the average fancier. Almost all small birds raised in the United States are raised In the backyard aviaries. Because of the many difficulties involved it has not been practical to establish. Large commercial breeding nscabllshments. The smaller residential lots are much more limited then the larger half acre lots, which many of us reside on. Consideration should be given to utilize these half acre lots and increase the deslrabillty of owning them. This Is very Important in the present depressed real estate market here. ^.he most practical use,for the average person, of the `largo bac'rtvards' of the half acre lots is the keeping of animals. This was pointed out as a selling point when the houses were offered for sale by the developers. • A89 Suitable plantings placed around any animal enclosure can add to the surburban atmosphere, which includes animals. a 'Iarge aviary' would not be any larger in •area then a horse corral necessary to maintain two horses, which is allowed at the present time. Of course, there would not be the potential smells and disposal problems of the urge cuuntltles of manure droppings because small birds have more limited dropping$. 1iv aviary, se well as, many others are registered with the California state health department, and others are registered with the state fish and game commission of California. All of us are under the control of the U. S Department of Agriculture, who, among its other functions is responsible for the health and regulation of the bird fancy. I belelve you should understand now, the number of birds allowed to be kept In an aviary is not the answer to the fair control of them. I was told by a member of the planning department that sound readings were to be used In relation to some situations. I belelve the records )f sound readings of birds songs at the nearest dwelling is the way to handle it. A satisfactory, acceptable sound level at nearby homes 1s really what you are inter- ested in securing. The souard readings would eliminate personal opinions, likes and dislikes. It is a West challenge to study some birds habits and cond- ttt ^je and have 'hem lay eggs and raise yoIng. The satisfaction of earnirs a 'first breeding' medal is beyond description. If I can he of further help, please contact me. I do plan to be at the workshops. Gentlemen, PL$ASE, recognize and give the birds more consideration in the new zoning codes. Thank you for vonr consideration, Lyndon Harp 9110 Carrarl Ct Alta Loma, Ca 91701 980 0424 ME • CUP 84 -02 - CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS REQUEST TO MAINTAIN 400 -500 PARAKEETS ON 1/2 ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT LYNDON HAR��R CARRARI COURT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA The following is a chronology of events regarding the parakeet problem on Carrari Court starting with the original complaint and continuing through to is present status. Chronology of Events 7 -20 -82 Phone complaint received from Mr. Albert OeStefana, 9126 Carrari Court, Rancho Cucamonga, :omplaining of excessive noise generated by several hundred parakeets at 9110 Carrari Court. 7 -21 -82 I inspected the property. Several hundred parakeets were observed from the street right -of -way being maintained in an accessary structure in the rear yard of 9110 Carrari Court. Owner /occupant not present when property originally inspected. 7 -21 -82 Violation Notice issued to Mr. Lyndon T. Harp Jr., property owner of record, for maintaining more than twenty -five (25) birds on residentially zoned property in violation of Section 61.024A(b)(7) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. 9 -4 -82 Mr. & Mrs. Harp came to the Planning Department to talk to me regarding the Notice of Violation that was issued to them on July • 21, 1982. Mr. Harp stated that he had contacted this department prior to the purchase of the above -noted residence to ensure that the raising of parakeets was a permitted use. He was told that he could raise up to 100 fowl for each 1/4 acre he owned. A copy of the R -1 Zoning Ordinance was given him indicating the section of the code which permitted the raising of fowl. I informed Mr. Harp that Section 61.024(a)(3)(A) permitted 100 fowl per 1/4 acre on minimum five (5) acre R -1 parcels prior to residential use, which in his case was not applicable. Mr. Harp indicated during our conversation that he would be writing a letter to the Planning Commission explaining his problem and requesting approval for the keeping /maintaining of at least 200 birds (parakeets) at his residence. 8 -6 -82 Received a copy of the letter Mr. Harp wrote to the Planning Commission requesting a hearing to maintain his parakeets at his residence. 8 -13 -82 Mr. Harp was contacted by staff. A tentative inspection was scheduled for August 18, 1982. 9 asp CUP 84 -02 - Chronology . Page 2 8 -13 -82 The property was inspected by myself and Rick Gomez (City Planner). We observed approximately 350 to 400 parakeets being maintained in an accessory structure in the rear yard of Mr. Harp's residence. We were informed by Mr. Harp that he conducts genetical studies on parakeets and that he does not conduct a commercial bird raising business. The accessory structure was located at the rear of the property approximately 80 feet from Mr. De Stefano's residence. 9 -29 -32 A memo from Rick Gomez was sent to the Planning Commission explaining the situation and informing the Commission that Staff would be enforcing the Municipal Code in order to mitigate the noise problem. A letter was also sent by Rick Gomez to Mr. Harp informing him that his request to maintain more than the number of birds permitted by the Municipal Code was being denied. Mr. Hart) was given 60 days to reduce the number of birds from 400 to the permitted number (25). 11 -29 -82 In inspected the property for compliance. It was noted that 350 to 400 parakeets still existed within the accessory structure in the rear yard of Mr. Harp's residence. . 12 -15 -82 The Harps were again contacted. Mr. Harp's daughter informed me that her father had recently returned from the hospital and was recuperating from a hernia operation. I informed Ms. Harp that I would write a letter to Mr. Harp regarding the parakeet problem. 12 -27 -82 Received another phone complaint from Mrs. Terry Abel (Hidden Farm Road) regarding the number of birds maintained and the noise generated by the parakeets owned by Mr. Harp. 12 -29 -32 I sent a letter to Mr. Harp requesting that an abatement schedule be submitted to the Planning Department prior to January 15, 1983, indicating the proposed removal date of the excess parakeets. 1 -19 -83 Received a letter from Mr. Harp requesting a three (3) year extension to sell his property and relocate his aviary. 1 -23 -83 After review of Mr. Harp's request for a three (3) year extension, Mr. Gomez granted a twelve (12) month extension to correct the violation. Letter ; giving Mr. Harp until 1 -27 -84 to remove the excessive birds from :ne property. 2 -1 -83 Status report sent to Planning Commission from Rick Gomez explaining the twelve (12) month extension granted t0 Mr. Harp. 7 -28 -83 Draft Development Standards sent to Mr. Harp by Rick Gomez for his • comments . -.7 I. • CUP 84 -02 - Chronology Page 3 • 9 -6 -83 Mr. Harp addressed the Planning Commission regarding the proposed regulations concefning the number of birds permitted on residential property. 1 -27 -84 Property inspected for compliance regarding twelve (12) month extension to remove the excess birds. The inspection indicated that the birds had not been removed. Note: In January 1984 the new Development Code became effective, making it possible for Mr. Harp to maintain more than twenty -five (25) birds on his property by submitting for a "Conditional Use Permit ". 2 -1 -94 Contacted Mr. Harp regarding the violation. He was informed that either the birds had to be removed or he had to submit for a "Conditional Use Permit ". 2 -7 -84 A "Conditional Use Permit" was submitted by the Harps to maintain approximately 400 -500 parakeets on a residentially zoned 1/2 acre lot located at 9110 Carrari Court, Rancho Cucamonga. X 9 3 • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT 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 Part 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 signi- ficant environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have a significant environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further informa- tion concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: ''/" ° �'rQ "- r-' /C .��• APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS TELEPHONE: NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO HE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: A RC 1; 1'::- LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: A, t- I -1 19Y PROJECT DESCRIPTION • DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE :'•z �_ _ �, INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): 14 t �✓ ICI .. � � � �> -� =,. � � !hp '[' l� l,' � L!��1� / - —7777 C T 'F S .L s ' o' r J F �r ;� _^ •.-. '.,� rr ... b - n -. _] c i � ten,•'. /AT ' /2�.r r v i ? �-i-c_� _ .� � .;= rC� •'r AAF •, r -' <. 'sA7Fv �r'Te �� ;� _ �,�� C; •a�'E; s�:�'(i:Rt� ^< �/, I 1 D F V e nE _ �i —mil l,'r' 70 E ,Is the ro ect� p j part of a larger project, one of 5 series • -' of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? %1?F,1<TC AT r /L T- To fio«6(,77�;' ,; 0E- (�� `4�0,✓� 7 /�E (, ,G� �1.4�> �:r�E �5T'�,�'C -.� 542 5p.Vfljw C • WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO r� 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? • 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? _ 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? S. Remove any existing trees? How many? _ 6. Create the need for use or disposal of r potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flamnables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial 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 to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Development Review Committee. J, Date Signature Title 1-3 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION XY OF RANCHO :.CAMONGA COMMUNITY DEW OPMFNT DEPT. • APR 19 1984 AN 71819110111112111213141616 .i The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission will be holding public hearings at 7:00 p.m. on April 25, 1984 at the Lions Park Community Building located at 9161 3ase Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730, to consider the following described project(s): CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -02 - HARP - A request to maintain a 400/500 bird aviary at 9110 Carrari Court in the "VL" District - APN 1061 - 781 -19. 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, Rancno Cucamonga, California 91730, prior to said meeting. Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission April '3, 1 934 Date For Puolication 1( j ` �97 • V i f? .29 f April 14. 1984 Rancho .ucamonga [Tanning .ivisio^. P.C. Box SC7 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Regarding your letter of April 13 for the request to maintain a bird aviary at 9117 Carrari Court, I am fully opposed to Mr. flare and ;'his birds. First of all he is a constant nusance and his birds are worse. They smell, the whole area is an eye sore and he should never 'nave been allowed to construct this monstrosity of an aviary in the beginning. We moved to Alta loma from Anaheim and hoped to keep property values • 'lh and we picked a beautiful area on Hidden Farm ?d•. Mr. H_^ Ges behind us and I am embarrassed to go out into my backyard because of the mess he has back there. ce cut of town and unable to attend the meeting however as I stated before i am very opposed to this aviary and would vote aga'ns; _... and ... ^son Ransom 9125 Hldden:armRd. Alta Loma. Ca. 91701 Qfy ugoPM ) TY4OEVF CUCAMON GA D P ppq 19 484 7 2i8� � 8 • • • 40TICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING C014MISSION r011VE9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMUNITY OEVEI OPMENT DEFT. APR 17 1984 An Pr 718�9indlltY11121314i616 Y The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission will be holding public hearings at 7 :00 p.m. on April 25, 1984 at the Lions Park Community Building located at 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730, to consider the following described project(s): CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -02 - HARP - A request to maintain a 400/500 bird aviary at 9110 Carrari Court in the "VL" District - APN 1061 - 781 -19. 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. Aoril 13, 1984 ate or ub ication Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission T 7.74 5i,'-e/ /ti 1. /C. 6Z IL J. )':•LLC•IL (l.l' .L i1 ^i._. Cr La// C� e' te...a� :) %�,. .L�i(t •. ) � �'-!, .. �.Z.. �� /� l; ryY-C Cl/• iC.4 C:. • ��,r.L L �4.. , zLL <�L1t �/ -f4-r ..� <:.. Ci�K F( C7G✓ ��l.��n /.Cil , <.. .�t� �r� /LG ��.LF'Y .��.� �l. [Ci C_:n.L �. �(Y+� ti,•-� .• /7,+�t.iLi �ai lo� rr �i.f'-tt- Li+•�( >/ (�C•. �l. i 'I �f t-f<✓ '�1L✓ - <�14a/'.iuC �nti-Y i1, lel�'..% .✓-. C C:.f CLi CG- C 6'x� C2 0 000tu i7 i f"s[t rte{ ,C-^- [•� >> CC : =-.� � t /c /i..... J � /_e..✓� .U�- ,s�d+�<- c- �-res. -e� : nn�� rLc i � . c� � • :•. , , i , r -T I ` �'li.A :�. {TY't �L"`•c•„-L���u ".� C":,.'-r -t /�G2[h -� [Z/ -J' Z��c //4� -rF er :v J / J � Uv �i r�L.A r• - -,t -� Z�G[r 1. ,.G.t '�-r -% .c-f�t ,C.ia-P�,! u�ry G�`-�+ w3.,, i '�� ��L %:.. ���a /� ^�•� (L! C .'l La -c..�_ _�. ncf- .�lLt,-C � �� rL:.f� (C L„-.�• GCL.�/L: ,. tt Li.�c(. .��Y�C iii. l[•c rH 7�lh�t r:.- i�C ct f�...+..,.. � ?j. '`C.icv E� *�.. c!oh...� < . C'1 :1_� l`�L �.'��.� L'�-LL.• -�. _. FYI_ C[.� i C..: -b • t-i.- ...a.v. P 2D/ IA NOISE Information presented in this element is in- tended to help the citizens of Rancho Cuca- monga understand the ramifications of planning decisions in terms of noise, to understand better the way that noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga occur, and to under- stand what the City can do to reduce these levels. The Noise Element is Closely related to the Land use, Housing, Circulation, and Open Space Elements. A major objective of the Noise Element is to provide guidelines to achieve noise - compatible land uses. The Noise Element, by identifying noise - sensitive land uses and establishing compatibility guidelines for land use and noise, will influ- ence the general distribution, location,and intensity of future land use. Effective land use planning can alleviate noise problems. Residential areas are one of the most noise - sensitive land uses. Therefore, the Housing • Element is directly affected by the Noise Element. Implementation of land use /noise compatibility guidelines can reduce noise im- pacts in residential location. In addition, proper noise mitigation measures during con- struction of housing can guard against adverse noise impacts. The circulation system within the City is one of the major sources of continuous noise. Therefore, the existing and future circula- tion system identified in the Circulation Element greatly influences the noise environ- ment. The circulation routes including free- ways and highways, along with truck routes, should be located to minimize noise impact upon noise - sensitive land use. The location and design of transportation facilities will greatly influence the overall noise environ- ment within the City. Since noise can adversely affect the enjoy- ment of quiet activities in open space, the Noise Element is also closely related to the Open Space Element. Conversely, open • space can be used as a noise buffer between • 254 30 L. 41 incompatible land uses. This technique can • reduce community noise levels and also pro - vide usable open space for recreation. HUMAN REACTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE The effects of noise on people can be grouped in three general categories: • Subjective effects of annoyance, nuisance, and dissatisfaction; • Interference with activities such as speech, sleep, and earning /performance; and • Physiological effects such as startle and hearing Subjective Effects of Noise About 10 percent of the population is so sen- sitive to noise that they object to any noise not of their own making. Thus, some com- plaints occur even in the quietest environ- ments. Another sizable portion of the popu- lation (about 25 percent), however, does not • react or complain even in very severe noise exposure. In any given noise exposure, therefore, one should expect a variety of reactions from the people exposed, rangng from serious annoyance to no awareness. People can be expected to respond to changes in level as follows: o Except in carefully contolled laboratory experiments, an increase or decrease of only one decibel (dB) in A-level- cannot be perceived. o Outside of the laboratory, a three -d8 increase or decrease in A -level is consider- ed a just - noticeable difference. 'A decibel is a unit for describing the amplitude of sound. A -level is a type of frequency weighting designed to reflect the fact that human hearing is less sensi- tive at low frequencies and extreme high frequencies than in the mid - frequency range. The weighting curve is called "A" weighting, and the level so measured is c.;Iled the "A- weighted sound level ", or simply "A- level ". 255 303 o An increase or decrease in A -level of at • least five dB is required before any noticeable change in community response would be expected. A ten dB increase in A -level is subjective- ly heard as a doubling in loundness and would almost certaily cause adverse change in community response. A ten -dB de- crease in A-level is subjectively heard as a halving in loudness and represents a sig- nificant improvement in a noise environ- ment. It has been demonstrated that if a noise problem is allowed to occur a reduction in noise level of from 5 to 10 dBA more than would have been required in the design stage is often necessary to appease com- plaints. For this reason it is very important to consider noise control early in the devel- opment of a project. Interference with Soeech Communication. People generally have [he ability to hear and distinguish one sound from a background of • sounds. For example, one can often hear the telephone ringing over a background of music and conversation. However, this ability has definite limitations. Unwanted sound can interfere with the perception of desired sounds or signals; this interference is called masking, Masking can render a sound or a signal inaudible or unrecogniz- able. Masking becomes a serious problem when background noise intereferes with per- ception of speech. Face -to -face personal conversations at the usual distance of about five feet can proceed in A- weighted noise levels as high as 66 dB. In many conversations involving groups of people, distances between speaker and lis- tener of five to twelve feet are common, and the level of the background noise should be less than 50 to 60 dBA. At public meetings or outdoors in parks, yards, or play- grounds, where distances between talker and listener range from twelve to thirty feet, the A- weighted sound level of background nosie should be kept below 45 to 55 dBA, if prac- tical speech communication is to be possible. • 256 30`1 Intereference with sle ep. Sleep is a compli- • • cated series of states, generally following similar patterns in people of all ages. The amount of time spent in the different states which comprise a night of sleep vary from the drowsy /awake state to the deep sleep state and back again. It has been widely observed that sound can interfere with any of sleep's stages and that people can accli- mate themselves to certain noises and sleep through them. No range of noise levels has been established as the minimum range at which sleep distur- bance occurs. Interferenc: with performance and learning. ,oises seemingly begin to interefere with human performance with the A- weighted level exceeds 90 dBA. High frequency noise (above the 1000 -2000 Hz) or irregular bursts of noise are more distracting and may pro- duce more performance interference than low frequency noise or steady noise, The per- formance of tasks demanding accuracy or having a complex series of steps is most • likely to be adversely affected, without • necessarily reducing the total amount of work performed. Physiological Effects of Noise. At any given sound level, individual re- sponses will vary considerably, and physio- logical effects of a transient or possibly per- sistent nature may result. Brief sounds at levels exceeding 70 dBA can produce such physiological responses as general constric- tion of the blood vessels and changes in breathing, size of the pupils of the eyes, and gastric secretions. Steady noises of 90 dBA have been shown to increase tension in all muscles, and influence the response time in a simple choice task. Long-term exposure to levels exceeding 70 dBA can cause hear- ing loss. While physiological arousal by noise can be beneficial in maintaing response to possible danger, continuing unnecessary arousal to irrelevant sounds can be annoying and possibly damaging to general health. • • 257 'A ns' • THE NOISE ENVIRONMENT Existing Noise Levels Noise measurements were made throughout the City in November 1979. The noise mea- surement sites were chosen so that some of the sites would be close to major transporta- tion noise sources while others would be distant from these major noise sources. The data from the sites close to the major trans- portation noise sources were used to validate the noise exposure contours. The data from the sites distant from major noise sources were used to provide information on the noise environment in those portions of Rancho Cucamonga where noise from a single source does not dominate the noise environ- ment. (Monitoring data are ,resented in Appendix D.) The noise exposure contours for the City of Rancho Cucamonga are shown in Figure V-7. The noise contours are shown in terms of the day -night average noise level. (Ldn.)" They depict the existing noise exposure for vehicular traffic on local streets, arterials, • and highways which are in or adjacent to Rancho Cucamonga, and trains which use the Santa Fe railroad tracks. These were the onlv noise sources determined to generate an Ldn level above 60 d8. No industrial plants or aircraft were determined to generate a 60 Lon contour off their property. Sixty Ldn is commonly accepted as the "cutoff" point in terms of noise measurements beyond which noise levels would be potentially disturbing and annoying. This level is cdnsidered "normally acceptable" for all land uses and is consistent with state and federal guidelines regarding protection of the noise environ- ment. 'To account for human sensitivity to nighttime noise levels a descriptor Ldn (day - night equivalent sound level) is used. The Ldn divides the 24 -hour day into the daytime of 7 am to 10 pm. Ten decibels are added to the nighttime noise levels. The Ldn is then calculated by logarithmically summing the hourly daytime and weighted nighttime Leq's. The Leq is defined as the equivalent steady -state sound level which in a stated period of time would contain the same acoustic energy as the time - varying sound level during the same time period. The Leq is particularly use- ful in describing the subjective change in an environment where the source of noise remains the same but there is change in the level of activity. Widening roads and/ • or increasing traffic are examples of this kind of situation. • 258 ,�3V The City presently has a relatively quiet noise environment. By comparing the noise • levels shown in Figure V -7 with the noise and land use compatibility guidelines (Figure V -9 in the following policy section), one can see that the existing land uses are predomi- nantly compatible with the noise environ- ment. As indicated above, the only excep- tions are some residential areas located along the major travel routes. Future Noise Environment The noise exposure contours projected for the City of Rancho Cucamonga at buildout are shown in Figure V -8. The noise con- tours are shown in terms of the day /night average noise level (LDn) as were the exist- ing noise levels in the City. In the future, as is the case today, the contours depict the noise exposure for vehicular traffic on local streets, arterials and highways (both exist- ing and proposed) which are in or adjacent to Rancho Cucamonga and for trains which use the Santa Fe railroad tracks. These are projected to be the only noise sources which would generate an Ldn of 60 dB outside of their right -of -way or property boundary, • A comparison of the existing and future • noise contour maps shows that noise levels in the City are going to increase significantly in the future. The increase is due to in- creased vehicular traffic throughout the City. The proposed F .hill Freeway will create the most signific t change n the noise environment. Even with 10 dBA of attenuation, noise levels will increase at homes backing up to the freeway as much as 10 dBA. A 10-dBA increase is perceived as approximately a doubling in loudness. OBJECTIVES The objectives enumerated below and the subsequent policies are aimed at protecting the citizens of Rancho Cucamonga from ex- cessive noise levels that interfere with daily routine and comfort. o Assure that noise levels in noisy areas do • not rise above levels compatible with the • land uses in those areas. 259 hk 30% o Prevent the escalation of noise levels in • areas where noise - sensitive uses are lo- cated. • Encourage creative solutions when potential conflicts between noise levels and land use arise. • Develoo programs to reduce community noise levels to "normally acceptable" levels where possible. POLICIES • The City shall consider the compatibility of proposed land uses with the noise environ- ment when preparing or revising communi- ty and /or specific plans and when review- ing development proposals. Figures V -8 and V-9 should be used by the City as a guide to land use /noise compatibility. • The City shall analyze in detail the poten- tial noise impacts of any actions that the City may take or act upon which could • significantly alter noise levels in the com- • munity. • The City shall encourage proper site planning to reduce noise impacts of any actions that the City make take or act upon which could significantly alter noise levels in the community. lJ o The City shall encourage proper site planning to reduce noise impacts. By taking advantage of the natural shape and contours of the Site it is often possible to arrange buidings and other uses in a manner which will reduce and possibly eliminate noise impact. Planned unit devel- opments are particularly conducive to site planning techniques. The following site techniques should be considered to reduce noise impacts. - Increase the distance between noise source and receiver. 260 JOE C, (..E 4 C, 0 IANU In[l Alf l,nRY LOMMUNIIS NO", 1 AI'(AORE IJ,, OR(NLI. JR ss so ns m If Ro Risk )IN I IAf I OW DENSITY %INGIE IAMILY OUPLE X. XNIHII 1 I0I411 s RESIUI Nt14I Met It f4MIEY Iva FR-161 1 RANSII N I 1 ODLIN6 MUII l+ 0a111 s 1(IIIIIAS IIHRARILS. NIURLEIES110 All, NUNSIN(. IllMlf S s MIDI IIIRIUMS_ l ONL E R f I IAL L 1 Will wih Walk 11 ARI NA. (It, I DOOR WI L IA IOR 1NIR Is P1 AN o. RUDNDS, NEILNHORD001) PARRS 61111 IuUNSIl R100K. %IAH11%.WAlrR Nl(RIAIION. Lt ME It RIEs of full HUnmN(s. uuslNESs t a11M1 R( (AI AND PRO* 1 SSDINAL -- - INDUSI RIAL MANUt AI I UN INI, n, II II n s, ALRICUL IUR1 0 INTERPRE=TATION F'izJ NORMALLY ACCEPTABLE Specified land use is satishle lory, based upon the assumplion that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, wilhoul any special noise insulation rlap)irenuvds. WM CON13I110NALLY _ACCT- PTABLE New constr( <liw or •:::Idopnlent should be undertaken only alter a dd-tuiled analysis of the noise'reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation fea- tures included in the d( -sign, Ca(Wentlanat construc- tion, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice. Out- door eovironnlcld will stern noisy. POTENTIALLY UNACCEPTABLE New construction or develapmenl should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insula- tion features included in the design, Ouldoor areas must be shielded. MI NORMALLY UNACCEPTABLE Pdew construction or development should generally not be undertaken_ CGOM(OCCM costs to make the indoor environment acceptable would be prohibitive and the outdoor environment would not be usable. Figure V -9 If D USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMWNITY NOISE ENVIRONMENTS • • 4 N D R --- - - - - -- I j` I Figure V -8 0 FUTURE NOISE CONTOURS' RESIDENTIAL . LOW kA ou'.iACA I MEDIUM Ia a OU SiACI I HIGH bbW DU'641CI MASTER PLAN REOUIRED COMMERCIAL /OFFICE _ COMMERCIAL + REGIONAL COMMERCIAL OFFICE INDUSTRIAL OPEN SPACE HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL PERMANENT OPEN SPACE PUBLIC FACILITIES EXISTING PARKS PROPOSED PARKS EXISTING SCHOOLS PROPOSED SCHOOLS CIVIC /COMMUNITY FUTURE NOISE EXPOSURE CONTOURS Ld.METRIC - -- NOISE CONTOUR - PROPOSED FOOTHRL FREEWAY CONTOURS ASSUME *M ATTENUATION CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN Q. — Place non -noise sensitive land uses such as parking lots, maintenance facilities, and utility areas between noise source I - A noise barrier must be massive enough and receiver. j - Use non -noise sensitive structures such I -'./ as garages to shield noise - sensitive - The minimum acceptable surface Weight for a noise barrier is 4 pounds per square foot (equivalent to 3/4" ply- areas. - Orient buildings to shield outdoor spaces E.Vttfk R6R.41 ANV —+ from a noise source. • The City shall encourage developers to consider architectural layouts as a means of meeting noise reduction requirements. openings. As guidelines, the following steps should be considered during building design: - Bedrooms would be considerably quieter if placed on the side of the house facing away from the major road. - Balconies facing major travel routes should be avoided. - Quiet outdoor spaces can be provided next to a noisy roadway by creating a U- shaped development which faces away from the roadway. • The City shall consider the use of noise barriers or walls to reduce noise levels from ground transportation noise sources and industrial sources. The following :;t :- (� guidelines are intended to insure the OQ CC40.F7711� effectiveness of noise harrier. I - A noise barrier must be massive enough to prevent significant noise transmission j through it and high enough to shield the receiver from the noise source. I -'./ - The minimum acceptable surface Weight for a noise barrier is 4 pounds per square foot (equivalent to 3/4" ply- wood ). E.Vttfk R6R.41 ANV —+ SdI4Dl%s At'r A5 NOIStl Bu"FaS - The barrier must be carefully con - structed so that there are no cracks or openings. 9 266 1 - The barrier must interrupt the line -of- sight between noise source and receiver. - Short barriers, regardless of height, provide essentially no reduction in the overall noise level. - The effects of flanking can be minimized by bending the wall back from the noise source at the ends of the barrier. Flanking is a term used to describe the manner by which a noise barrier's per- formance is compromised by noise pass- ing around the end of a barrier. o If site planning, architectural layout, noise barriers, or a combination of these mea- sures do not achieve the required noise reduction for the building in question, it may be necessary to modify the building's construction. Indoor noise levels due to exterior sources are controlled by the noise reduction characteristics of the building shell. The walls, roof, ceilings, doors, windows, and other penetrations 267 2 are all determinants of the structure's overall noise reduction capabilities. • The City should consider adoption of a Noise Ordinance which can be used to set limitations on unwarranted noise including amplified music, public address systems, mechanical construction equipment, barking • dogs, etc. • The City shall review federal and state noise control legislation and support legis- lation which is in the best interests of the City. • The City should work closely with Caltrans to reduce levels along the state highways and freeways through the City, The new transportation facility in the Foothill Free- way coordior should include a minimum of 10 dO of noise attenuation in its design. • The City shall establisy noise abatement policies for each new road and for those areas of the City where future land uses would be incompatible with the noise envi- ronment. These measures 40 could include 267 2 the erection of walls or berms, restriction of building multi -story dwellings within qo fixed distances of the raods, using open space as a buffer, site planning or archi- tectural treatments. The City should work with the surround- ing communities to ensure compliance with the land use and noise compatibility goals and objectives contained in this Noise Element at City boundaries. The City shall monitor and comment on any proposed changes in Ontario International Airport's operations which would affect noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga. AIR QUALITY Air Quality is considered within the Public Health and Safety Super - Element because the levels of air contaminants in Rancho Cuca- monga frequently are unhealthy. This is only partially due to pollutant sources near Rancho Cucamonga, but is primarily due to Rancho Cucamonga's location downwind of the majority of air pollutant sources in the South Coast Air Basin. Measure air quality near Rancho Cucamonga currently exceeds the National Ambient Air Quality Standards and California State Air Quality Standards for several pollutants. These standards were established as repre- senting air pollutant exposures below which no adverse health affects are known to occur. Emergency regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District provide for the declaration of "episodes" whenever air pollution concentrations reach or are pre - :icted to reach levels that could endanger or cause significant harm to public health. Stage 1 emergency criteria were reached on 98 days in 1978 in Fontana (the closest moni- toring site to Rancho Cucamonga); second - stage emergency criteria were exceeded on 17 days. • 268 ?in DRAFT EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - APRIL 2S, 1984 G. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -02 - HARP - A request to maintain a 350 -400 bird aviary at 9 Carrari Court in the "VL" District - APN 208 - 781 -19. Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Lyndon Hart), 9110 Carrari Court, applicant, addressed the Commission urging approval of the Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Harp advised that his birds are kept for genetic studies. The following individuals addressed the Commission in opposition to the Conditional Use Permit based upon noise, appearance of the aviary, and odors: Terry Adel - 9111 Hidden Farm Road - Rancho Cucamonga Tony Apels - 9111 Hidden Farm Road - Rancho Cucamonga Albert Distefano - 9126 Carrara Court - Rancho Cucamonga Frank Kovacevis - 9154 Carrari Court - Rancho Cucamonga Pat Brenner - Rancho Cucamonga Joe Davis - Rancho Cucamonga There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. • Commissioner Barker stated that this project has a long history of complaints over the course of several years. Further, that he was also able to hear the birds in Mr. Harp's avairy at his home and understood the problems faced by the adjacent prooerty owners, therefore could not vote in favor of the permit. Commissioner Remoel stated that the number of birds is the problem and that probably no one would have complained if there weren't so many. He further stated that if the avairy had been a block enclosed structure it would have retained the noise much better. Chairman Stout stated that when the Commission considered the Conditional Use Permit process during review of the Development Code, the maximum limit of 25 birds was established as a reasonable number allowable before the necessity of a Conditional Use Permit. He advised that criteria was then developed requiring the Commission's review of a Conditional Use Permit application to determine compatibility with the surrounding area on a case -by -case basis and to establish further conditions regarding allowable amounts. However, he could not approve this permit because 300 -400 is not a reasonable amount of birds to have in a residential area and that the use is not compatible with the surrounding neighoorhood. 'lotion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Rempel, carried, to deny Conditional Use Permit 33 -22. ��y AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: JUAREZ, MCNIEL - carried 3/y • • • RESOLUTION NO. 84 -37 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84 -02 FOR A 350 -400 BIRD AVIARY TO BE LOCATED AT 9110 CARRARI COURT IN THE VERY LOW DISTRICT - WHEREAS, on the 7th day of February, 1984, a complete application was filed by Lyndon Harp for review of the above- described project; and WHEREAS, on the 25th day of April, 1984, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above- described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows; SECTION 1: That the following cannot be met: 1. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and • 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and 4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTIO "1 2: The Planning Commission hereby denies Conditional Use Permit 843F— APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25th DAY OF APRIL, 1984. ION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: 0ennn s' -Stout ATTEST: 1pk Game: I 3/�. C � 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 25th day of April, 1984, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: JUAREZ, MCNIEL u • 317 AGREEMNT THIS AaUMENr, made and entered into this 8 day of Deceber, 1983, by and between the CTf4 OF RRM GOCM0NCA, CALIFORNIA, a Municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and RC LAND CCKANY, a California general partnership, hereinafter referred to as "Developer', provides as follows: RECTTAIS WHEREAS, Developer desired to complete the improvements required for the subdivision of certain real property in the City shown on conditionally approved Tentative Tract Map No. 11934; WHEREAS, one of the conditions of approval of Tentative Tract M.ao No. 11934 is that adequate flood protection facilities be provided; • WHEREAS, the Corps of Fhgineers and the Federal Emergency Manage - ment Agency has deterndned that said adequate flood protection requires the acquisition and construction of a training levee to provide protection from a possible outbreak of the east levee of the Day Creek Spreaang Grounds and to remove Tentative Tract No. 11934 fran the Flood Plain Zone. frMUTAS, the training levee is required north of Highlald Avenue, in the unincorporated area, but is necessary for the safety and protection of area within the City of Rancho Cucerrnga. WHEREAS, City is willing to acquire the right-of -way for the train- ing levee across the property described in Exhibit "A' and "V , at the present time, only if Developer agrees to pay all cysts of acquiring said right -of -way; NOW, THEREFORE, City and Developer agree as follows: (1) Developer shall use its best efforts to acquire, by appropriate means, an easement for construction and maintenance of the training levee across the property described in Exhibit "A" and 'B" attached hereto. 3 1p (2) If Developer is unable to acquire easement after using its best efforts, City shall use its best efforts to acquire by appropriate proceedings, including eminent domain proceedings if necessary, said • easement. (3) Developer may utilize said easement, when acquired for the construction of a training Levee, in order to satisfy the flood protection conditions of Tentative Tract No. 11934. The location, design and construc- tion of said training levee within said easement shall conform to all City and appropriate governmmental agencies' requirements therefor. (4) All costs of acquiring the aforesaid easement shall be borne by the Developer. Said costs shall include, but shall not be limited to, just compensation for the property acquired including severance damages, if any, litigation expenses and damages upon dismissal or defeat of right to take, appraisals, acquisition agent expenses, legal fees, and court costs. Any settlement which exceeds 115% of the appraised value shall be approved • by the Developer. (5) Immediately upon the execution of this Agreement, Developer shall make a payment on account to the City in the sum of $3,000.00. This sum, and any other deposit with the City, may be used for any purpose con- templated by this Agreement, (6) Prior to the filing of a complaint in eminent domain for the purpose of acquiring the easement herein described, Developer shall deposit with the City the probable amount of compensation, based on an appraisal, that will be awarded in the proceeding, together with an additional sum equal to 157 of the probable amount of compensation. Said amount, and additions thereto while in the control of the City, will be kept in an interest bearing account. (7) In the event additional monies are necessary in order to complete the acquisition contemplated by this Agreement, Developer shall deposit the • same with the City within fifteen (15) days after demand is made therefor. -2- 315 (7) (cunt.) • Without in any way limiting the foregoing, within fifteen (15) days after entry of judgment, or other order, in any eminent domain proceeding, Developer shall deposit with the City an amount of money sufficient to enable the City to make said payment. (8) Snfnsequent to the conclusion of all proceedings contemplated by this Agreement, City shall return any unused portion of Developer's deposits including interest thereon to Developer. (9) This Agreement shall be binding and shall inure to the benefit of successors and assigns of the parties hereto. (10) Time is of the essence of this Agreement. (11) This Agreement may be modified or amended only by an instru- ment in writing executed by both parties. (12) In the event either party is required to cc mane legal action • to secure performance by the other party of any of the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to recover court costs and reasonable attorneys fees. IN WITNESS WFEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the day and year first above written. RC LAND COMPANY a California Cenral Partnership BY: THR WILLIAM LYON CCfIIPANY as General Partner BY: !�Presidnt ' b. r ?, '. :,i .'v ..:.: WE OEC 2 11983 II CITY OF RAWHO CUWUNGA By P ¢snow cis. cen em;a :.a BY. yor -3- M E M O R A N D U M TO: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Manager; and Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer FROM: Robert E. Dougherty, City Attorney DATE: December 21, 1983 RE: Training Levee for Protection of Tracts 11934, 12044, 12045 and 12046. Enclosed please find quadruplicate originals of a proposed Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, and the RC Land Company relative to the condemnation of property for the purpose of constructing a training levee to provide protection from a possible outbreak of the east levee of the Day Creek Spreading Grounds and to remove Tentative Tract No. 11934 from the Flood Plain Zone Also enclosed is RC Land Company's check in the sum of $3,000.00, which check is issued pursuant to paragraph 5 of the Agreement. The Agreement should be presented to the City Council for approval and execution and thereafter a fully signed copy of the Agreement should be returned to The William Lyon Company. Also, please provide me with a photocopy of a signed original for my file. Once the City Council approves the Agreement, then the first step is to obtain appraisals of the parcels which the City seeks to acquire. Since the time we last commenced an eminent domain action, there has been a chanage in State law effecting the proce- dures which we must follow. Government Code 57267.2 now requires that "Prior to adopting a Resolution of Necessity . . . and ini- -1- tiating negotiations for the acquisition of real property, the public entity shall establish an amount which it believes to be • just compensation therefor, and shall make an offer to the owner or owners of record to acquire the property for the full amount so established. . . . in no event shall such amount be less than the public entity's approved appraisal of the fair market value of the property . Once the City Council approves the Agreement I will contact Difilippo s Company, Real Estate Appraisers, and I will ask them to perform the required appraisals assuming that their schedule will permit them to do so promptly. You may recall that Difilippo 6 Company performed appraisals for the City in connection with Assessment District 82 -1. However, if Difilippo 6 Company cannot perform appraisals promptly, I will shop around in an effort to • locate a competent appraiser who can. In the meantime, Lloyd, please check the latest equalized county assessment roll and provide me with the name and address of each owner of record of the subject parcels. RED: sjo Enclosures cc: Mr. Richard S. Robinson, Vice President /Treasurer The William Lyon Company • _2_ 3.7 7- LYON I <l,1, A ilv9,, 19 CORPORATE PLAZA, P. C BOX 7570. NEWPORT BEACH. CA 92660 • 1714` 833 -7600 December 12, 1983 O =CiS33 c> ..cCi:i: ;cam 0 Mr. Robert E. Dougherty for -he City of .Ranc owCucaronga 1131 i4est Sixth Street Suite 300 Ontario, CA 91762 iP.: Trai.izg Levee for PrOteCt ion OT Tracts 11934, 12744, 12045 and 12046 Dear Mr. Dougherty: Attached are three _1 lv executed copies of the Agreement regarding the • Traini „ Levee. Also attached is a check in the amount of $3,000.00 payable co the City of Rancho Cucarnc_a. We would appreciate it if you w. u1d proceed with the condemnation as expeditiously as possible as we •4i'L be leokina to deliver homes which will need to be protected by this facility in ?larch of 1984. :f you have any questions or if there is anything we can do to help the process, please let us know. . i:cerely, ,".R4C!%ard S. Robinson ':ice Preside�ot /Treasurer A,tachnents RSR;jj cc: Y-. 3. Hubbs Gar; `fechling P.S. Af-er sigmaa:re, please return one fuliv executed coov of the Agreeaent. REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT -2 �3 May 31, 1984. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 9320 Baseline Road P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Attention: Ms. Beverly Authelet City Clerk Dear Ms. Authelet: I hereby respectfully request that time be alloted at the next City Council meeting, June 6, 1984, to present the is matter of voting for the Office of Mayor in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Respectfully submitted, Charles West CW:rg cc: file • ,3.2 4 0 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT June 6, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Robert A. Rizzo Assistant to City Manager SUBJECT: Cable Television Matters l r.„ There are two cable television (CATV) items for the City Council's con- sideration: firat, development of minimum requirements for Rancho Cucamonga's CAN service proposals (RFP), and second, setting of interim minimum system design standards for present CATV operators within the City. First, in the development of minimum requirements for the RFP, attached is a draft proposal document. Included in this draft is suggested minimum requirements (Section B) and the evaluation weights and criteria (Encloaure 2, Figure 1): these sections will be discussed and direction received at the Council meeting. Also, comments may be obtained at that time from our present CATV operators and from possible new applicants. With respect to the blank spaces in the RFP General Instructions, our consultant (Telecommunications Management Corporation) is suggesting an application fee of $6,000 be required (this fee is gar -ally in the neighborhood of 35,00047,5000). This fee will assist in ecovering our franchise evaluation costs. Other information, such as the RFP due date and pre -bid meeting date, can be filled in when we have approved the RFP for release. Additionally, any portion of the RFP can be modified, as requested by the City Council. The City Council may desire to have language added to the RFP, which would require the successful application to purchase any CATV wiring and conduit in developments where the developer has prewired the units (wire and conduit would have to conform to industry standards). Second, Rancho Cucamonga adopted by reference (March, 1978) San Bernardino County Code Section 42.0512 (Rights Reserved to the County 'City'). This grants the City authority to require additional or greater standards of construction, operation, maintenance, or otherwise on part of the CATV operator to reflect technical and economic changes occuring during the term, and to enable the City and CAN operators to take advantage of new developments in the CATV industry as to more effectively serve the public. 3JJ June 6, 1984 Cable Television Natters Page 2 The attached resolution would required the present CATP operators to provide a new minimum standard of CATP service consistent with the minimum requirements of our UP. These new standards would only affect extention of services by the present CATP operators. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council review, comment and approve attached RFP; approve Resolution 84 -171 requiring new minimum service standards for our present CATP operators. RAR:mk attachment i 1 LJ • • RESOLUTION NO. 84- 1~71 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING INTERIM MINIMUM SYSTEM DESIGN AND CAPACITY STANDARDS FOR CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WHEREAS, the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga is in the process of developing a request for proposal to provide cable television service throughout the entire City; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City Rancho Cucamonga adopted by reference the San Bernardino County Code Section 42.0512 (Rights Reserved to the County 'City') which grants the City authority to require additional or greater standards of construction, operation, maintenance, or otherwise on part of the licensee to reflect technical and economic changes occuring during the term, and to enable the City and the licensee to take advantage of new developments in the cable television industry so as to more effectively serve the public. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby set the following system design and capacity • standards for the present cable operators within the City of Rancho Cucamonga to be effective for all residents and developments not presently being provided with cable service until such time as their license agreements expire or new standards are developed: a. The Residential Network shall have a capacity of at least fifty (50) channels plus FM to subscribers (downstream), and four (4) channels plus data from subscribers (upstream). All of this capacity shall be activated initially. b, An Institutional Network, with a capacity of at least fifteen (15) channels downstream and fifteen (15) channels upstream, with the ability to divide any six (6) MHz channel into narrow -band subehannels for data and voice transmission. Any Institutional Network shall have the capability to accommodate a broad range of services including, but not limited to, alarm monitoring, energy management, utility meter reading, teleconferencing, point -to -point and point- to- multlpolnt transmission, polling, and interconnection to other communications networks. c. Both the Residential and Institutional Network shall have addreaaable capability, and also the means to provide signal security for selected channels and subohannels through such teohniquea as signal scrambling or encryption. 3�'7 d. The Residential Network shall have the capacity for • providing interactive home services. e. The system configuration shall include satellite earth station capacity to receive signals simultaneously from all operating U. S. satellites carrying at least six (6) cable programming services. f. A parental "lockout" device or digital code shall be provided to requesting subscribers. g. The capacity for an emergency audio override shall be provided which permits designated City officials to override all audio signals in the event of an emergency. h. One character generator and associated interface equipment shall be provided for authorized municipal, education and community use. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this • day of •, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Authelet, City Clark 3 -�B Son . , ikels, Mayor • • • 11 nTm AV OAAV'Fn /`t TPA MnNCA STAFF REPORT June 6, 1984 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Robert A. Rizzo Assistant to City Manager SUBJECT: Renewal of Animal Control Service Contract 1977 presently, the City of Rancho Cucamonga is contracting with San Bernardino County Department of public Health for animal control services. This activity consists of such functions as: a. Enforcing laws and licenses governing the licensing, impounding, sale, shelter, and care of animals. b. Vehicle patrol of City seven days a week, 11 hours a day - 4,015 hours annually. c. 24 -hour emergency service. d. Computerized licensing system. e. Other specific tasks as cited in the attached contract. These services are provided at no direct cost to Rancho Cucamonga. The City has authorized the County to handle all animal control matters, which allows the County to collect dog licenses and other related fees from the residents of Rancho Cucamonga. The service level is equal to the amount of fees collected and is consider full payment for all costs, including overhead. This year's contract includes three new aspects: 1, Cats will be picked up and impounded at no cost to Rancho Cucamonga residents (last year this was a $7.00 fee). 2. 60 -day termination clause with the City receiving a pro -rated share of license fees if the contract is cancelled prior to the end of a fiscal year, 3. An increase of 1,350 vehicle patrol hours. This increase is due mostly to the $2.50 adjustment for altered dog license fees. 3 Z5 June 6, 1984 Renewal of Animal Control Service Contract Page 2 Additionally, attached is the fee schedule which will be in effect during the fiscal year 1984 -85. If Council desires, it could adopt an ordinance revising fees for the animal license process. The County fees were devised on a cost per service basis, and if Council chooses to alter the fee schedule, it may necessitate an adjustment in service levels. As an overview of service provided by the County this year, I would say it has been improving on a daily basis. On July 1, 1984, the County "tackled" the large task of providing animal control service to both Rancho Cucamonga and Ontario. This includes an area of over 65 square miles and 168,000 new clients, they did not service in fiscal year 1983 -84. With this new undertaking there was the natural rapid growth shock with limited phone access, dog license processing changes (different from Chaffey Humane Society procedures), different types of service levels other than in the unincorporated areas of the County. Each of these early problems have been addressed and improvements made. During the past three months we have received fewer animal control complaints. Any time there has been a problem, the Animal Control staff has been very responsive in serving the public needs. RECOMMENDATION: E The City Council approvel the attached Animal Control service contract with • the Public Health Department of San Bernardino County. RAR:mk attachment 330 • • SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY GOVERNMENT AND ADMINSTRATIVE CODE 16.0213A-- Health and Animal Regulations (b) Animals (1) Dogs and other Domestic Animals (A) Pick -up and disposal of owned dog .......... $12.00 (B) New owner registration of currently licensed animal ............................$ 1.00 (C) Apprehension fee (domestic animals ......... $ 9.00 (D) Impound and disposal fee. (I) First 72 hours ........................$ 8.00 (II) Daily (after first 72 hrs.) ........... $ 3.00 (III) Disposal fee (after 72 hrs.) ....... ...$ 3.00 (IV) If stray ..............................$ 3.00 (2) Rabies Control (A) License fee. (I) Annual Fee ... .........................$15.00 (Unspayed /Unneutered) (II) Annual Fee ............................$ 1.50 (Spayed /Neutered) (II1) -year Fee ............................$ 7.50 (Unspayed /Unneutered) • (IV) ' -Year Fee ............................$ (Spayed /Neutered) 3.75 (V) Delinquent Fee ........................$25.00 (Includes Annual Fee) (B) DELETED (C) Replacement dog tag.. ............. *** $ 1.00 (D) Pickup and handling fee (leash law areas only) Loose Dog Violation . .......................$25.00 (E) DELETED (F) Large animals, pickup and impoundment. (See Section 32.012) (I) Pickup: Horses, cattle ................$25.00 large animals (II) Pickup for small animals: Goats, calves and pigs ................$20.00 (III) Pickup for sheep: 1 -5 sheep .... .........................$50.00 6 -10 sheep ... .........................$75.00 11 -15 sheep .. .........................$90.00 16 -20 sheep .. ........................$105.00 Over 20 sheep .........................$ 5.00/' (IV) Daily board charge: (i) Horses, cattle, large animals, per day ..........................$ 3.00 (ii) Calves, sheep, small animals, • per day ..........................$ Maximum holding period: 30 days. 2.00 After 30 days, animals will be sold at public auction to reclaim County expense. ,331 (3) Commercial Kennels. License: 6 -10 dogs .......... .........................$25.00 • 11 -15 dogs ......... .........................$30.00 16 -20 dogs-. ................................ $35.00 21 -30 dogs ......... .........................$45.00 31 -40 dogs ......... .........................$55.00 41 -60 dogs ......... .........................$80.00 61 -80 dogs ......... .........................$90.00 81 -100 dogs ........ ........................$100.00 101 -150 dogs ....... ........................$125.00 151 -200 dogs ....... ........................$185.00 (4) Private Cattery License. Limited to 5 cats only; if over 5 the cattery is classified as commercial and subsection (b)(5) applies ..... .........................$10.00 (5) Commercial Cattery. License: 5 -10 cats .......... .........................$25.00 11 -20 cats ......... .........................$35.00 21 -30 cats ......... .........................$45.00 Each increment of 10, or fractional part of 10 cats, over 30 cats ....................$10.00 (6) Commercial Calf Growers. Permit fees: • 10 -24 calves ....... ........................$150.00 25 -75 calves ....... ........................$150.00 76 calves or more .. ........................$150.00 (7) Privately owned Wild, Exotic or Nondomestic Animals -- permit fee .............$20.00 /yr. (8) Game Bird Farm -- permit fee ..................$10.00 /yr. (9) Pet Grooming Parlor -- permit fee ............. #35.00 /yr. (10) Pet Shop -- permit fee ... .....................$50.00 /yr. (11) Petting Zoo -- permit fee .....................$75.00 /yr. (12) Public Aquarium -- permit fee .................$30.00 /yr. (13) Animal Menagerie -- permit fee ...............$125.00 /yr. (14) Wild Animal Breeding or Boarding -- permit fee ... ....................$125.00 /yr. (15) Miscellaneous Animal or Reptile Establishments -- permit fee .................$125.00 /yo 33 •• (16) Application fee for permit to operate an animal project ...................$ 5.00 /yr. • r1 u (17) Rog Ranch .............. ....................$100.00 /yr. 33.2 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO • � STANDARD CONTRACT �v. THIS CONTRACT is entered into in the State of California by and between the County of San Bernardino, hereafter called the County, and Nlm. City of Rancho Cucamonga hereafter called City Addy 9320 Baseline p h r Cam ^ ^na ra o 72n rnon. a�nn oa. F.doN O No er Soc. Srtunn V a IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: (Use space below and additional bond sheen, Set ford) service to be rendered, amount ro be paid, manner ofpayment, time for performance or completion, detertrinetion of sarlsfwrory perlormnce and cause for rumination, other Rana and conditions, and attach plans, specificatims, and addenda, if any.) WHEREAS, the City is desirous of contracting with the County for the performance of specified service by County officers and employees, and • WHEREAS, Article I, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 1, Title 5, of the Government Code authorizes the County to assume certain City functions, and WHEREAS, County Code Section 16.0213A(b) remains in full force and FOR COUNTY USE Or.LY County C.O.rtm.nl ' COr"rNl Vvm01, PUBLIC HEAL C OU ntV O.O.,i m.nt Contr.ct RIdI.NniI ITV. Corer «tor. _ic FnN N-1P.r Michael S. Welsh Ph 9" 2943 euaq. <umt No. SuO OS'i.et Na. Funa No. loo No. Arh..nt of eon[r «t Rr.r.t N.m. r ront.Nt nN moN mm on. o.rmmt or , «odt. mma. m. roua.mp hymmnEmma. o.r...hh imount E.en the unincorporated area of the County. Such services may in- clude, but not be limited to, those services and functions THIS CONTRACT is entered into in the State of California by and between the County of San Bernardino, hereafter called the County, and Nlm. City of Rancho Cucamonga hereafter called City Addy 9320 Baseline p h r Cam ^ ^na ra o 72n rnon. a�nn oa. F.doN O No er Soc. Srtunn V a IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: (Use space below and additional bond sheen, Set ford) service to be rendered, amount ro be paid, manner ofpayment, time for performance or completion, detertrinetion of sarlsfwrory perlormnce and cause for rumination, other Rana and conditions, and attach plans, specificatims, and addenda, if any.) WHEREAS, the City is desirous of contracting with the County for the performance of specified service by County officers and employees, and • WHEREAS, Article I, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 1, Title 5, of the Government Code authorizes the County to assume certain City functions, and WHEREAS, County Code Section 16.0213A(b) remains in full force and effect as a City ordinance, VOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. County shall provide through its Public Health Department, or such other agency as the Board of Supervisors may designate, ani ^.al control services normally provided by the Department to the unincorporated area of the County. Such services may in- clude, but not be limited to, those services and functions performed under Chapters 1 and 2 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the County Code. 2. City shall compensate County in an amount equal to the fees collected attendant to Paragraph 4 for services provided in this agreement. Such compensation shall constitute full payment, including reimbursement for supervision, clerical assistance, and other overhead costs. 3. The County hereby agrees to provide the following specific functions: a. Enforce all County ordinances pertaining to animals, includ- ing the issuing of citations as necessary for violations of said ordinances. 33V b. Impound all animals caught at large, including cats, and provide for the return of all licensed dogs whenever • possible. C. Quarantine as prescribed by law all animals suspected to be rabid. d. Investigate complaints of nuisance by animals upon request during routine patrol. e. Remove dead animals on the public right -of -way. f. Investigate reported dog bites. g. Provide a program whereby dog licenses may be issued by mail; clinics and during house -to -house canvassing; and send renewal notices by mail to owners of currently licensed dogs together with an application for renewal. h. Conduct clinics for the vaccination of dogs during the months of May, June, and July. i. Develop a plan and conduct a house -to -house canvass within the city for the purpose of ascertaining the number of unlicensed dogs and to license such dogs during the actual canvass. The County shall give notice of the requirements of existing ordinances and laws with respect to the lic ing of such dogs and the obligation of the owner(s) or or responsible persons to apply for and obtain such licenses. A written citation will be issued at the time of canvass to any person required to purchase a dog license and who fails to purchase said license at the time of canvass. The County agrees during the canvassing period of August through April to attempt to make 1006 total canvassing coverage of the entire City area. Assign officers to provide an average of seventy -seven hours per seven day week, in the performance of the functions specified in Sections a. through f. above. The number of hours per week include, but are not necessarily limited to, routine mobile patrols, investigative and rescue time, court appearances and impoundment of dangerous, wild, injured or loose animals. k. Provide a .might mechanism to answer telephones from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. Sunday through Saturday and an Officer after regular hours to offer limited special and emergency service to the public in the field seven days a week. Special and emergency service includes, but is not limited to, Desponding to either a citizen's request or request from the Sheriff's office to aid an injured animal(s), or to impound a dangerous, sick or injured animal, or attempt locate a stray biting animal. 3 3S, Page 2 of 4 • 1. Enforce those sections of State law relating to damages to owners of livestock killed by dogs. M. The County Health Officer shall determine any other level of service provided within the Citv. 4. The County shall use County Code Section 16.0213A(b) in the administration of an animal license program in the absence of action by the City to adopt an ordinance revising fees for an animal license program. All fees collected by County pursuant to County Code Section 16.0213A(b) shall be retained by County. 5. All work performed by County shall be performed in County offices or at such locations as designated by the County Health Officer. 6. This agreement shall be effective on July 1, 1984, and shall remain in effect through June 30, 1985, but shall automatically be extended bevond this date unless terminated or amended. This agreement may be terminated at any time with or without cause by City or by County on written notice given to the other at least 60 days before the date specified for such termination. In the case of such termination, the total fees collected attendant to an annual licensing program in the jurisdiction of the City for the year in which the termination occurs will be prorated between the City and County. • 7. To facilitate the performance of functions as provided for in this agreement, it is hereby agreed that the County shall have full cooperation and assistance from the City, its officers, agents, and employees. 8. For the purpose of performing said services in this agreement, Countv shall furnish all necessary materials, supplies, and equipment. 9. Notwithstanding anything hereinabove stated, it is agreed that in all instances wherein special supplies, stationery, notices, forms, and the like must be issued in the name of the City, the same shall be supplied by said City at its own cost and expense. 10. All persons employed in the performance of such services and functions for the City shall be County employees; and no County employees shall have any City pension, civil service, or other status or right. 11. Notwithstanding the foregoing, for the purpose of performing such services and functions and for the purpose of giving official status to the performance thereof where necessary, every County officer and employee engaged in the performance of any service hereunder shall be deemed to be an officer or employee of the • City, which services are within the scope of this contract and are purely municipal functions. 326 Page 3 of 4 12. The City shall not be called upon to assume any liability for the direct payment of any salary, wages, or other compensation to A County officer or employee performing services hereunder for t City. Except as herein otherwise specified, the City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnity to any County officer or employee for injury or sickness arising out of his employment. 13. The City will indemnify, defend, and hold the County harmless from loss, costs, or expenses caused by the negligent or wrongful acts or omissions of City officers, agents, and employees occur- ring in the performance of this contract to the extent that such liability is imposed on the County by the provisions of Govern- ment Code Section 895.2. 14. The County will indemnify, defend, and hold the City harmless from loss, costs, or expenses caused by the negligent or wrongful acts or omissions of County officers, agents, and employees occurring in the performance of this contract to the extent that such liability is imposed on the City by the provisions of Government Code, Section 895.2. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO Chairman, Board of Supervisors Dated ATTESTED: lSfart dcoNO,aPpn. compm y, erc.l By IAu MpnRO S,q�afurcl Dated Title Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Address AOOrov.0 a to �.pa Folm I Hauw.o a to 411hmala A<UOn Ca.. fr Coumn WN O<u :e.teau 00a n.. f t,�o 337 W A1­1 .a mim<tm or CAO C... • �,ua yr uaaa.vaav vvvru ova. v.a ACvw VA,_ MEMORANDUM ' Date: May 30, 1984 Yh ?_' "W s To: Cit Cwnei /l/ and City Manager - j 19.. From: D11 11 Planner C. ty SerVlge8 Department Subject: Award of Construction Contract to lowest responsible bidder, R&R General Contractors, for the addition to the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center Project. June 6 Agenda Item 6 -C Information The City Council, at their April 18 meeting, authorized the Community Services Department to solicit construction bids for the 3,600 square foot addition to the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood center. The project was advertised several time in both the Daily Report and the Green Sheet (Dodge Report). Twenty -two sets of plans and specifications were requested by interested contractors and on May 22, twelve (12) bids were received. of the twelve bids received, the base bid of $399,990, from RiR General Contractors, of Chino, California, was the lowest received. A list of the contractors submitting bide and their bids is attached. The bid package was structured in such a manner as to provide the most flexibility in awarding a construction contract. The bid proposal provided for a base bid item, which included the building and adjacent landscaping and four additive alternates. Alternative 1 was to provide an operable wall to divide the multi- purpose foom into two smaller areas; Alternate 2 was to provide new cabinetry in one of the Center's existing rooms; Alternate 3 was to add anti - qraffiti protection to the exterior of the buildine; and Alternate 4 was to paint the exterior of the existing building to match the exterior of the new addition. The bid amounts for the four additive alternates submitted by RsR General Contractors were as follows: Alternate 1 - $7,645 Alternate 2 - 7,159 Alternate 3 - 4,708 Alternate 4 - 9,482 $28,994 Combined with their Rase Bid, the total bid for the project by RSR General Contractors was $428,984. The construction estimate provided by Wolf`, tang and Christopher, the architectural consultants for the project, was $406,648. A difference of $22,036, or, 9.54. continued ... 338 page 2 memo 5/30/84 re: Award of Construction Bid, RCNC Expansion Project After reviewing the base bid and additive alternates, as wall as our project budgetary constraints, we believe the base bid plus additive alternates 7 and 2 should be awarded for a project cost of $414,794. We believe it would be difficult to obtain alternates 1 and 2 for much less than the prices bid. Alternates 3 and 4, however, should be able to be obtained for lees than the amount bid and can be implemented at a future time. Funds for the project are available from the Community Development Block Grant Fund in the amount of $407,599 for the base bid and additive alternate 1, The funds, in the amount of $7,159, necessary to award additive alternate 2 will be derived from the Recreation Enterprise Fund (REP). This is an appropriate use of these funds as the new cabinetry will be used to assist in promoting the user programs from which the REF is derived. Staff Comments: We are pleased with the bids received and with the lowest responsible bidder, R&R General Contractors. This contractor is a Federally approved contractor and has very good references. While most of their previous Work has been in the private sector, the contractor has constructed buildings for the cities of Norco and Ontario, with good results. Additionally, many of the subcontractors listed are of a known quality. The project consultant, Wolff, Lang and Christopher, has checked the • contractor's references and their project completion rate and recommend. that R&R General Contractors be awarded the project. Staff Recommendation That the City Council: 1. Accept the construction bids submitted for the addition to the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center; and 2. Award a construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder, R&R General Contractors for the base bid of $399,990, additive alternate 1 of $7,645 and additive alternate 2 of $7,159, for a total contract award price of $414,794. 339 r 3�i� List of Bidders Addition to the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center Project Bidding Contractor Base Bid R&R General Contractors $399,990 4590 Riverside Drive Chino, CA 91710 OMNI Builders $405,000 9581 Business Center Drive, Ste "E" Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 R.C.R. General Contractors $412,903 11625 Industry Avenue Fontana, CA 92335 Conquest Construction $414,984 1228 S. Walnut Avenue West Covina, CA 91790 Paul W. Crabtree $418,986 P.O. Box 7716 Riverside, CA 92513 Earle T. Casler, Inc. $421,700 1094 E. Ninth Street Upland, CA 91186 • L.E. Karger Co. $422,900 703 S. Glendora Avenue West Covina, CA 91790 W.D. Gott Construction $433,280 1956 W. 9th Street Upland, CA 91786 Pacific Southwest Construction $439,300 1544 Hazel Court Upland, CA 91786 Leonard E. So-.:h s Son $440,444 709 E. Sycamore Anaheim, CA 92805 M.R. Bracey Construction $443,636 646 W. California Street Ontario, CA 91761 Dale C. Eckert Corp $497,000 P.O. Box 4667 Riverside, CA 92514 r 3�i� AGREEMENT • THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 19 84 , by and between the CITY OF RANUrdTUCAMON MUNICIPAL CORPUM UN, hereinafter called City, and R R R GPnnnai not -w rtnra hereinafter called Contractor. WITNESSEill, that the parties hereto do mutually agree as follows: ARTICLE I: For and in consideration of the payments and agreement hereinafter mentioned to be made and performed by said City, said Contractor agrees with said City to perform and complete in a workmanlike manner all work required under the Contract Proposal titles: ADDITION TO THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER - 9791 ARROW HIGHWAY In accordance with the Specification and Drawings therefor, to furnish at his own expense all labor, materials, equipment, tools and services necessary therefor, except such materials, equipment, and services as may be stipulated in said Specifications to be furnished by said City, and to do everything required by this Agreement and the said Specifications and Drawings. ARTICLE II: For furnishing all said labor, materials, equipment, tools, and • services, furnishing and removing all plant, temporary structures, tools, and equipment, and doing everything required by this Agreement and the said Specifications and Drawings; also for all loss and damage arising out of the nature of the work aforesaid, or from the action of the elements, or from any unforeseen difficulties which may arise during the prosecution of the work until its acceptance by said City, and for all risks of every description connected with the work; also for all expenses resulting from the suspension or discontinuance of work, except as in the said Specifications are expressly stipulated to be borne by said City; and for completeing the work in accordance with the requirements of said Specifications and Drawings, said City will pay and said Contractor shall receive, in full compensation thereofore, the price(s) named in the above - mentioned Contract Proposal. ARTICLE III: The City hereby employs said Contractor to perform the work according to the terms of this Agrament for the above-mentioned price(s), and agrees to pay the same at the time, in the manner, and upon the conditions stipulated in the said Specifications; and the said parties for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, do hereby agree to the full performance of the covenants herein contained. ARTICLE IV: The Notice Inviting Bids, Proposal Information Required of Bidder, Certificate of Non - Discrimination by Contractors, Specifications, Drawings, and all addenda issued by the City with respect to the foregoing prior to the opening of bids, are hereby incoporated in and made part of this Agreement. • F -1 3VI IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this contract to be executed the day and year first above written. ATTEST: By: city clerk THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA BY: Mayor eral Con4L9 o ra or • By nat re) Ronald R. Rose Approved as to form By Partner (Title) Attest, f, BY`l:Cl .G9i���� J 1gn Ure) Sandra G. Calder dm'ni t'v ... ,t e F -2 3 � 1 E • CJ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 1984 - T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer SUBJECT: Designation of Foothill Freeway Interchange at Day Creek Blvd, and East Avenue The General Plan Circulation Element designates certain modifications to the interchanges with the Route 30 Freeway. The most significant modifications being the elimination of the interchange Etiwanda Avenue and the addition of interchanges at East Avenue and Day Creek Blvd, A recent development proposals on the north side of Highland Avenue between East and Etiwanda Avenues precipitated a preliminary feasibility study on the construction of an interchange at East Avenue. CalTrans completed that study and has verified that a conventional diamond interchange is workable. In order to allow their plans to officially reflect these changes, they have requested a formal resolution of the Council to make the modifications. RECOMMENDATION Recommend adoption of the resolution requesting revision and reaffirmation of interchange locations and freeway design features. Respectfully submitted, I 'LB jaa Attachments 343 1 s i - -% Gary_ . / d —_• — — — ' EXH(01 — A _- EAST AVENVF- . .,. • 3vy • RESOLUTION NO. 96- 96 -16Bft A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCOH CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DESIGNATION OF FREEWAY INTERCHANGE ON ROUTE, 30 AT DAY CREEK BLVD. AND EAST AVENUE WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California upon incorporation assumed jurisdiction of a portion of the designated future Route 30 Freeway from approximately Cucamonga Creek to Interstate 15; and WHEREAS, said portion of Route 30 was covered by Freeway Agreement by and between CalTrans and San Bernardino County designating proposed freeway interchange locations throughout the freeway segment; and WHEREAS, CalTrans is proceeding to protect rights -of -way in conformance with those past freeway agreements; and WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California through adoption of its General Plan Circulation Element has revised the location of said interchanges. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Rancho Cucamonga • requests CalTrans to prepare the necessary documents to revise the Route 30 interchange locations to provide for the following modification: n 1. Delete interchange location at Etiwanda Avenue. 2. Provide for interchange with East Avenue. 3. Add interchange at future alignment of Day Creek Boulevard approximately 4,000 feet west of Etiwanda Avenue. 4. All other interchange locations shall remain at the following: Carnelian Street, Archibald Avenue, Haven Avenue, Future Milliken Avenue. iy'y BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City requests the revision of existing plans and right -of -way protection to reflect a maximum depression of • Route 30 between Cucamonga and Deer Creek Channels and between Etiwanda and -east Avenues. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. A.ithelet, City Clerk jaa Jon D. Mi a s, Mayor aye 0 • 0 • \J CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: Members of the City Council and City Manager FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: BASE LINE MEDIAN DESIGN - Landscape and construction design concept for the ;a se Line median, east of Haven Avenue SUMMARY: The Planning Commission held a meeting on May 28, 1984 to consider the above- described item and recommended approval of the landscape and construction design concept subject to providing soil moisture tensiometers and simulated alluvial granite edging. Please find attached a copy of the Planning Commission Staff Report which fully describes this item. Pending City Council approval, staff would add the Goldenrain tree to the City's designated street tree list to promote a consistent landscaping theme along Base Line, including Terra Vista, Victoria and Etiwanda communities. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the landscape and construction design concept through minute action. Rewctfu Lly, submi tted; Rick dome z ,City Planner RG:ns Attachments: May 23, 1984 Planning Commission Staff Report 34 i 1977 0 • 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT 04 w�. r DATE: May 23, 1984 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: BASE LINE MEDIAN DESIGN I. BACKGROUND: In accordance with the Conditions of Approval, Lewis Homes has prepared landscaping construction plans for the Base Line median island, Exhibit "A ". Because of the importance of this median as a community design element, Staff is seeking Planning Commission review and consideration of the proposed design. II. ANALYSIS: The primary purpose of the median island is to control tra c along Base Line by prohibiting indiscriminate and haphazard turn movements. The General Plan encourages use of the median island as an urban design resource by designing it aesthetically through creative use of hardscape and landscape treatment. The landscaping adds aesthetic character that softens the impact of new development. The Community Design section of the General Plan specifically discusses the function and character of the median island. "When possible, median landscaping should be provided along major divided arterials. Such landscaping should be scaled according to the size of the roadway and the importance of the route. Major views from the roadway should be enhanced and emphasized by the landscaping. Plant materials should not obscure views." (Page 146) The parkway tree planting guidelines in the General Plan propose large columnar evergreens to reflect the rural history and image of the Eucalyptus windrows. The landscaping supplement for Terra Vista designates Eucalyptus camaldulensis (Red Gum) as the appropriate parkway tree. However, the General Plan made no specific recommendation as to the type or tree variety to be used in the median. The Terra Vista landscape supplement has established the following criteria: 3a? ITEM I PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Base Line Median Design Page 2 Median should be planted with distinctive trees that will lend identity, to the streets. To promote views of the mountains and other features, median trees should generally be deciduous. Ornamental flowering varieties are preferred, no larger than medium sized, so as to not overwhelm the street." Specifically, the Terra Vista landscape supplement proposes the Koelreuteria paniculata (Goldenrain tree) as the Base Line median tree to highlight views of the City's central park and the mountains without blocking them. The Goldenrain tree is a fairly small (20 to 35 feet), deciduous tree which is covered with spikes of bright yellow flowers in summer. The flowers are followed by buff colored seed pods, which ornament the tree well into the winter after the leaves fall. The Goldenrain's long deciduous period and open branching (particularly when intergrowth is pruned) make it a good choice for this excellent view location. • The proposed construction drawings indicated 15 gallon Goldenrain trees planted 20 feet on center, and underplanted with Oleander and Natal Plum shrubs. In addition, the median design is proposed to include the stamped concrete pattern resembling alluvial granite • stone which is also used along the Haven Avenue median. A conventional shrub spray head irrigation system is proposed. Staff recommends that soil moisture tensiometers be included, as required along Haven Avenue median, which measures moisture of soil to control adequate watering. Staff conducted a detailed analysis of 15 street trees suitable for this area and climate. Each tree was reviewed in terms of: (1) low maintenance, (2) moderate to fast growth rate, and (3) a tolerance for drought, heat, smog, and wind. Attached as Exhibit "C" is a list of trees meeting this criteria that would be aporooriate for median planting. The Goldenrain tree was not included because of its slow to moderate growth rate. However, the Goldenrain tree is particularly suited to this area in terms of cold, heat, drought, wind, and soil tolerance. Therefore, Staff has no objection to the Goldenrain tree being used as a median tree on Base Line Avenue. III. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Commission approve the propos� ea median concept subject to providing soil moisture tensiometers. Respectfully submitted: ~ ck Rick,,Goommez 1— City(Planner .3 Y9 • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Base Line Median Design Page 3 10 Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Landscaping Construction Plan Exhibit "C" - Tree List Exhibit "D" - Photograph of the Goldenrain tree ,a r, 0 M NC M .Ilf L M / !.. ��.LNN bNR IZ3tr t ' PRoft*efo At-a tJ ° ML YRy • a 0 0 MN OP O� C �• •. •T1ih NH" E O' O OPM MH a V P ,ii •`�.� i CC OP :� •: 1, i S C. � OP MAC. i Ho i S7Jr►� ,�iiz��� MFC MO t NqN.' N __ •�•. N/ "oo .N...t_ -w .NNNN , • OOMIRq _ _ SPECIAL LANDSCAPING TREATMENT DESCRIBED IN FOOTHILL GUIDELINES l l FIGURE IV-7 Landscape Plan 0 *0000 COLUMNAR TREES AT PERIMETER GREENWAY AND TRAIL •+e LOOP EFFECT ^ MAJOR GATEWAY ORNAMENTAL MEDIAN TREE ® LOOP —ARBOR EFFECT 1"'N SECONDARY GATEWAY 0000 COLUMNAR TREES FRAMING SPECIAL GATEWAY MOUNTAIN VIEWS INFORMAL PLANTING IN ^ CLUSTERS H ✓�\ \I STREET TREES VARYING �'' ko lon isoo WITH NEIGHBORHOOD ,N �� 1 o © NORTH CITY OF (TENI �A�UA1lG ACOflt.)• RANCHO CLCAMONGA TITLE: I- QCA77QN) more PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT; A SCALE 3%Y r��ean��n ^TMs Fee, L risl?,1Ln mi CaNV 5EE -r� r Ir1FPOV[a -RMr P"-+15. ,NORTH CITl Or ITEM: ! "'emu IJ Ct �L16DI RANCHO CLC- kNIO \GA TITLE+ L -IJD SCi C- R nl PLANNI \G DIVISION E \HUMT1 D _ SCALE: 3- ,�- 'EXHIBIT "C" TREES SUITABLE FOR MEDIANS Deciduous or Common Evergreen Name Botanical Name D E Italian Alder Silver Dollar Gum Corda to E Desert Gum Eucalyptus Po lyan thomos Semi - Jacaranda E. Rudis D Crape Myrtle Jacaranda Acutifolia E Flaxleaf Paperbark Lagerstroemia Indica E Pink Melaleuca Me la leuca Lina riifolia E Cajeput Tree M. Nesophila M. E E Chinese Plotinia Quinquenervia Photinia Serrulata D Canary Island Pine London Plane Tree Pinus Canariensis D Chinese Scholar Tree Platanus Acerfolia Sophora Japonica • • r 1 U 3S3 MOT "G" .. ^� .s - -� .. ., _ . ,�, 1i6 -'` `. � y ., �-� *� _- �-�� •P n !� �� .. '!:� -.� e`%j �tl t,� �;; � �� s. 4� `. .�• i �.R y ) 'i l P� ��. .Y� � r r, —, ,; ti `. a ; ��� �. �. _ ,, �v. _ �. �_ ,.. _� . 4� `. .�• i �.R y ) 'i l P� ��. .Y� � r r, —, ,; ti `. a ; ��� �. 0 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner SUBJECT: BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 1984 -85 On April 18, 1984 the City Council approved a funding allocation for Fiscal 84 -85 Block Grant Program in the amount of $479,000. This allocation was based on HUD estimates. However, staff has recently been notified by the Los Angeles HUD office that the City's final entitlement for Fiscal 84 -85 will be only $467,000 - a reduction of $12,000 from the original HUD estimate. The original allocation made by the City Council included $29,950 for contingency purposes, with the remainder allocated to specific programs. Consequently, the $12,000 reduction can come out of the contingency account with no direct effect on any of the projects or programs funded for next year. RECOMMENDATION: As a result of changes made by HUD to the City's Block Grant allocation, it is recommended that the City Council reduce the contingency amount set aside for Fiscal Year 84 -85 Block Grant Program by $12,000. A Resolution amending the program funding is attached for your consideration. Respectfully-submitted, Rick (Gog City Planner RG:OK:jr Attachment: Resolution 3z- S- RESOLUTION NO. 4&4 -WR 9"/ - I ') 3 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AMENDING PROGRAM FUNDING FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 1984 -85. WHEREAS, following a public hearing, the City Council has authorized Block Grant Program funding for Fiscal Year 1984 -85 in the amount of $479,000, as estimated by HUD; and WHEREAS, 526,950 were set aside for contingency purposes, with the rest allocated to specific programs; and WHEREAS, following the public hearing, the City has been notified by HUD that the final entitlement for Fiscal Year 1984 -85 will be only $467,000 which is $12,000 less than originally estimated; and, WHEREAS, it is not the intention of the City Council to change the funding allocations made to specific programs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby reduce the contingency amount set aside for Fiscal Year 1984 -85 Block by $12,000, resulting in the following allocation: Project/Program Amount % 1. Housing kehabilitation T- 661M T2:8>: • 2. Fair Housing Services 6,000 1.3% 3. North Town Park 150,000 32.1% 4. North Town Streets (Area II) 150,000 32.1% 5. North Town Streets (Area I) 15,000 3.2% 6. Local Costs /Program Implementation a. Future Projects 15,300 3.3% b. Administration 11,975 2.6% c. Programs Management 43,775 9.4% 7. Contingency 14 950 0 3.2% -Iu TOTAL PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: 10 Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk Jon 0. Mike s, Mayor 3sG 0 9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Y 1977 ABSTRACT: As part of the Block Grant application process for Fiscal Yea— r 1464 -85, the City is required to adopt a "Community Development Plan" prior to our application submittal. This report outlines the contents of such a plan, as prepared by staff and our CDBG consultant, based on past Council action, and recommends that the City Council adopt the Community Development Plan. BACKGROUND: On April 18, 1984, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the C08G program for Fiscal Year 1984 -85, and approved funding for a number of projects and programs. These included a City -wide housing rehabilitation program, fair housing services, and North Town park site and street improvements. Based on the Council's action, the final application for COBG funds has been completed for submittal to HUD. Included in this year's Block Grant regulations is the requirement that the City adopt a "Community Development Plan" prior to submittal of the application. According to the regulations, the Community Development Plan shall "summarize the Community development and housing needs of the applicant, its comprehensive strategy for meeting those needs, including those long and short term objectives, and the projects and activities planned for the next three years'. In addition, the new requirements call for the contents of the Community Development Plan to include the additional following information: 1. A description of the use of Block Grant funds during the 1982 and 1983 program years; and, 2. An assessment of the relationship of the use of funds to the Community Development objectives identified in the final plans for 1982 and 1983 program years, as well as to the national objectives. 3S? CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Adoption of Community Development Plan June 6, 1984 Page 2 \J RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN: Attached for your consideration and approval is a copy of the draft "Community Development Plan ". The plan meets the requirements mandated by HUD as to its content and format. The information contained in the plan has already been presented to the City Council on previous occasions and most recently during the Block Grant hearing, and is based entirely on the Council's action. For the most Dart, the Community Development Plan represents a compilation of previous Council actions, organized to be consistent with the required format. The plan is organized as follows: A. Summary of community development needs containing information from The City's adopted Housing Element and Housing Assistance Plan, as well as from the needs assessment approved by the Council during the Block Grant hearing. 8. Assessment of previous use of Block Grant funds containing information presented to the Council during the Block Grant hearing. C. Comorehensive strategy, outlining the objectives and programs already approved for funding. • 0. Th ree year project summary, identifying program areas for potential i•uture funding. It should be noted that the program areas outlined in the three year summary are not intended to be mandatory. Consequently, the Council may, at its discretion, add or delete program types in future program years. E. Relocation assistance policy, as adopted by the City Council on April . RECOMMENDATION: Based on the Council's past action, it is recommended that the attached Resolution approving the Community Development Plan as outlined in the report be adopted. Respectfully'submitted, Rick Gomez City Planner RG:OK:jr Attachments: Resolution of Approval • Community Development Plan 3-- P RESOLUTION NO. Abwee•BkCR R9— / ,7v A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING THE CITY'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga is an Entitlement Community under the regulations governing the Community Development Block Grant Progam; and ''WHEREAS, prior to submitting an application for Fiscal Year 1984 -85 Block Grant funds the City is required to adopt a Community Development Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the individual components of the Community Development Plan and found them consistent with previously adopted policies and documents. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESCLVEO, that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby adopt the City's Community Development Plan. . PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 1984. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk Jon D. Mikels, Mayor �c'i �gcA o MOtic f f III. Community o Development Z Plan c; 1977 III. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING PLAN • Section 570.304 of the Consolidated Community Development Block Grant Regulation (published August, 1980) states that the Community Development and Housing Plan "shall summarize the community development and housing needs of the applicant, its comprehensive strategy for meeting those needs, including its long -and short -term objectives, and the projects and activities planned for the next three years." These requirements remain applicable under the 1983 amendments to the CDBG regulations. In addition, the 1983 Amendments require that the content of the Community Development and Housing Plan contain the additional following information: ' A description of the use of CDBG Entitlement funds expended during Fiscal Year 1982 and 1983 program years; An assessment of the relationship of the use of funds to the community development objectives identified in the final plans for 1982 and 1983 and to the broad national objectives specified in the "maximum feasible priority" certification for those years. The following needs assessment and strategy statement for the City of Rancho Cucamonga focuses an the major problems related to the pockets of older development within the rapidly growing City. Between 1960 and 1980, the population of the City of Rancho Cucamonga grew by 410 percent (from 10,780 to 55,250 persons), However, most of the growth and public improvements occurred outside the older historic neighborhoods in Rancho Cucamonga. The primary • focus of the Community Development and Housing Plan is therefore the improvement of inadequate and substandard public improvements (streets, infrastructure, other public facilities) in conjunction with upgrading the City's housing stock concentrated within five identified target areas. These target areas are (see attached map): 1. North Town - east 2. Porch Town - vest 3. Southwest Cucamonga 4. Old Alta Loma 5. Foothill /Etiwanda City policy regarding use of CDBG program funds is to designate at least 51 percent of the entitlement funds each year for programs which directly benefit persons of low and moderate income. 11 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA i i, - 1 u ii i,1 . Nal�lpi Ne r _ • j,ly �. LL 1,IF u,1 +U,k7u; J_i_�, 4Fih a ejC_ ti (1 , dSlltl l{,,a.i c 7 pr_ . . C: � '-� ' 1 HIGHLAND AVE W' V +W 11:,;LIii c k! let '11.07 tl{.ry J7a' =� x 1 Iliiltt Uf! 'E!� i � 5 - I'm � —'--'� NlNOinv.l - - t ;µ� l�.l`Jy.1 1 i i • e � � �� .. r I � l II�� Ul7 iT'I � it � 1 i + �J. Rehabilitation Target Areas LKWND t North Town - east 2 North Town - west 3 Southwest Cucamonga 4 Old Alta Loma 5 Foothill /Etiwanda Rehabilitation Target Areas A. Summary of Community Development mad Housing Needs • A profile of the community describing population and income characteristics, as well as the economic condition of the community as a whole (based on 1980 Census data) is provided on the attached sheet. Information on the condition of the housing stock is provided in the Housing Assistance Plan (see Section V). 1. Housing There is a need to continue City efforts to improve existing housing stock that does not meet building or safety code requirements yet is basically sound and can„ with some improvement efforts, continue to serve the housing needs of the City. Substandard unite are not concentrated in one area but are scattered in a"11 neighborhoods throughout the City. There is also a need to continue City efforts to eliminate discrimination in the sale and rental of housing and to ensure that the rights of all parties are protected. The three-year Housing Assistance Plan and the one -year Housing Action Program (both attached) identify in tabular and narrative form the housing needs of the City. There are a total of 511 substandard units within the City (out of a total housing inventory of 17,034 units), of which 413 are suitable for rehabilitation. The total of minority households in substandard housing is 109; minority households requiring rental subsidies total 215, A substantial number of households headed by handicapped persons or single individuals with dependent children • are also in the City. The City's Housing Element of the General Plan notes that the City's housing stock is generally sound (due to the relatively recent build -out of much of the City); however, the .. . "deteriorating units in the older parts of the City will require ... immediate attention ". The Housing Element further identifies the expansion of lower priced housing units as a critical housing issue in the City (to accommodate the recent and projected growth) in addition to the problem of substandard units. 2. Neighborhood Revitalization There is a need for certain public improvements in older neighborhoods which have been targeted for rehabilitation assistance to prevent the spread of blight and deterioration, to eliminate the causes of blight, and to support the investment of public and private funds in rehabilitation. Specific areas of improvement include: ' North Town street improvements, including reconstruction of the roadway and construction of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and driveway aprons on the substandard streets; ' Southwest Cucamonga street improvements, including reconstruction of the street and construction of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and • driveway aprons on the substandard streets; S 31.14 COMMUNITY PROFILE City of Rancho Cucawaga Number 2 I. Population, Total 55,250 100.0 1) Sex ' Men 27,700 50.1 ' Women 27,550 49.9 2) Race ' White 48,613 87.9 ' Hispanic 9,017 16.3 ' Black 1,201 2.2 ' Other Minority 2,046 3.7 3) Employment • Employed 24,997 95.2 ' Unemployed 1,266 4.8 II. Families, Total 14,637 100.0 1) Lower Income 2,425 16.5 ' White 1,893 12.9 ' Hispanic 466 3.2 ' Black 13 0.1 ' Other Minority 53 0.4 2) Income Below Poverty Level 670 4,6 II1. Households, Total 16,989 100.0 1) Lower Income, Total 3,343 19.6 Source: 1980 Cenaus Data 6 304 s Old Alta Loma street improvements, including reconstruction 0f the • street and construction of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and driveway aprons on the substandard streets; e North Town Park, including acquisition and development of a neighborhood park in the North Town target area; ' Southwest Cucamonga Park, including acquisition and development of a neighborhood park in the Southwest Cucamonga target area; B. Description and Assessment of Dss of Previous CDEG Entitlement Funds 1. FY82 -83 In 1982 -83 the City received $360,000.00 which was allocated to the following programs: • Housing Rehabilitation Program: S 84,000.00 • Neighborhood Center Expansion: 81,000.00 • North Town Street Improvements: 120,000.00 (Center and Maxine Streets) • Contingency 17,387.00 • Local Costs of Program Implementation 57,613.00 The City's community development objectives for 1982 -83 included the • following: I. To develop a program capable of eliminating and preventing slums, blight, and conditions detrimental to health, safety, and public welfare that can aid in preserving housing stock for people of low and moderate income. II. Continue City efforts to eliminate conditions which are detrimental to health, safety, and public welfare, alleviate physical and economic distress through the stimulation of private investment and community revitalization and improve the quality of community services. III. To expand and improve the quantity and quality of community services, provide needed neighborhood and community facilities and reduce the isolation of senior citizens living within the City. The programs funded by the City for 1982 -83 are consistent with the City's objectives. The housing rehabilitation program directly meets the need addressed in Objective I; the North Town street improvements satisfy Objective 11; the neighborhood cancer expansion carries out Objective Ile. • 7 34r . The programs are also consistent with the broad national objectives specified in the "maximum feasible priority" certification. The housing rehabilitation program is intended to improve substandard housing, thus eliminating slums and blighting influence. Participation in the program is also limited to lover income households, or families with senior citizen or handicapped persons as heads of household. The neighborhood center expansion is targeted to senior citizens in the City. The street improvements will directly benefit residents of the North To" target area, a majority of whose residents are lower income. 2. FY 83 -84 In 1983 -84 the City received a total of $437,000.00 in Community Development Block Grant funds which were allocated as follows: ' Housing Rehabilitation Program $ 70,000.00 ' Neighborhood Center Expansion 297,000.00 Fair Housing Services 5,000.00 Contingency 5,000.00 ° Local Costs of Program Implementation 60,000.00 The City's community development objectives for 2983 -84 are similar to Objectives I and III from 1982 -83 and are as follows: I. To develop a program capable of eliminating and preventing slums, • blight, and conditions detrimental to health, safety, and public welfare chat can aid in preserving housing stock for people of low and moderate income. r 1 It. To expand and improve the quantity and quality of community services, provide needed neighborhood and community facilities and reduce the isolation of senior citizens living within the City. The Housing Rehabilitation and Neighborhood Center Expansion programs are consistent with Objectives I and II, respectively. The Fair Housing Services program serves to eliminate and prevent conditions detrimental to health, safety and public welfare as identified in Objective I. In terms of consistency with the national "maximum feasible priority" objective, refer to the discussion above regarding the 1982 -83 program. In addition, the Fair Housing Services program provides mediation services in landlord /tenant disputes. The resolution of such co:.flict benefits low and moderate income families. The project also provides information and affirmative support for state and federal Fair Housing Laws, consistent with Section 570.601(b) of the regulations. 2 6 (a C. Comprehensive Strategy /Statement of Community Objectives Based on past direction from City Council and the analysis of community needs involved in the preparation of the Community Development Plan, the following Comprehensive Strategy (including Statement of Community Objectives) was prepared. Programs proposed to achieve these objectives are listed under each objective. A detailed description of each project is contained in the attached project description sheets (see Section IV "Community Development Program "). Although the exact amount of the 1984 -85 grant is not known, it is estimated to be $479,000. The following statement of community objectives and programs reflects the priorities of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga established at a public hearing held for that purpose on April 18, 1984 (see Section VI). City policy regarding the CDBG program is to designate at least 51 percent of the entitlement funds each year for programs which directly benefit persons of low and moderate income. 1. HOUSING MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION (existing program) Needs Assessment Finding: There is a need to continue City efforts to improve existing housing stock that does not meet building or safety code requirements yet is basically sound and can, with some improvement efforts, continue to serve the housing needs of the City. Substandard units are not concentrated in one area but are scattered in smell neighborhoods throughout the City. Objective: To eliminate and prevent slums and blight and conditions detrimental to health, safety and public welfare while preserving the housing stock for people of low and moderate income. This is in direct compliance with the national objective of eliminating slums and blight. Only low and moderate income households are eligible for loans or grants, which is also in accord with the federal regulations. Programs: The existing Housing Rehabilitation Program offers below - market interest rate home loans to persons /families of low -or- moderate income and home improvement grants for minor projects to senior citizens and disabled or handicapped persons. Funded activities include: • Outreach /public information; • Home improvement loans; and • Home repair grants (senior citizen, disabled, handicapped persons). 40 • In 1982/87, $84,000.00 of the City's Block Grant was allocated for this program and $20,000.00 as expended. In 1987184 $70,000.00 was allocated and to :ate $70,100.00 has been expended (although another $20,000 is obligated). The need is clearly there and the funds have been expended as targeted, however, it has proven easier to qualify households for emergency repair grants than for below- market interest rate (BM(R) loans. This is because those households which need to have • major repair work done frequently do not have sufficient income or credit record to qualify for a bank loan, even with the City's subsidy. 3i.? • The City proposes to continue the Housing Rehabilitation Program because there in still a significant need for such a program. However, two changes are recommended to increase its effectiveness in terms of reaching those most in need: (a) Addition of deferred loans to the package of loan options. (Deferred loans are loans for which no payment of either principal or interest is required until the property is sold or changes hands.) This would enable the poorest homeowners to receive the assistance they require. (b) Expansion of the program to include low income households outside the five target areas which meet income, age and /or disability requirements. Priority will still be given to homeowners in the target areas, but other eligible households could participate if eligibility conditions are met. 2. FAIR HOUSING (existing program) Needs Assessment Finding: There is a need to continue City efforts to eliminate discrimination in the sale and rental of housing and to ensure that the rights of all parties are protected. Objective: To provide informs tion and affirmative support for the Fair • Housing laws of the state and federal governments, in support of the goal of ensuring that all residents have access to a decent home in a suitable living environment, and the requirement that the City affirmatively further fair housing (Section 570.601(b) of the regulations). Programs: Continuation of the contract for services with Inland Mediation whose programs include: • Outreach and public information; • Landlord /tenant mediation; and • Counseling on fair housing laws and rights. In 1982/83, Inland Mediation handled 145 cases from the City of Rancho Cucamonga, In 1983184, they will handle in excess of 160 cases, and for next year (1984/85) they project handling between 180 and 200 cases. The agency has two paid staff members and relies primarily on volunteers to provide vital information and counseling. The grant request is proportional - based on the percentage of their cases which are in Rancho Cucamonga (approximately eight percent). 3. COMMUNITY SERVICES (new programs) Needs Assessment Finding: There is a need to provide recreation facilities accessible to persons and families of low and moderate income throughout the community. IO 24. v Objective: To provide neighborhood parks and recreation facilities in • low and moderate income neighborhoods in order to support rehabilitation of those areas and in order to meet the needs of the residents. Creation of these centers for community activities will improve the living environment in the surrounding low and moderate income neighborhoods and support the prevention and elimination of blighting conditions, as required under the national priorities. Program: (a) North Town Park: acquisition and development of a neighborhood park in the North Town target area. This is a multi -year project with only site acquisition and planning funded in 1984 -85. The North Town area is predominantly low and moderate income. (b) Southwest Cucamonga Park: acquisition and development of a neighborhood park in the Southwest Cucamonga target area. This is a multi -year program; no funding is proposed in 1984/85. 4. STREET IMPROVEMENTS (new programs) Needs Assessment Finding: There is a need for certain public improvements in neighborhoods which have been targeted for rehabilitation assistance to prevent and eliminate blight and deterioration. These improvements would reinforce private efforts and eliminate hazards to public health and safety. • Obiective: To eliminate hazards to the public health and safety and provide street improvements in areas targeted for housing rehabilitation assistance. Priority in these improvements is being given to areas whose residents are predominantly low and moderate income and to repairs which will correct health and safety hazards, thus improving the living environment. These programs will further the national goals of eliminating slums and blight and primarily benefitting low and moderate income households. Programs: (a) North Town street improvements (Area 11), including reconstruction. of the street surface, and construction of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and driveway aprons on the west aide of Turner Avenue north of the railroad and on Main Street. This area is predominantly low and moderate income. The area is currently a pedestrian hazard and experiences flooding during heavy rains. 'S) North Town street improvements (Area 1) including reconstruction of the street and construction of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and driveway aprons on the following substandard streets: Acacia, Belmont, Cottage and Eighth. This area is predominantly low and moderate income. • 11 34.1 • (c) Southwest Cucamonga street improvements, including reconstruction of the street and construction of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and driveway aprons on the following streets: Rancheria, Via Carrillo, Placida Court, Avenida Vejas, Arrow, Ninth, Calaveros, Vinmar and Sierra Madre. No funding is proposed in 1984 -85. (d) Old Alta Loma street improvements including reconstruction of the street and construction of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and driveway aprons on the following streets: La Vine, LA Grande, Lomita, is Mesa, and Layton. No funding is proposed in 1984 -85. D. Three -Year Project Summary Based upon the comprehensive strategy outlined above, the City's three -year program for the CDBG program is summarized in the attached table. The table identifies, by program objective, the projects proposed for funding for fiscal year 1984 -85, and an estimate of the programs which may be implemented during the following two years. The estimated percentage breakdown of funding by objective is based upon past City experience with the Block Grant program (from 1982 -84). The programs and funding allocation for the years 1985 -87 are considered estimates and may be subject to change and /or addition. The Community Development Programs to be prepared by the City during the next two years will continue to pursue the primary objective of the CDBG program; however, new and /or innovative programs may be proposed in conjunction with the one -year programs which are not specifically identified in this three -year Community Development and Housing Plan. E. Relocation Asistance Policy None of the activities proposed for funding this year or anticipated in 1985 -87 would involve the displacement of residents or businesses. However, in the event that displacement should occur, provisions for relocation assistance will be made in conformance with the City's adopted Relocation Policy (attached) and the requirements of federal and State law. 12 310 Coammity Daneiap at Block Grant Progras 2. Fair gaging *Inland Mediation 'Continuation of Up co 2% 1984-8$ Program h. Comanity Services 'North Town Park 'Provision of additional Up to 7OZ toomaity services • 4. Street Improvements 'North Tarn Street 'Provision of additional Up to 40Z Improvements street improveants and public facilities *At least 51 percent of the funds in each you will be allocated to programs • uhich will directly benefit peraa w of for and alderate income. 13 37/ Bstirated % CWG Potential Pwding Community Development Proposed Ptogrm Allocation and Bmaing Obiectives 1984 -W 1985.87► (1985-07) 1. Rousing Maintenance 'Rousing Rehab 'Cmtination of Up to 25% and Rehabilitation 4 Repair Grant 1984 -85 Program Program 2. Fair gaging *Inland Mediation 'Continuation of Up co 2% 1984-8$ Program h. Comanity Services 'North Town Park 'Provision of additional Up to 7OZ toomaity services • 4. Street Improvements 'North Tarn Street 'Provision of additional Up to 40Z Improvements street improveants and public facilities *At least 51 percent of the funds in each you will be allocated to programs • uhich will directly benefit peraa w of for and alderate income. 13 37/ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RELOCATION ASSISTANCE POLICY FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM Recent changes in the regulations governing the expenditure of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds require that the City establish a policy governing the provision of relocation assistance to any family, individual, business, nonprofit organization or farm that results from implementation of its CDBG programs. It is the policy of the City to avoid displacement of all families, individuals, businesses, nonprofit organizations and farms in carrying out its CDBG programs. No displacement is expected to result from the activities proposed for the 1984 -85 fiscal year. However, in the event that operation of any of the CDBG funded programs results in the voluntary or involuntary displacement of any family, individual, business, nonprofit organization, or farm (whether owner or renter) the City will provide relocation assistance in accordance with the standards and guidelines set forth in the federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act and Section 7260 et.sea• of the • State of California Government Code (Title 25, Chapter 6) and the guidelines issued by the Commission of Housing and Community Development. The City will meet its relocation responsibilities through the use of its staff and consultants, supplemented by assistance from local realtors, social agencies, and civic organizations. 11 It is the City's objective that all displacees be relocated with a minimum of hardship in accommodations which are decent, safe, sanitary, and suitable to their individual needs; located in areas not less desirable than their current location in regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities, and reasonably accessible to their customers or places of employment; and priced within their financial means, The City anticipates no relocations, and will handle those which result from implementation of CDBG activities in an individual, case -by -case manner. Services provided to eligible displacees shall include but not be limited to: Providing information on project activities, rights, benefits, and options open to them. Maintaining liaison between displacees and agencies or firms with resources to assist them (e.g.. Chamber of Commerce, Small Business Administration, Office of Local Economic Development, lending institutions, realtors, etc.) 14 3i> ' Locating, inspecting, evaluating, or stimulating the production of accomodations to meet the needs of all displacees. Assisting displacees in obtaining financing. ' Assisting displaceea in securing priority consideration for Section 8, public housing, or other housing assistance programs. Making referrals to appropriate social, community, and welfare agencies. Assisting eligible displacees to prepare claims for all relocation assistance payments to which They are entitled. Keeping records, maintaining files, and coordinating all relocation activities. Providing all families, individuals, businessee, innti.tuticns, and farms which are displaced by CDBG- funded programs, with Britten not ,..ce of this policy, the types of service available to them, and tl,c amount of relocation assistance benefits for which they say be eligible. (Payments will be those established by State and Federal guidelines.) City staff and cosultants will be available to answer question., end provide information, and by their early involvement to see that relocation proceeds with a minimum of hardship. • • 15 373 JACQUELYN 9. HOLZ C.C.I.M. rn, r.[�ll♦ 9B2 BBOI w[�i, oll May 30, 1984 Mr. Rick Gomez City Planner City Hall Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Related File T.T. 12621 - Richwood for 7.85 acres located at the southwest corner of Arrow and Madrone. Dear Mr. Gomez: The owner of the above described parcel, J. Alvin Musser, et al, is out of state and his planned return has been delayed due to problems beyond his control. Mr. Musser and I are business associates and have been for many years. He has instructed me telephonically to prepare the following request as his authorized agent. Please withdraw the northern portion (described above) north of the Richwood Development, from the request for zone change to down zone said parcel from 8 -14 du's /acre to 4 -8 du's /acre. Thank you for your cooperation in this withdrawal of zone change. Sincerely, J Alvin Musser ay Jacquelyn B. Holz uthorized Agent smb /JBH INVESTORS REALTY SERVICE A34 NO SECOND AVE • UPLAND. CA 91199 Personalized Tax Service, Inc. 1453 West Foothill BoLdevord Upland, California 91786 (714) 981 -5661 rr.c...rr. r..ru.,+.. "' 1':'( c..r.rs.wr.. May 29, 1984 L r Jor t. Ma Lel Harp 9110 Carrari Ct. Alta Loma, Ca. 91701 In response to your request this letter will confirm that Personalized Tax Service, Inc, has prepared the bookkeeping and taxes ( both State and Federal ) for Lyndon and Mabel Harp for more than twenty years. During this entire tine the bird raising r, peration has never reported a profit. Sincerely, ward Cnit'eII rr Hor, Tract NO, 5.555, M. E3. 60 I.lare °, due %thv /lrLrrRLC_'i W,uD4 Prun�no�s Rr -tIe -trewe of LA,rs `_- .u2UeV l t�e -bL a LeL)e_Ls s46,z A1 /_ ` C.O�etd b, i -2 DLa's Louwee r7 38-40 20 21 - - -� - 22 23 > ° 24 25 3-' 1 is 5C N5-49 4o-+V4 3A-42 38 37/ 36 35 34 i 33 32 3i a eAPRARI „ v - - h '.. COURT G4 fn Gb. i. rl w .Z .. • ^ 9) N ^I I le • i Wi, n.l H Z o Q } E 39 =40 n Z 1J j- 41 i� 42. ti 43 44 h 45 9 CN .TH North Mt. View Aranue • San Idamardino, CA 82415 • (714) 383-2841 y Dinctw of IuMk Flawtw June 6, 1964 TO WHO? IT MAY CONCERN: On this date, at Mr. Lyndon Harp's request and in his presence, I made an inspection of his aviary located at his area of residence, 9110 Carrari Ct., Alta Loma. fly findinas are summarized as follows: 1. The aviary is located at the northeast rear portion of his Property, approximately 75 feet north of his residence and approx- imately 60 feet northwest of his nearest neighborts house. 2. The birds are in a totally enclosed building, 50 feet long and 24 feet wide. It has a tin roof In the middle and wooden louvres Placed longitudinally on each side of the roof close to the walls. Each louvre and the space between them and the tin roof is ''open'', i.e., made of wire for light and ventilation. There are 24 flights. 3. The walls are made of wood painted green on the west side and brown on the north and south sides. 4. The floors are part concrete and part dirt. 5. There are approximately 300 birds all of which are budgerigars except 6 diamond doves. They are all housed Inside this building. 6. All the birds appeared healthy except for one albino budgie which looked sick. 7. There was a good amount of feathers Inside the fIights.Mr. Harp attributed this to the fact that the birds are molting. 6. In general, the aviary is in good repair but in need of a thorough clean -up and disinfection. 9. Except for the usual hlrpings of the birds, no unusual noises were observed. Mr. Hip claimed that the birds are quiet at night except when disturbed. 10. The aviary itself is partially covered with foliage of fruit trees and ornamental plants. RECOMMENDATIONS: I. An aviary does not appear to be out of place in this area. One of the residents north of his property has a couple of horses. 2. If his request for a non - conforming use is approved by the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga, Mr. Harp must be made to comply with the following: Board of Suparvlaora RUBFHF fI +�,r,lt JOHN JOYNER F,rst Diawint DAVIDI MCKENNA Third Diath., "•' _ r,AI M,.EI WAIN Sernnd Obekr ROBERT TOWNSENn Fourth ObVkt ROBFRT I. HAMMOCK Fifth Dktricf MENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH 61 Norlb Mt, View Aw • San Bwnwdino, CA 92415 • (711) 3912947 aYM+ Page 2, Mr. Harp County of San Bernardino - % NEAUN CAVE SERVICES AGENCY I,. e"mtar of WUM waenn (a) Maintain the health of his birds so that they do not become a potential human health hazard. (b) Maintain his aviary in a clean and sanitary condition.A thorough clean -up and disinfection twice a week during the molting season and once a week at other times is recommended. Feathers, bird droppings, and teed wastes must not be allowed to accumulate. This will also minimize odors. (c) The building housing the birds need to be rennovated or improved so as to appear more "aesthetic". (d) Additional trees with good foliage to be planted around the aviary to help minimize the "noise" from the chirping, Mr. Harp was very cooperative during the inspection process and seemed open to suggestions. T..J«R JOSE V. TACAL, .,DV kVPH Senior Public Health Veterinarian Preventive Veterinary Services 1'1ee. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMUNITY DEVF' DPMFNT DEPT, JUN O 11984 PM q�9�W111 Il121�16�� , r�..,.i.ti.v ,ems "&- 7� Ile— Ace `�' Ae y °" V zo � o k tl V k U CITY OF VICK CUCAMONM COMMUNITY LAW 0MIRT DEPT. APR 25 1984 AM m ze� May 16, 1984 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Regular Meeting 1. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga met on Wednesday, May 16, 1984 in the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga. The meeting was called to order at 7:37 p.m. by Mayor Jon D. Mikels. Present were Councilmembers: Pamela J. Wright, Charles J. Buquet II, Richard M. Dahl, Jeffrey King, and Mayor Jon D. Mikels. Also present were: City Manager, Lauren M. Wasserman; City Attorney, Robert Dougherty; Community Development Director, Jack Lam; City Planner, Rick Gomez; City Engineer, Lloyd Hobbs; Finance Director, Harry Fmpey; and Community Services Director, Bill Holley. Approval of Minutes: April 4, 1984, April 18, 1984, May 2, 1984. MOTION: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Dahl to approve the minutes of April 4. Motion carried 3 -0 -0 -2 (Ring and Wright abstaining). MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Dahl to approve the Minutes of April 18 and May 2. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. 2. ANNOUNCEMENTS /PRESENTATIONS 2A. Thursday, May 17, 1984, 7:15 p.m. - PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE, Lions Park Community Center. 2B. Wednesday, May 23, 1984, 7:00 p.m. - PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, Lions Park Community Center. 2C. Tuesday, Hay 29, 1984, 7:30 p.m. - ADVISORY COMMISSION, Community Library meeting room. 2D. Presentation of 1984 Spring Clean Poster Contest Awards. Judges were: Shirley Dahl, Eva Kiedrowski, and Sue Sceranka. Three hundred and twenty five students submitted posters representing all the schools in the community. Senior Division Winners: First Place - Evi Aviram of Alta Was Junior High, $50 check. Second Place - Michelle McArdle, Alta Loma Junior High, $30 check. Third Place - Brian James, Etiwanda Intermediate School, $20 check. Junior Division Winners: First Place - Steven Sanderson, Deer Canyon Elementary, $50 check. Second Place - Ryan Hollien, Floyd Stork Elementary, $30 check. Third Place - Jason Medina, Alta Loma Elementary, $20 check. * * * * * a 3. CONSENT CALENDAR Councllmember King requested item F removed for discussion. Mayor Mikels requested Stem P removed for discussion. City Council Minutes Hay 16, 1984 Page 2 3A. Approval of Warrants, Register No's. 84 -05 -16 and Payroll ending 4/30/84 for the total amount of $419,623.54. 3B. Forward Claim against the City by Philip H. Perdue to the City Attorney and Insurance Carrier for handling. 3C. Approval of acceptance of Final T ict No. 12320 from Barclays -Terra for their project located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Victoria Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -125 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL MAP OF TRACT 12320 3D. Approval of acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement submitted by Hillside Community Church for CUP 82 -29, located at 5354 Haven Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -126 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM HILLSIDE COMMUNITY CHURCH FOR CUP 82 -29 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME 3E. Approval of acceptance of a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement submitted by Richard and Phyllis Newton for DR 83 -08, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Grove Avenue RESOLUTION NO. 84 -127 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM RICHARD AND PHYLLIS NEWTON FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 83 -08 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME 3F. Approval of acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement submitted by William and Dona Barnes for a single family residence at 12715 Summit, located west of Etiwanda Avenue. (Item removed for discussion) RESOLUTION NO. 84 -128 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM WILLIAM AND DONA BARNES AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME 3G. Release of Bonds; 4th Street Storm Drain - Located on the north side of 4th Street, 2300 feet west of Etiwanda Avenue; owner, Etiwanda Investment Company (Pic -N- Save). Release Labor 6 Material Bond $176,000 3H. Approval of a Storm Drain Easement Deed from Southern California Edison Company to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for 7th Street, west of Etiwanda Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -129 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A STORM DRAIN EASEMENT FROM SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY FOR 7TH STREET, WEST OF ETIWANDA AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO i City Council Minutes May 16, 1984 Page 3 3I. Approval of completed plans and specifications for the traffic signal at Carnelian Street and Lemon Avenue. Estimated cost is $60,000. It is recommended that the project be advertised for construction. 3J. Approval of adoption of criteria for Lending Agencies for the 1984 Residential Mortgage Revenue Bond Program to establish the criteria which all participating lending agencies must conform to in the proposed tortgage Bond Program. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -130 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CRITERIA FOR PARTICIPATION BY LENDERS IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOME MORTGAGE FINANCE PROGRAM 3R. Approval of final plans and specifications for the Bear Gulch Place, Arrow Route S Arrow Park grading improvements and authorization to advertise for construction bids. 3L. Set public hearing for June 6, 1984 to approve Development District Amendment 83-07, Archibald Associates, from Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac) to Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) for 4.5 acres of land located on Archibald Avenue, south of Victoria - APN 202 - 181 -15. 3M. Set public hearing for June 6, 1984 for Appeal of Planning Commission decision approving Tentative Tract 12532, Archibald Associates. 3N. Set public hearing for June 6, 1984 for Appeal of Planning Commission decision denying Conditional Use permit 84 -02, Harp. 30. Set public hearing for June 6, 1984 for consideration of Development Agreement between Lewis Homes and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 3P. Set public hearing for June 20, 1984 to form Landscape Maintenance District No. 5 for the open space area within Tract 11915-1, located at the northeast corner of Turner Avenue and 26th Street. (Item removed for discussion). RESOLUTION NO. 84 -131 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE FORMATION OF LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5, PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -132 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -133 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO FORM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 3Q. Bet public hearing for June 20, 1984 for Annual Assessment and preliminary approval of City Engineer's Annual Report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -134 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S ANNUAL REPORT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 City Council Minutes May 16, 1984 Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -135 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1984 -85 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972; AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO 3R. Set public hearing for June 20, 1984 for Annual Assessment and preliminary approval of City Engineer's Annual Report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 2 (Victoria). RESOLUTION NO. 84 -136 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER'S ANNUAL REPORT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -137 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1984 -85 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972; AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO 3S. Set public hearing for June 20, 1984 for Annual Assessment and preliminary approval of City Engineer's Report for Street Lighting Maintenance Districts No. 1, 2 and 3 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -138 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -139 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. I FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1984 -85 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972; AND OFFERING TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO RESOLUTION NO. 84 -140 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -141 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1984 -85 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972; AND OFFERING TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO City Council Minutes May 16, 1984 Page 5 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -142 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -143 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1984 -85 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972; AND OFFERING TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO MOTION: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Buquet to approve the Consent Calendar with the deletion of items F and P. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. DISCUSSION OF ITEM "F ": Approval of acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement submitted by William and Donna Barnes for a single family residence at 12715 Summit, located west of Etiwanda Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -128 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM WILLIAM AND DONA BARNES AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME. Mr. King expressed his concern was that the lien agreement had very few guidelines for the scope of the improvements. He felt that either the conditions of approval or the development code should be incorporated into the lien agreement in order to be more specific. Then when they sign the agreement, they would have some idea as to the entire scope of what is expected of them at a later time. He felt that at some point in the future there could be some Council discussion relative to making these lien agreements more specific. Mr. Dougherty stated that when dealing with individual property owners by law you cannot require the improvements to extend beyond the property unless you enter into a Reimbursement Agreement. The types of improvements are specified although quantities are difficult to prescribe now. He would be willing to work with Mr. Hobbs and Councilmember King in any way to tie this down to the extent he feels it is necessary. MOTION: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Wright to approve item "F ". Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. DISCUSSION OF ITEM "P ": Set public hearing for June 20, 1984 to form Landscape Maintenance District No. 5 for the open space area within Tract 11915 -1, located at the northeast corner of Turner Avenue and 26th Street. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -131 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE FORMATION OF LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5, PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972. City Council Minutes May 16, 1984 Page 6 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -132 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -133 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CAAIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO FORM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPE AMD LIGHTING ACT OF 1972. Mayor Mikels stated that it seemed like a small departure to have an Assessment District formed with the City doing the work itself on the internal portion of the District. Normally there are Home Owner Associations which carry the internal maintenance responsibility. Mr. Hubbs responded there was a small single family subdivision on Turner and 26th Street in the North Town area -- in this case it was not the typical planned unit development that had a number of amenities that would he maintained by a Home Owners Association. The only purpose for a Home Owners Association would have been maintenance of a rather small tot lot and its almost guaranteed given that little incentive to maintain a Home Owners Association, they would have abandoned the tot lot and would have become a nuicense and eye sore. We felt the best approach was to make it a part of the landscape maintenance district and charge it back to them so we could maintain the quality. MOTION: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Dahl to approve Item "P ". Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. RRR# #R # R R R R R 4. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 4A. FORMATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2 - It is recommended that City Council determine that the public necessity, health, safety and welfare require the formation of Underground Utility District No. 2 along Archibald Avenue from Church Street to Base Line Road and adopt the attached Resolution forming said District. Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. City Clerk Authelet read the title of Resolution No. 84 -144. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -144 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, FORMING UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2 ALONG ARCHIBALD AVENUE FROM CHURCH STREET TO BASE LINE ROAD MOTION; Moved by Dahl, seconded by Buquet to adopt Resolution No. 84 -144 and waive full reading. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. RRRRR (Mayor Mikels left the Council table for the following hearing. Mayor Pro Tom Richard Dahl chaired the hearing). 4B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 84 -01 - RICHWOOD - A Development District Amendment from Medium Residential (8 -14 du ac to Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac) for 16.3 acres of land, located on City Council Minutes May 16, 1984 Page 7 the south side of Arrow Highway, north side of 9th Street, between Baker Avenue and Madrone Avenue - APN 207 - 261 -02 and 07, 207 - 132 -01 through 37. Staff report by Rick Gomez, City Planner. ORDINANCE NO. 226 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 207 - 261 -02 AND 07, AND 207 - 132 -01 THROUGH 37, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ARROW HIGHWAY, NORTH SIDE OF 9TH STREET, BETWEEN BAKER AND MADRONE AVENUES FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8 -14 DU /AC) TO LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4 -8 DU /AC). Mayor Pro Tem Dahl opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing Council was: Alvin Musser who felt there are some problems which have developed between themselves and the city staff. He was asked to have the item continued for two weeks. There being no further public response, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Buquet to continue item to June 6, 1984. Motion carried 4 -0 -1 (Mikels absent). xxxxxx (Mayor Mikels returned to his seat and continued to chair the meeting). 4C. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING A TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11781 - ROBERTS GROUP - A total residential development of 76 condominiums on 6.4 acres of land In the Medium Residential District (4 -14 du /ac), located on the west side of Hermosa, approximately 330 feet north of 19th Street - APN 202 - 171 -29 6 38. Staff report by Rick Gomez, City Planner. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing Council was: Tom Winfield, attorney representing the Roberts Group. He questioned why this should be a public hearing since its normally a practice that if a developer was proceeding In good faith, extensions are given. He requested that they be granted an extension for the map. But the City has wanted to move in accordance with the New Development Code. They would be willing to sign the agreement they have worked up with our City Attorney. However, they were concerned that they were not being treated like others before them since there were other maps requesting extensions on the same Planning Commission agenda which were approved. Larry Lewis, 6739 Cambridge, Alta Loma, requested the area be put back to single family homes. Doug Hone, Hone and Associates, stated there were about fifty investors who were watching what Council would do this evening. There being no further public response, the public hearing was closed. Discussion followed by Council. MOTION: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Dahl to grant the appeal contingent upon the condition that the agreement be signed. Motion carried by following vote: AYES: Buquet, Mikels, Dahl NOES: Wright, Ring ABSENT: None xAAAAA City Council Minutes May 16, 1984 Page 8 4D. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -01 - WEST - The development of acoin- operated car wash on .45 acres of land in the General Commercial district, located on the southeast corner of Foothill and Helms - APN 208 - 261 -54. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for the Appellant to speak. Addressing Council was: Chris West, 518 W. 17th Street, Huntington Beach. He stated he had studied and reviewed the proposed project and changes which would be necessary to make the project desirable to the community. He needed two more weeks to accomplish his work; therefore, was requesting a continuance. Mayor Mikels polled the Council as to their feelings on this issue and whether or not they wanted to give Mr. West time for his appeal. MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Wright to continue the matter for two months. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for further public input. Forrest Perry, 9180 Orange Street, was against the car wash because it will be a 24 hour operation. There will be a safety problem. He was against the appeal and the continuance. Kathy Holden did not feel any opposition. She thought it was a good project. Bryan Harden, Manager of Woolworths Garden Center, felt that Helms was a residential street with a lot of children. Without a traffic signal, it would be hazardous. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Wright, Mikels, King NOES: Buquet, Dahl ABSENT: None Mr. Gomez stated that this item would not have to go back through the Planning Commission since they have already made their decision on the CUP. MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Wright to reconsider the original motion. MOTION: Moved by Dahl to uphold the Planning Commission's decision. For a lack of a second the motion died. MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Wright to uphold the Planning Commission's appeal and deny the CUP without prejudice and waive fees as it relates to him so he can resubmit within one year. Mr. West stated that if the appeal is denied, he hasn't even been heard on his appeal. Mr. Dougherty stated that we should open up the public hearing again on the question of the appeal. MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Wright to withdraw the motion prior to taking public hearing. RR # #A# Mayor Mikels called a recess at 10:00 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 10:15 p.m. with all members of Council and staff present). A #RAAR Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Buquet to uphold the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal. U City Council Minutes May 16, 1984 Page 9 MOTION: Moved by King to amend the motion that it be denied without prejudice and to give the appellant six months with waiver of fees and give him an opportunity from today to resubmit. Motion failed for lack of a second. MOTION: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Buquet to uphold the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. •xxxxx 4E. REVENUE SHARING - EPA 15 - Appropriation of Entitlement Period 15 of Revenue Sharing. Staff report by Lauren M. Wasserman, City Manager. Mr. Wasserman recommended that the Revenue Sharing go towards the Law Enforcement Contract. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. There being nor esponse, The public hearing was closed. MOTION: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Wright that the Revenue Sharing funds be allocated to the Sheriff's Contract. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. 5. NON- ADVERTISED HEARINGS 5A. STATUS REPORT OF ACQUISITION OF TRAINING LEVEE FOR FLOOD CONTROL PURPOSES R.C. LAND CO. - Construc[Son of Training Levee providing Flood Protection for Tracts 11974, 12044, 12045, and 12046. Approval is recommended of agreement with R.C. Land Co. to cover all costs involved in the condemnation of lands required for the construction of a flood protection training levee. Item was continued be consensus of the Council to June 6th meeting. No Items Submitted x x x x x x 6. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS x x x x x x 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS 7A, DISCUSSION ON ITEM REGARDING CITY COUNCIL INVOLVEMENT IN COMMUNITY - The City Council appointed a subcommitte to formulate suggestions and come back this meeting. Mr. King staed they had no firm recommendations for the Council. He suggested it be continued. Mayor Mikels stated it be continued to a time when he was ready to report. xxxxxx 7B. CONSIDERATION OF HISTORICAL COMMISSION VACANCY MOTION: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Wright to appoint Marsha Banks to fill the vacancy on the Historical Preservation Commission created by the resignation of Beverly White. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. xxxxxx 7C. DISCUSS PROCEDURE FOR FILLING VACANT PLANNING COMMISSION POSITION ACTION: Council concurred to receive applications or letters of intent by May City Council Minutes May 16, 1984 Page 10 30th. To include contacting those already on file. If they don't respond, their names will he dropped from the active file). Public interviews will be conducted on June 18th at 7:00 p.m. with appointments to be made on June 20th. 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Dahl to adjourn to a closed session, not to reconvene this evening. Council to reconvene on May 24 for a meeting to discuss city goals and services. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. Councilmember Wright suggested that a letter should be sent from the Mayor on behalf of the Council congratulating the Historical Preservation Commission on the successful Historical Tour which they organized. Council concurred. The meeting adjourned at 10:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beverly A. Authelet City Clerk 1 _ March 19, 1984 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES Special Joint Meeting CALL TO ORDER A special joint meeting of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga met on Monday, March 19, 1984 in the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Rase Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. by Mayor and Chairman Jon D. Mikels. Present were Councilmembers and Agency members: Charles J. Buquet II, Phillip D. Schlosser, James C. Frost, and Jon D. Mikels. x x x x x x 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2A. OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT 84 -I (OPA 84 -I) - Redevelopment Agency /City Council consideration of an owner participation agreement with "A Associates, (a California General Partnership in which Ernest W. Hahn, Inc., a California Corporation is the managing general partner) for the development of a regional shopping center located within the Rancho Redevelopment Project and is generally bounded by the Devote Freeway (I -15) and Victoria Loop to the east, Victoria Loop on the south, Day Creek Boulevard on the west and Miller Avenue on the north. Proposed OPA contemplates acquisition and sale of shopping center site. City Clerk /Secretary announced that pursuant to the appropriate sections of the California Community Redevelopment Law, notice has been duly given that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga have authorized a joint public hearing to consider the approval of Owner Participation Agreement 84 -I (OPA 84 -1). Notice of this hearing was published in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation, on March 9 and March 16, 1984. Mayor /Chairman Mikels announced that this is the time and place set for the joint public hearing of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on the proposed acquisition and sale of real property for regional shopping center purposes. At this hearing all persons who wish to speak for or against the proposed acquisition and sale will have an opportunity speak. Mayor /Chairman called upon staff members, Lauren Wasserman, Executive Director, and Jack Lam, Community Development Director, to present a summary of the participation agreement and the proposed acquisition and sale. Mayor /Chairman Mikels called upon Ernest W. Hahn for brief remarks with respect to the agreement or sale. He presented some slides showing some of Hahn's more recent projects. Mayor /Chairman Mikels declared the public hearing opened. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. CITY COUNCIL MOTION: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Schlosser to approve the Owner Participation Agreement 84 -1 and authorize sale of real property for regional shopping center development. Motion carried 4 -0 -I (Dahl absent). Joint City Council /RDA Minutes March 19, 1984 Page 2 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MOTION: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Frost to approve the Owner Participation Agreement 84 -1, authorize sale of real property for regional shopping center development, and authorize Chairman to sign agreement on behalf of the Redevelopment Agency. Motion carried 4 -0-1 (Dahl absent). * R R * * R 3. ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MOTION: Moved by Frost, seconded by Schlosser to adjourn the City Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously 4 -0 -1 (Dahl absent). xxxxx* (Mayor /Chairman MSkels called a recess. All members of the Agency present when the meeting reconvened) xxxxxx * * x x x x 4. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STAFF REPORTS 4A. PROPERTY ACQUISITION REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT- Consideration of a property acquisition reimbursement agreement with Foothill Associates to reimburse Agency for all costs associated with property acquisition relating to the Rancho Redevelopment Regional Shopping Center project. Jack Lam, Community Development Director, presented staff report. John Brown, legal counsel, stated that since the letter was furnished to us he recommended that the Agency entertain a motion authorizing execution of Letter of Reimbursement Agreement on behalf of the Redevelopment Agency. Chairman Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Frost to approve execution of the Letter of Reimbursement Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and Foothill Associates. Motion carried 4-0 -1 (Dahl absent). * * * *xR 43. TAE ALLOCATION BOND ISSUE NO. 84 -1 (TA 84 -1) - Consider authorization of a tax allocation bond issue in the amount of $7,750,000, a portion of which is designated for the Day Creek Flood Control Project and a portion of which is designated for the Rancho Redevelopment Regional Shopping Center Project. Staff report by Jack Lam, Community Development Director. John Brown, legal counsel, pointed out some changes -- on page 3 of Resolution RA83-01, Scott Sollers, the financial consultant, has suggested adding in subsection "e" the word, outstanding, so that reserve requirement would be defined to mean an amount equal to outstanding maximum annual debt service. On page 10 of the same Resolution - section 5 entitled, "Investment of Funds" that in the approval this evening we will be incorporating language into that section that will provide for a release of interest income free and clear of the bond issue indenture. Also, under the Notice of Sale a modification has been made to Incorporate a change to read: a premium of 2 1 /2S of the principal amount of bond redeemed beginning in 1991 and decreasing to 1 1 /2Z for each year thereafter; instead of: "and a premium of 1/2 of lx, but not to exceed 2 1 /2x . Secretary Wasserman read the title of Resolution RA84 -01. RESOLUTION RA84 -01 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $7,750,000 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT TAR ALLOCATION BONDS, 1984 SERIES A OF SAID AGENCY TO FINANCE A PORTION OF THE COST OF A REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT KNOWN AS THE RANCHO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT 9 1 Joint City Council /RDA Minutes March 19, 1984 Page 3 Chairman Mikela opened the meeting for public comment. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Moved by Frost, seconded by Buquet to adopt Resolution No. RA84 -01 and waive full reading. Motion carried 4 -0 -1 (Dahl absent). Secretary Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. RA84 -02. RESOLUTION NO. RA84 -02 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $7,750,000 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF RANCHO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TAR ALLOCATION BONDS, 1984 SERIES A Chairman Mikels opened the meeting for public input. There being none, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Frost to adopt Resolution No. RA84 -02 and waive full reading. Motion carried 4 -0 -1 (Dahl absent). * * * * * * 5. PUBLIC HEARING 5A. BUDGET MODIFICATION - Consideration of Redevelopment Agency Budget Modifications necessary for Agency implementation of Owner Participation Agreement No. 84 -1. Staff report by Jack Lam, Community Development Director. Chairman Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Moved by Frost, seconded by Schlosser to approve the budget modifications as presented by staff. Motion carried 4 -0-1 (Dahl absent). 6. ADJOURNMENT OF REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING MOTION: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Schlosser to adjourn. Motion carried 4 -0 -1 (Dahl absent). The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beverly A. Authelet Assistant Secretary PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: I. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME ADDRESS _i awry •aM,k <V, r ly J, t t •. r (UC 9rA JNl/R Vol. PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council Positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME ADDRESS �iwu.+ J flAev_ PIPY I1Q K� c' i 7_hL.LEL �w /Lsrn � Hu Hme:/' Y. 10Yin nn /C &* ,& r. Finr k h PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system o£ choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6, The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME fie rr_ti �Ow tr2� dl,,�'fi1/y L) a L Fb /i. 0,40o u d 7, .. 1 ADDRESS q� u!/'e n i z ,L. JGC �jt [emnycv 9, >10 1t /fo Y17 i4NOAl �1 *C1 A'h0.i G u3h— lif, A')91J71 —yip PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of- choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME • ., , 0 •.cam --_ ;� _.,,.... , � ADDRESS ess�� r PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. t 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Cc ncilpersons choose 'from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE 'i/Jirnnu �.ol/ PRINT NAME C(fit ec E-S Kru c N �Y �7AnlP/ rep /Tir trr J-Jr r ADDRESS v 7277 YJ ."l�21lffL'J... yd/!all, PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor shouid be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME ADDRESS 1 _ l.tnyn / KC /i Ti nrn Tflr k � Y ., IQ. Pnu k G'ezietiA �iyueov'.rr �nhi 11n�{u n ^it�l- i�ern�cy M AIV i 07- %L)fli.fct��E,o LF,C YPito� /GF.c�F %�ar�/fS a PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility. of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME ADDRESS c c-- 77y Laois P�cSaiotL< QIk,h PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: I. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME ADDRESS ,,,,1-:; l Li Mll« C�nJAR i> s ��RA,JRa �= I��✓�I,��S 11JS �,E LL .t. MmFr. '�-4 c✓ "t'c, 7 i)4,1 )X'/ f� "ii/J" /.Par.lmm� rl/ �1 M41 PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1966. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE ,( PRI++N''T NAME COC CS.ty sr, -'SOW, 11✓�1 �� /YJi3° ��%/r R.i ADDRESS a�uJ« A/e 7-i ). CO c 1. �t r L_-z3 4sx✓L f`'1r PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. PRINT NAME 1 Ol4n�' i. c 0 LL (i Gar.�eT ( AAm - t?1,�.� -A-��` ADDRESS I PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of 'choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME elan M -84 ,l,n a n FROM Trent rj,t,ert" I/;�kg /am „(,„ Karen os, ADDRESS )( o/ &,97 Ailal,- ti mlivy 72 37 .(u.v C. d hem. 71901 c .,ten —° 0 4252 9iib PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose "from among themselves, allows for the Possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rs.:cho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGN RE PRINT NAME n, VJ � ADDRESS 9/71a ? /W( PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of. choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE ENT NAME wa y vane J— � —AA r. 'n ,a Ax L s ii: an r yd _ ZIA,_ r..iPr ADDRESS l.Y PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. ~We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME 'Wo �.jaM�S /�1. +I.oCICt.Q_ .LaUouq �wiN� HJ8eeapa��a dl avJreh ADDRESS PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the 'voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to tine people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME ADDRESS 7 FUEL AV AR 5641 Laura L. F /crkt� Cl�rrivn) PC /lkcller D,1✓) D FLoaeAw PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of. choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. 1 /7 .r PRINT NAME J/)M -S, Ei; z P4 A. (3ar It n.x. S Die —Tun rez (rn.n,��> �l eF lrrr �ntd ADDRESS 0► 91,16/ PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME ADDRESS w . ✓17 C'TI . T �NNf� M. NF�au�ir A� r PAM- eLAFt.DD QPLF- (iY yr ro/ PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our city. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. Tha mayor reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of . choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from amont themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (a[.d responsive) cu the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. Signature Print Name Address {�•C 3� m J CNCaMU.r+ A , .• S1 '� "11111 [ 1 r•.7 d Den. C �.i 2e. O�Ca r / /.r ✓.. fl.. n n �Cy %L f, AOcTAl✓ c►. ! 0V J. 4 9s 3/ tdAl2 -A, dl uL PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for • four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose "from among themselves, allows for the Possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" System our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME ADDRESS i I / 1; 12%275 L / e, PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 7. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which my not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Ranchu Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather chap to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME C'7�K' %)ail I- ,4141A yNngVLi., �nvncrn,. �d /� 7hi /p NJ ADDRESS N 2 ` 1 Vv Jf fT J' ✓cm.r .W.a� a r4 ,C.• m � Ar G /1uf PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our city. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. Th° --JS r roasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from amont themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. Signature Print Name Address %b�Bi2EU ST pree, Z/sh 'Gf', 5003 f�.¢an.sr �_ PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our city. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from amont themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. Name i AAA ---- L, PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME ADDRESS G - r Jim 11�bb o. MAaI��AI J�.ca-�•�Nlry We, the undersigned ftwwsM.°e^ of4 Rancho Cucamonga,, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance whiph would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by, public gj,9c ion for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Councill election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. P 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SIGNATURE PRINT NAME ADDRESS 70 9 xeaajj�e 54 APl Q. 47D 175 (VA 1t ;,_ PETITION We, the undersigned residents of Rancho Cucamonga, support the concept of an ELECTED MAYOR for our City. We hereby petition the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga to institute proceedings for the establishment of an ordinance which would provide that the Office of Mayor be filled by public election for a four (4) year term, starting with the next City Council election in 1986. There would be no increase in the size of Council - one (1) Mayor, four (4) Council positions. The major reasons we support the public election of the Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows: 1. Election of the Mayor by the voters of Rancho Cucamonga would be much more democratic, as well as providing for more direct citizen participation in City government. f 2. Other local cities (Claremont, Chino, Formana, Montclair, Ontario, and upland) hold public election for their Mayors. 3. The present system of choice of Mayor, where the five (5) Councilpersons choose from among themselves, allows for the possibility of "deals" and "tradeoffs" being made, which may not be in the best interest of the City as a whole. 4. Public election would eliminate one use of the "secret ballot" system our City Council now uses to fill appointed positions. 5. The Mayor of Rancho Cucamonga is the symbolic head of our City, and should be chosen directly by the voters to represent the City as a whole. 6. The Mayor should be responsible (and responsive) to the people, rather than to a few members of the City Council. We strongly urge the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to act on this Petition. SICN�TURE i PRINT NAME �(L� (Al Writ ADDRESS F'