HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984/07/05 - Agenda PacketZM7--,
1977
CrrY OF
RANCHO C11CAA4oWA
CITY COUNCIL
AGENEA
Lions Park Community Center
9161 Base Line Road
Rancho Cucamonga, California
Thursday, July 5, 1984 - 7:30 p.m.
All items submitted for the City Council Agenda must be in writing. The
deadline for submitting these items is 5:00 p.m. on the Wednesday prior to the
meeting. The City Clerk's Office receives all such items.
1. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance to Flag.
B. Roll Call: Wright , Bu9uet Mikels
_
Dahl , and King _.
C. Approval of Minutes: May 24, 1984
2. ANNOUNCEMENTS /PRESENTATIONS �— C
A. July 5, 1984 - 7:00 p.m. - HISTORICAL PRESERVATION
COMMISSION - Lions Park Community Center
B. July 11, 1984 - 7:00 p.m. - PLANNING COMMISSION - Lines
Park Community Center
C. July 19, 1984 - 7:30 p.m. - PARK DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
- Lions Park Community Center
D. July 26, 1984 - 7:30 p.m. - CITIZENS ADVISORY
COMMISSION - Library Conference Room
E. July 26, 1984 - 7:00 p.m. - ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL
MEETING ON CATV - Lions Park Community Center
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.
City Council Agenda
-2-
A. Forward Claim No. CL84 -14 by James Lawrence Deason to
City Attorney and Insurance Carrier for handling.
Accident on May 9, 1984 at intersection of Archibald
G. Approval of a Lien Agreement for Mr. and Mrs. Jensen at
9460 La Grande to postpone construction of street
improvements.
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -193
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A
REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN
AGREEMENT FROM MR. AND MRS. JENSEN AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN
THE SAME.
July 7, 1984
1
4
6
27
39
40
41
46
47
Avenue and 4th Street.
B.
Approval to renew Annual Street Sweeping Contract with
a 4.18 increase with R. F. Dickson, the current
contract sweeper.
C.
Approval to renew Annual Concrete Repair Contract with
a 10% increase with J. H. Concrete.
D.
Approval to extend Annual Supplementary and Emergency
Contrast with Laird Construction Company.
E.
Release of Bonds:
Tract 9539 - located on the Nest Side of Sapphire,
south of Hillside.
Monumentation Bonds $2,500
CUP 8Z -01 - located on 7th Street and 4th Street, west
of Etiwanda Avenue.
Faithful Performance Bond (4th St.) $25,000
Faithful Performance Bond (7th St.) $18,000
F.
Approval to accept a Quitclaim Deed from the County of
San Bernardino to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for a
parcel of land on the north side of Eighth Street, west
of Baker Avenue.
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -192
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
QUITCLAIM DEED FROM THE COUNTY OF SAN
BERNARDINO TO THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA.
G. Approval of a Lien Agreement for Mr. and Mrs. Jensen at
9460 La Grande to postpone construction of street
improvements.
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -193
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A
REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN
AGREEMENT FROM MR. AND MRS. JENSEN AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN
THE SAME.
July 7, 1984
1
4
6
27
39
40
41
46
47
City Council Agenda -3- July 7, 1984
H. Approval of Parcel Map 8298, bonds, and agreement 51
submitted by Morris and Searles.
RESOLUTION NO. B4 -194 52
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
PARCEL MAP NUMBER 8298, (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
NO. 8298), IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, ANO
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY.
I. Approval of Contract between the City of Rancho 59
Cucamonga and Malden Dahl Maintenance for building
maintenance serevices at Lions Park Community Center
and City Offices.
J. Approval of Intent to annex Tracts 11934, 12044, 12045, 65
and 12046 as Annexation No. 5 to Street Light
Maintenance District No. 1, and setting public hearing
date for August 1, 1984.
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -195 66
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S
REPORT FOR ANNEXATION NO. 5 TO STREET
LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1.
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -196 71
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING
ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION TO
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1,
AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID
ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION NO. 5 TO STREET
LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1; PURSUANT
TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972
AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING
OBJECTIONS THERETO.
OX Set Public Hearing date of July 18, 1984 - Revisions of
the General Plan Housing Element - In accordance with
Article 10.6, Section 65580 of the California
Government Code.
City Council Agenda -4- July 7, 1984
4. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS
AMENDMENT 83 -07 — ARCHIBALD ASSOCIATES - A Development
District An n ram Kedium ResWntial (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. (Item schedule: June 6, June 20).
ORDINANCE NO. 228 (second reading)
77
AN ORDINANCE 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 OU /AC).
B. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING
78
BATES (ASHWILL/HAWIHST - A development of two
office/industrial bu ngs totaling 29,184 square feet
on 2.09 acres of land in the Industrial Park District
(Subarea 6) located on the southeast corner of Haven
Avenue and 7th Street - ARM 209 - 411 -01.
• C. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING A TIME
79
EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 82-20 - 99ARRX--
Based upon non -camp ance with e con ons of
approval, the Planning Commission took no action to
extend the expiration date for the Conditional Use
Pennit for the development of a 3,691 square foot
elementary school and two temporary trailers on 3/4
acres of land located at 9113 Foothill Boulevard - APN
208- 241 -09.
S. NON- ADVERTISED HEARINGS
A. ESTABLISHING A PARK DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION - (Item
schedule: Kay 2, Ju-n-F-M.
ORDINANCE NO. 225 (second reading) 103
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A PARK DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION TO ACT IN AN ADVISORY CAPACITY TO
THE CITY COUNCIL ON MATTERS PERTAINING TO
PARK AND RECREATION FACILITY DEVELOPMENT
WITHIN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA.
I
City Council Agenda -5- July 7, 1984
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -124 105
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHG CUCMIONGA, CALIFORNIA, SETTING
SCHEDULE FOR REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE PARK
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION.
6. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS
A. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO ADDRESS COUNCIL BY MR. 106
concern regarding building ees or
ere u ng of property located at 6318 East Avenue,
Etiwanda.
B. REQUEST BY WILLIAM COMPANY FOR CITY TO INITIAL 109
C. CERTIFICATION OF DAY CREEK MELLO -ROOS ELECTION RESULTS 112
RESOLUTION N0. 84 -197
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECITING THE FACT OF
THE MAIL ELECTION HELD IN SAID CITY OF RANCHO
• CUCAMONGA ON THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 1984, DECLARING
THE RESULT THEREOF
7. COUNCIL BUSINESS
A. CONSIDERATION OF AN ELECTED MAYOR 113
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -198 114
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SAN
BERNARDINO TO CONSOLIDATE A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 6, 1984,
WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE
HELD ON NOVEMBER 6, 1984, PURSUANT TO SECTION
23302 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE.
City Council Agenda -6- July 7, 1984
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -199 116
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO "CUCAMONGII, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND
GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A SPECIAL
MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN SAID CITY ON
TUESDAY, THE SIXTH" (6TH) DAY OF NOVEMBER,
1984, SUBMITTING QUESTIONS TO THE ELECTORS OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
CONCERNING WHETHER THE ELECTORS SHALL
THEREAFTER ELECT A MAYOR AND FOUR CITY
COUNCILPERSONS, AND WHETHER THE MAY SHALL
SERVE A TWO YEAR OR FOUR YEAR TERM
B. DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED LOCATION OF PRISON IN 128
GLEN HELEN AREA
C. GIFT OF SIX ACRES OF PARK LAND
8. ADJOURNMENT
E
E
.r
j
u
RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
BUDGET SUMMARY
1984 - 1985
n
U
2
JUNE 22, 1984
RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
SUMMARY ANALYSIS OF FUNDS - 1984 -85
$27,598,500 less:
2,000,000 Escrowed Housing Bond
5,461,056 Escrowed OPA, TA Bond + Interest
193,000 Fire Protection Fund
80,000 Sewer /Water Fund
394,000 Affordable Housing Fund
$19,470,444
2This is an estimate of total tax increment including other taxing agency agreements.
See Mortgage Revenue Bond budget explanation detail.
3See Regional Facility budget explanation detail.
4See OPA 84 -1 budget explanation detail.
5See Redevelopment budget explanation detail.
1 fund balances and City Revolving Loan (to ins�debt coverage for receipt of increment) •
11 be incorporated when books are closed for th scal year.
ESTIMATED
ESTIMATED
REVENUE
EXPENDITURES
_1984 -85
TRANSFER IN
TRANSFER OUT
1984 -85
Tax Increment)
E 1,955,000
E -0-
$ 1,955,000
E -0-
Mortgage Revenue Bands (SB -99)2
20,000,000
-0-
5,000
17,995,000
Regional Facilities3
(Flood Control)
-0-
660,000
-0-
660,000
Tax Allocation Bonds
(TA 84 -1)
5,643,500
-0-
578,500
-0-
Owner Participation
Agreements 84
(OPA -1)4
-0-
446,056
-0-
50,000
Fire Protection
-0-
203,000
10,000
-0-
Sewer and Water Facility
-0-
85,000
5,000
-0-
Non- Reclaimable Waste
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
Affordable Housing
-0-
394,000
-0-
-0-
Redevelopment5
-0-
765,444
_ -0-
765,444
$27,598,500'
$2,553,500
$ 2,553,500
$19,470,4446
$27,598,500 less:
2,000,000 Escrowed Housing Bond
5,461,056 Escrowed OPA, TA Bond + Interest
193,000 Fire Protection Fund
80,000 Sewer /Water Fund
394,000 Affordable Housing Fund
$19,470,444
2This is an estimate of total tax increment including other taxing agency agreements.
See Mortgage Revenue Bond budget explanation detail.
3See Regional Facility budget explanation detail.
4See OPA 84 -1 budget explanation detail.
5See Redevelopment budget explanation detail.
1 fund balances and City Revolving Loan (to ins�debt coverage for receipt of increment) •
11 be incorporated when books are closed for th scal year.
• MORTGAGE REVENUE BOND PROGRAM (SB -99)
Budget Detail
n
L A
n
U
Initiated in 1983, the Redevelopment Agency sold $36,200,000 of single
family mortgage revenue bonds. The originating period for these
mortgages is 3 years. With the start of sales for the participant
development firms, these mortgages should be fully originated well
within this period. Of the original $36,200,000, approximately
$20,000,000 remain, the majority of which are attributable to the two
planned communities.
2 _
REGIONAL FACILITIES
Budget Detail
Under agreement with the County of San Bernardino, increment monies
received in this account -are to be used for regional facilities, more
particularly, the Day Creek Flood Control project. To date, the Day
Creek design study has been completed and a concept plan has been
accepted by the Agencies having interest in the channel. A contract
with County Flood Control has been established for assistance in
coordinating the jurisdictional areas of project implementation. A
proposed Mello -Roos formation vote has been scheduled for June 26, 1984
in both Ontario and Rancho Cucamonga as an effort to provide funding for
the permanent improvements. The program contemplates increment pledge
agreements in both cities to assist in Mello -Roos support. In pril
1984, the Agency sold tax allocation bonds which netted $3.1 million to
help with final design of the Day Creek facility and provide funding for
the Day Creek Debris Basin located north of the City. The majority of
tax allocation bonds will be held in account until the beginning of the
next fiscal year to be utilized for construction.
Revenue Estimate:
Estimated Expenditures:
Debt Service
Legal Service District
Flood Control Contract
Professional Services (Design)
$660,0001
$339,099
20,000
65,000
235,901
Total $660,000
IA11 fund balances from 1983 -84 will remain in this account.
- 3 -
0
E
•
0
OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
(OPA 84 -1)
Budget Detail
Under OPA 84 -1 the Redevelopment Agency obligations are to provide an
approximate $9.5 million investment in the Regional Shopping Center. A
$2.25 million initial obligation has already been met with Tax
Allocation Bond Issue 84 -1 which leaves a $7.25 million obligation
remaining beginning in 1986. This amount is planned to be financed by a
combination of escrowed fund balances, accumulated interest and a new
tax allocation bond issue. Therefore, interest from escrowed bond
monies and RDA fund balances are transferred into the OPA 84 -i
account. Given projections of increment and fund balances as well as
planned interest, the Redevelopment Agency obligation financing will be
met by 1986.
Currently Hahn and RDA obligations are on schedule and no obstacles are
foreseen at this time. The site has been 100 percent acquired and the
Center use permit and environmental assessment process is proceeding for
late Fall completion.
Estimated Revenue 5446,056
Estimated Expenditures
Legal Services 15,000
Professional Services 35,000
- 4 - I1
REDEVELOPMENT FUND
Budget Detail
The Redevelopment Fund is that portion of the increment directly
attributable to the RDA and is the resource from which RDA projects are
accomplished. The RDA commitment is to OPA 84 -1, the Regional Shopping
Center. Debt service on TA 84 -1 will substantially account for the
increment received, since maximum leverage was accomplished by the bond
issue. In fact, TA 84 -1 was structured so that a portion of escrowed
fund interest and reserve account interest is pledged to support
operations of the Agency. Otherwise, the Agency could not operate.
This account also receives transfer from administrative portions of
project accounts, i.e., fund maintenance, mortgage revenue bonds, etc.
Project maintenance as well as accounting has resulted in strains in
City program maintenance since City staff has provided support for the
RDA. This year, it is recommended that RDA projects begin transitioning
to RDA staff. This transition is to be accomplished at less than last
year's increment transfer to the General Fund because of bond issue
structure and offsetting administrative accounting, thus maximizing
project funds for the Regional Center yet providing funding for RDA
staffing. Note also that Data Management is the second year of the
multi -year program authorized last year.
•
1983 -84 1984 -85 •
Estimated Revenues: 4765,4441
Estimated Expenditures:
Debt Service 0 5455,044
Sal axles
ity 3eriices to
2Agency
and RDA Staffing
S167,000
150,000
Onera" ons
Financia l udit
5,000
71000
Printing /Publications
16,000
15,000
Office S•mpli =_s
5,000
5,000
Travel "leet'nis
3,000
5,000
Dues
1, ^,00
1,500
Sub -total
S 33,JOJ
S 33,500
1All `md b3'an.ces from 1933 -34 will be transferred to the
Regional Snooping Center project.
2Add: 1 Sr. Redevelopment Analyst .
1 Sr. Redevelopment Account Clerk
1/2 Clerk Typist
5-
0
•
h
1983 -84 1984 -85
Contract Services
Lega ervices
E 36,000 S 30,000
Professional Services
45,000 25,000
Sub -total
S 81,000 S 55,000
Ca ital Im roveent Projects
En
- o oothi change
M
15,000
(Professional Services)
Capital Outlay
ata Management
35,000
Word Processing Equipment
17,000
Desk /Chair /Equipment
4,500
Dictaphones
400
Sub -total
E 56,000
Grand Total
$765,444
- 6 -
Reallocation
a a ,anagement* $ 28,000
"First year (1983 -84) program must be reallocates instead
of encumbered since RFP process cannot be completed prior
to July 1, :984. 1st S 2nd year phase will be combined.
0
•
n
U
1983 -84
1984 -85
Contract Services
legal Services
$ 36,000
$ 30,000
Professional Services
45,000
25,000
Sub -total
$ 81,000
$ 55,000
Ca ital Im rovement Projects
ootht nterchange
15,000
(Professional Services)
Capital Outlay
Data gent
35,000
Word Processing Equipment
17,000
Desk /Chair /Equipment
4,500
Dictaphones
400
Sub -total
$ 56,000
Grand Total
$765,444
Reallocation
a a ,anagement* $ 28,000
"First year (1983 -84) program must be reallocates instead
of encumbered since RFP process cannot be completed prior
to July 1, :984. 1st S 2nd year phase will be combined.
0
•
n
U
,k.
May 24, 1984
•
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting
1. CALL TO ORDER
An adjourned meting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was
held in the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road on Thursday, May
24, 1984. The meeting was called to order at 6:18 p.m. by Mayor Jon D. Mikels.
Present were: Cuuncilmembers Panel* J. Wright, Charles J. Buquet II, Richard
M. Dahl, Jeffrey King, and Mayor Jon D. Mikels. Councilman Buquet arrived at
6:47 p.m.
Also present were: City Manager, Lauren M. Wasserman; City Attorney, Robert
Dougherty; Assistant to City Manager, Robert A. Rizzo; Community Development
Director, Jack Lam; City Planner, Rick Gomez; City Engineer, Lloyd Hobbs; and
Building Official, Jerry Grant.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
2A. Approval to advertise for bids for the Annual Street Striping and Pavement
Marking Services Contract.
MOTION: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Wright to approve the Consent Calendar.
WTon carried unanimously 4 -0 -1 (Buquet had not arrived).
• 3. STAFF REPORTS
3A, CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED CENTRAL PARK LAND PURCHASE AMD GIFT AGREEMENT.
Mr. Wasserman presented staff repor
Councilmember Wright asked if the price on the park land was directly connected
with negotiations with any other aspect of Terra Vista outside of this park
agreement?
Mr. Holley responded that this was a completely separate issue. The price was
calculated on the City's ability to pay and the desire of Lewis Humes to see
this particular project cone to fruition through the reduced price. This had
no connection with any other aspect of Terra Vista.
Mayor Mikels asked if Mr. Lewis or any representative from his company had any
comments.
Ralph Lewis stated that he was pleased that the City's acquisition of the park
site was finally being resolved. Regarding the low price, he said that it had
been Lewis Homes' practice over the years to make donations to cities and ser-
vice agencies in order to give something back to the communities where they
build. He stated that was his motivation in making this gift.
Mayor Mikels highlighted that the donation by the Lewis Company amounts to ap-
proximately one -third of the park. The value of the land is well beyond In to-
tal market value the capability of the City at this point. This park could not
have been accomplished without generosity and good faith effort of the Lewis
Company. Mayor Mikels stated that to commemorate and recognize this
contribution, we want to name the first and largest facility In that park the
Ralph Lewis Sports Complex or other new chosen by Mr. Lewis to commmorate for
all times that gift to the citizens of Rancho Cucamonga.
• Mr. Lewis thanked the Council and asked that, If possible, his wife's name,
Boldly, could also be Included.
city Council Minutes
May 24, 1984
Page 2
Mayor Mikels questioned the difference in language within the Land Purchase and
Gift Agreement as follows:
page 2, section 2: The City represents and warrants, which representation
and warranty are material parts of the consideration to Lewis:
IS) That the Property shall be developed and forever used solely for pub-
lic park purposes.
and .....
Page 8, section (b): Lewis may apply at any time thereafter to begin de-
velowent of such Lots pursuant to Section V1 of the Terra Vista Community
Plan adopted February 16, 1987 (the "Community Plan'I which provides in
part that -the site will (then) be developed for income property uses, that
Is, rental properties intended to be maintained by the owner /developer for
its investment portfolio...'. and the City agrees to process such applica-
tion in good faith consistent with said Community Plan and General Plan of
the City.
then at the bottom of page 8
For purposes of this Section 10 of this Agreement a lease, license, or sim-
ilar grant to a private business entity for purposes of providing or opera-
ting public recreational facilities shall not be a default in the terns
hereof or the All Inclusive Purchase Money Deed of Trust and shall not ac-
tivate this right of repurchase.
Mr. Mikels specific question was does a pizza parlor constitute a public rec-
reational facility? If not, then there is a discrepancy in the language in the
Agreement and the understandings that we have reached in terms of
negotiations. He felt the language precluded ancillary uses to the park and
. leaves room for misunderttanding if we wanted to put a pizza parlor in the
park.
Attorney for Lewis Homes, Dennis Metal, and City Attorney, Robert Dougherty,
met to formulate a change in. the language. Recommended changes were:
Page 2, section 2 (a) : that the Property shall he developed and forever
used solely for public park or ancillary commercial purposes;
Page B, section 10: For purposes of this Section 10 of this Agreement a
lease, license, or similar grant to a private business entity for the pur-
poses of providing or operating public recreational facilities or ancillary
commercial facilities shall not he A default in the terms hereo ..T —. e
MOTION: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Wright to approve the Land Purchase and
Gift Agreement as amended by the attorneys. Motion carried by the following
vote:
AYES: Wright, Mikels, Dahl, King
NOES: None
ABSENT: Buquet
3B. CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDED TERRA VISTA PARK IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. Staff
report presented by Lauren Wasserman, City manager.
Mayor Mikels questioned Mr. Holley how the 50% credit works with respect to the
other dedications. "Any project containing private open space and recreation
facilities which meet the above standards will receive credit against the park
require�onts of Municipal Code Section 16.71 for the private recreation area
provid jut not to exceed 50% of the project's park requirements.' Fifty per-
cent of what?
Mr. Holley responded using an example that if a particular tract had a park
dedication requirement of one acre. Up to 50% of that one acre could be met
through private open space.
Mayor Mikels asked what if there were ten acres? It would be five acres then?
City Council Minutes
May 24, 1984
Page 3
• In theory responded Mr. Holley,
But there is a cap on private open space stated Mr. Mikels.
Mr. Holley responded that was correct - 8.2 acres.
Mr. Mikels stated that there is not reference to that cap on either page 9 or
10 of the Park IMPlementation Plan. Mr. Holley stated that on page 10 it
states: 'Unless the community's total park requirement changes from 55.8 acres,
credit against this requirement for private open space shall not exceed 8.2
acres unless specifically approved by the City as development progresses.' Mr.
Holley stated that what we are enviS toning at this particular point based on
the mid -range density of the Terra Vista Planned Community is that there will
be a requirement placed of 55.80 acres total. Within that it would be proposed
and recommended that 47.6 acres of that be public open space composed of public
parks, trails, and greemey. The remainder of 8.2 acres is proposed to be used
for private open space considerations so long as they meet the guidelines for
private open space as laid out in the particular plan.
Mr. Holley further stated that the park credit is not at the option of the
developer since the City has to approve this. It is a joint cooperative ven-
ture in implementing the Plan.
Councilmember Buquet arrived - 6:47 p.m.
MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Dahl to approve the Terra Vista Park
Implementation Plan. Notion carried unanimously 5 -0.
3C. CONSIDERATION, BY ORDINANCE. OF THE TERRA VISTA PARK DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN LEWIS HOMES AND THE CITY Of RANCHO a repot presen e
by Lauren asserman, y pager.
• Mayor Mikels asked what was the purpose of the language on page 10, Section 10
of the Development Agreement, "The parties agree that this Agreement shall not
bind any lender providing construction or permanent financing for any Improve-
ments in the Planned Community..."
Mr. Dougherty responded that in practical purposes the language is to allow the
developer to get a loan from a lender because as a matter of practice with an
agreement like this any type of an agreement were to affect a lender, they
would not as a practical matter loan money. The only time this would cone into
play is if a lender were to loan for a development and later be required to
foreclose. Generally speaking by that time you would already have obtained
your park dedication with respect to the particular tract concerned. He did
not see this as a stumbling block as a practical matter for the City.
City Manager, Lauren Wasserman, read the title of Ordinance No. 227
ORDINANCE NO. 227 Ifirst reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ENTITLED
"TERRA VISTA PARK 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 HAND.
MOTION: Moved by Dab I, seconded by King to waive fu II reading of Ordinance No.
227. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0.
Mayor Mtkets set June 6th for second reading and holding of the advertised pub-
lic hearing.
3D. APPROVAL OF MAPS AND RELATED IMPROVEMENT BONDS FOB TRACTS: 12316, 12316 -1,
an a repor y oy a s, y
n9 peer,
Councilmember Wright expressed that since she was not an the Council when the
mops wen originally filed with the City, she would abstain from voting.
City Council Minutes
May 24, 1984
Page 4
• City Manager, Lauren Nassernman, read the title of Resolution No. 84 -145 and
Resolution No. 84 -146.
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -145
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT,
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, AND FINAL MAP OF TRACT NOS.
12316, 12316 -1, 12317, 12317 -1, 12364, and 12364 -1.
RESOLUTION N0. 84 -146
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT,
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, AND FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 12402.
MOTION: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Buguet to waive full reading of Resolution
No. 84 -14S and Resolution No. 84 -146. lotion carried by following vote:
AYES: Buguet, Mikels, Dahl, King
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Wright
3E. SET PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF JUNE 20, 1984 TO FORM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
VISTA PLANNED MITI. Staff report by LlOyd Hubbs, City Engineer.
(Resolutions for the fO MtiOn of the Street Lighting Maintenance District were
not included).
• City Manager, Lauren Wasserman, read the title of Resolution No. 84 -147, Reso-
lution No. 84 -148, and Resolution No. 84 -149.
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -147
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE
FORMATION OF LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4
(TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY), PURSUANT TO THE LAND-
SCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972,
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -148
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. 4 (TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY)
RESOLUTION 40. 04 -149
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO FORM
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 (TERRA VISTA
PLANNED COMMUNITY), PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND
LIGHTING ACT OF 1972.
MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Buguet to waive full reading and adopt Res-
olution Nos 84 -147, 84 -148, and 84 -149 and to approve the setting of public
hearing for the fomation of Street Lighting Maintenance District and Landscape
• Maintenance District on June 20, 1984. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0.
3F. CONSIDERATION OF THE TERRA VISTA MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE. Staff report by
LlOyd Hobbs, City Lngineer.
City Manager, Lauren Wasserman, read the title of Resolution No. 84 -153.
I,
LJ
•
•
City Council Minutes
May 24, 1984
Page 5
RESOLUTION N0. 84 -153
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE MASTER PLAN OF
DRAINAGE FACILITIES FOR THE TERRA VISTA PLANNED
COMMUNITY.
MOTION: Moved by Dahl, seconded by King to adopt Resolution No. 84 -153 and
waive full reading. lotion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Buquet, Mikels, Dahl, King
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Wright
Councilman Dahl thanked Lewis Banes for their participation in the Park Agree-
ment and the Park Land Purchase Agreement.
3H. CONSIDERATION OF SERVICES PROVIDED BY CITY
City Council spent some time going over the City services.
4. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Dahl to adjourn to May 31, 1984 Budget
Meeting. lotion carried unanimously 5 -0. The meeting adjourned at 7:18 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Beverly A. Authelet
City Clerk
0
•
L
11 FERRANTE i FERRANTE
i Attorneys at Law
2 P.O. Box 220
8350 Archibald Avenue
3 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
(714) 980 -6411
411
5IIAttorneya for Claimant,
JAMES LAWRENCE DEASON
CG: dm,(2 Mtt�cceH
My OF R RANCHO CUCA ONGA
ADMINISTRATION
AN JUN 15 am IN
7 11
718191r1111�111�1
l
CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
8
9 TO: THE CITY CLERK OR CITY COUNSEL,
n
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
14 1. This claim is made on behalf of JAMES LAWRENCE DEASON.
12!1 2. We desire notices to be sent to the following poet office
13 address:
1411 FERRANTE 6 FERRANTE
Attorneys at Law
15I P.O. Box 220
8350 Archibald Ave., Suite 228
16 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
17. 3. The date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence
181that gave to this claim are as follows:
10 At all times herein mentioned, JAMES LAWRENCE DEASON
20 ! ((hereinafter referred to as "claimant ") was a resident of the Cit
21'':1,of Ontario, California;
22 At all times herein mentioned the intersection of
23' Archibald Avenue and 4th Street, City of Rancho Cucamonga, County
24d of San Bernardino, State of California was controlled by one or
2V more traffic signals; at all times herein mentioned, said traffic
i
26� signals were managed, maintained, repaired, owned and operated by
27I
28
-1-
1! the City of Rancho Cucamonga;
I
21 On or about May 9th, 1984, claimant was driving his 1980
3� Toyota Celica, California license number 924 ZFA, southbound on
41 Archibald Avenue in the number two lane at the intersection of 4t'
5! Street and Archibald Avenue; claimant entered said intersection o
6I a green light; simultaneous to claimant entering said intersec-
7I tion, a 1980 Chevrolet Citation driven by BETTY GEAN HALL entered
8I said intersection eastbound on 4th street; the City of Rancho
9! Cucamonga so negligently managed, maintained, repaired, owned and
l0 operated said traffic signals so as to cause the signals to
ill, display a green light for both southbound Archibald Avenue traffi
12 and eastbound 4th Street traffic; as a result, thereof, this con -
13;dition caused the aforementioned vehicles to collide with each
14'd other and cause the hereinafter described injuries and damages ,
15 claimant; at this time claimant to refers to and incorporates by
16 reference the traffic collision report taken by the San Bernardin;
17 Sheriff's Department, said report has been marked Exhibit "A" and
13 is attached hereto;
19 4. A general description of the personal injuries of
20j claimant, as they are now known, are as follows:
21 From and after the date of this accident, claimant has
22'1 experienced acute pain and suffering from hyperflex'ion and
23 hyperextension of the neck with radiating pain into his upper
241 thorasic region,
25! A general description of the property damage of claimant,
26!I�I as they are now known, are as follows:
27'I ,
281
-2-
0
1
2i,
3I4
51
8I9
111
From and after the date of this accident, claimant has
been without the use of his vehicle; said vehicle has been damaged
beyond repair;
5. The names of the public employees involved in this inci-
dent are currently unknown to claimant;
6. The amount of the claim as of this date of presentation is
$12,500.00, which the amount of any present and prospective future
damages to the claimant as the result of this occurrence;
7. The computation of this amount is based upon the estimated
general damages, especial damages and any incidental and consequen-
tial damages to which the claimant may be entitled.
a. I, Joseph M. Ferrante, the undersigned, am the person
l representing the claim of claimant.
FE RRANTE
14 ,DATED: June 14th, 19B4
15' I
16
17'
�1
18','I
10I �
20'.
21
22'
23'
24'
2511
i
2611
2711
28
-3-
3
JOSEPH 'ERRANTE
ttorney for Claimant
171
is
-- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Gucnalp�
STAFF REPORT' ,
A
FII � Z
DATE: July 5, 1984 1>
is ;;
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
BY: Dave Leonard, Maintenance Superintendent
SUBJECT: Renewal of Street Sweeping Contract
As provided in the 1983 -84 Sweeping Contract, based on mutual
satisfaction , the contract can be renewed for an additionaltwelve months
with a percent increase not to exceed 10%. R.F. Dickson Co., the current
contract sweeper, is requesting a 4.7% increase. Although the sweeping
contract has been less than satisfactory at times and requires extensive
City supervision the contractor has proven willing to correct any
deficiencies in his service. With he requested price increase the
contractor states he can correct any past deficiencies with the contract.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council authorize the renewal of the annual
sweeping contract with a 4.7% increase with the understanding that
service problems encountered in the past should show marked improvement.
Respectfully submi tedd,/,
LBH: DL:bc
I
June 12, 1984
At. Dave Leonard
Maintenance Supeltintendent
City o6 Rancho Cucamonga
9320 6aseEine Rd., Suite C
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91130
Dean Dave:
7h.iA a the time o6 year we adjuat our rtatea to 066eet oue..increaaed
coate.
We would Like to 4eepect6ufty rtequeat a 4.1$ ,incAeaae in our 6.iuing
e66ective Juty 1, 1984. •
We enjoy working with the peopCe o6 Rancho Cucamonga, and Cook 6oauwrd
to our continued aaaoeiation.
S.inceAety,
R.F. DICKSON COMPANY, INC.
Don D.ichaoa
M
R. F.OkhMnCO.,Iro. Conlncl S&*s. tY52�C, CA9mue 211923541
SprSWS. Downey, 090242 211793855
SemauMPen 714I522.tE5p
•
•
1]
nTMv nT n A \TnxSn Olin A Arnwrn A
STAFF REPORT' ,
F, � z
DATE: July 5, 1984 u
1977
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
BY: Dave Leonard, Maintenance Superintendent
SUBJECT: Renewal of the Citywide Concrete Repair Annual Maintenance
Contract
J. H. Concrete, the City's current contractor for the above mentioned
contract is requesting a 10% increase for renewal of the agreement for
1984_85 fiscal year. (See attached letter and proposed contract unid
price increases) Additionally, they are requesting the City provide root
pruning in severe cases. Based on J. H. Concrete's performance, the
request seems reasonable. The prices quoted for the first year the
contract was in effect were similar to new construction costs. It has
become apparent, the first year's price quotes did not anticipate the
extensive amount of work required to remove tree roots. The City now has
the capacity under the Citywide Tree Maintenance Contract to provide root
pruning. This combined with the 10% increase should reflect a reasonable
rate for performing the contract.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above it is recommended that the Citywide Concrete Repair
Annual Maintenance Contract be renewed with J. H. Concrete, Rancho
Cucamonga, with a 10% unit price increase.
Attachments
0
J. H. CONCRETE
Uceea[ tauo.
9360 -B Baseline Road
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701
(714) 980.5103
JUNE 20, 1984
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
P.O. BOX 807
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730
ATT: CITY ENGINEER
RE: CITYWIDE CONCRETE REPAIR ANNUAL MAINTENANCE CONTRACT
IN ORDER TO CONTINUE THE ABOVE MENTIONED CONTRACT, UNIT
PRICES WILL BE INCREASED BY 10 %. IN ADDITION, AN EXCLUSION
STATING ROOT PRUNING ALONG SIDEWALKS AND CURBS TO BE PROVIDED
BY OTHERS, MUST BE ADDED TO THAT CONTRACT.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO BUSINESS WITH YOU.
SINCERELY, ,.
•OHN H. HAUGLAND
0
AGREEMENT .
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 19
by and between the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a municipal corporation, County'
of San Bernardino, State of California, hereinafter called the City, and
Ca e the Contractor.
hereinafter
NITNESSETH:
FIRST: That the Contractor, in consideration of the promises of the City to
pay, hereby agrees to furnish all materials, tools, equipment, and labor
necessary to perform and complete, in a good and workmanlike manner, the items
of work described in these Contract Documents, all in accordance with the
specifications and standard drawings of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Said
specifications, and the proposal of the Contractor, which is also on file in
the office of the City Engineer, are hereby referred to and made a part of
this contract in like manner and with he same force and effect as if
incorporated herein.
SECOND: That it is further agreed that all material, tools, equipment, and
labor shall be furnished and work performed and completed within the time as
required or indicated by said specifications, under the direction and to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, and the Contractor hereby expressly agrees
to meet, observe, perform and follow every term and requirement of the •
specifications.
THIRD: That it'is further agreed that in the event said Contractor fails to
furnish tools, equipment, or labor in the necessary quantity or quality, or
fails to prosecute the work or any part contemplated by this contract in a
diligent and workmanlike manner, the City Engineer shall make verbal or
written demand upon the contractor. If said Contractor after receipt of
demand from the City Engineer so to do, fails to prosecute said work in a
diligent and workmanlike manner within the time specified by the City Engineer
the City may exclude the Contractor from the premises or any portion thereof,
and take possession and complete the job as deemed best by the City. In the
procuring of the completion of said work, or the portion thereof the City
shall charge against the Contractor, and may deduct from any money due, or the
Contractor may be compelled to pay the City the amount of said charge, or the
portion thereof unsatisfied.
FOURTH: That the Contractor agrees to begin the work of construction
contemplated and provided for in this contract within 10 days after receipt by
contractor of contract repair list by the City Engineer.
FIFTH: Time is declared to be of the essence of this contract, and should the
Contractor fail to complete the work required in a timely fashion the City
Engineer may exclude the Contractor from the premises, or any portion thereof,
together with all materials and equipment thereon, and may complete the work
in the manner provided in paragraph "THIRD ".
F- I
L
F -1
I
• SIXTH: That the Contractor agrees to save, keep and bear harmless the City
and its officers and agents from all damages, costs or expenses in law or
equity that may at any time arise because of any infringement or alleged
infringement of the patent rights of any person, firm, or corporation in
consequenc of the use in or about said work of any article or material
supplied or installed under this contract, which article or material was
furnished by the Contractor,
SEVENTH: That it is further agreed that the City shall not be held liable or
responsible for any accident, loss or damage happening to the works referred
to in this contract prior to the completion and acceptance of the same.
EIGHTH: The Notice Inviting Bids, the Instruction to Bidders, and the
Proposal are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement.
NINTH: That the City agrees, in consideration of the performance of this
contract, to pay to contractor as follows:
The Contractor shall submit to the Engineer a written estimate
of the total amount of work done. The City Engineer will
review the estimate and approve it or notify the Contractor of
any exception. The City shall upon acceptance by the City
Council, issue payment to the Contractor. No such payment or
estimate shall be required to be made when in the judgement of
the Engineer the work is not proceeding in accordance with
• provisions of the contract. No such estimate or payment shall
be construed to be an acceptance of any defective work or
improper materials.
The Contractor shall be paid in accordance with the payment
processing of the City. It is understood that any delay in the
Preparation, approval and payment of these demands will not
constitute a breach of contract on the City.
TENTH: It is further understood and agreed between the parties hereto as
follows:
1. That the quantities are unknown and that all of the work contemplated by
this contract must be completed in all respects in accordance with the
specifications.
2. That the Contractor shall not assign, transfer, convey, sublet or'
otherwise dispose of this contract, or of his right, title, or interest,
without the previous consent in writing of the City Council. If the
Contractor shall, without such previous written consent, assign, transfer,
convey, sublet orotherwise dispose of this contract, or of his right,
title or interest therein, or lose or be deprived of the same by operation
of the bankruptcy laws or insolvency laws, or in any other manner
whatsoever, then and in any such event his contract may be revoked and
annulled by the City Council at their option and in their absolute
discretion, and if so revoked or annulled, the City shall thereupon be
relieved and discharged from any and all liabilities and obligations
F -2
arising out of the same to the Contractor and /or hi; assignee, trustee or .
transferee; and no right shall be acquired by any such assignee, trustee
or transferee, 'or any one claiming under them or any of them, either at
law or in equity, to make or assert any claim or demand whatever against
the City, whether for monies due or to become due under this contract, or
otherwise whosoever.
That the words "City Council ", "Engineer ", or "City Engineer ", and
"Contractor', when used in this contract, and /or bonds accompanying the
same, have the same meaning as when used in the specifications and as
defined in the specifications.
4. That this contract shall be binding upon the City, its successors or
assigns, and upon the Contractor, his executors or administrators.
ELEVENTH: That the Contractor agrees, pursuant to the provisions of the Labor
Code of the State of California, to pay not less than the general prevailing
rate of per diem wages and not less than the general prevailing rate of per
diem wages for legal holidays and overtime work, for each craft or type of
workman needed to execute the work under this agreement, as ascertained by the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, said provisins to be applicable to pay for all
workmen employed by the Contractor for work under this agreemnt. Said rate
and scale are on file at the City Offices, and copies may be obtained.
TWELFTH: This Contract shall be for a period of twelve (12) months commencing
on the 11th day of July, 1984, and ending the 30th day of June, 1985, unless •
terminated or extended as provided. The City reserves the right of option to
extend this contract from year to year commencing on the first (1st) day of
July of each fiscal year. In no even shall this contract be extended beyond
the 30th day of June, 1981.
THIRTEENTH: In the event this contract be extended, compensation shall be as
defined in the "NINTH" paragraph adjusted as follows:
The City reserves the right to negotiate adjustment of unit cost with the
contractor at the beginning of each fiscal year. The unit cost shall not be
adjusted in exce e-cl Illge in consumer or ice index for the Los Anoe�
Lon ac metropolitan Statistical Area as calculated from April 1st through
March 31st of the previous fiscal year. EXCEPT as determined by the City
Engineer as follows:
Where labor benefits are increased in the contractors labor agreement /contract
in excess of the index and /or where prevailing wages are increased in current
publication of the CalTrans General Prevailing Wage Rates in excess of the
index and /or where material cost are increased uniformly in the area commonly
known as the West -End, San Bernardino County, in excess of the index and /or
where equipment rental rates are increased uniformly within the sphere of the
City in excess of the index.
Adjusted cost shall be effectively July 1st of each successive fiscal year
through the term of the contract unless terminated as provided herein. •
F -3
/D
• If the index is discontinued or revised during the term such other
governmental index or computation with which it is replaced shall be used in
order to obtain substantially the same result as would be obtained if the
index had not be discontinued or revised.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said City of Rancho Cucamonga has, by order of its
City Council caused these presents to be subscribed by the Mayor and the Seal
of said City to be affixed and attested by the City Clerk, and the said
Contractor has subscribed his name hereto the day and year first above
written.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Mayor of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
ATTEST:
City Clerk, City of anc o Cucamonga
CONTRACTO :
• Approved as to form and execution
City Attorney, City of ancho Cucamonga 7
F -4
CONTRACT PROPOSAL
1984 -85
Concrete Repair
TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA:
Tne undersigned bidder declares that he has carefully examined the nature of the
proposed work, that he has examined the special provisions and specifications, and read
the accompanying instruction to bidders, and hereby proposes and agrees, if this
p,000sal is accepted, to furnish all material and do all the work required to complete
ine said work in accordance with the Special Provisions and Specifications, in the time
and manner prescribed for the unit cost set forth in the schedule on the following
proposal.
ITEM I CURB AND GUTTER
:TEM I
TYPE
CIiY
PRICE PER L:NEAR F00T
STD d
ota
B" Curb Only
301
0 -50
51 -700
101 -150
151+
Across
Remove
Existing
7.70
7.15
6.60
6.33
Construct
�
New
7.70
7.15
6,60
6.60
/
ota
Down
(�7
15.40
14.30
13.20
12.93
55.83
8" Curl) Face
Total
��
w118" Gutter
302
0 -50
51 -100
101 -150
151+
Across
Remove
Existing
8.80
8.80
6.60
6.60
2
Construct
New
11.00
10.45
7.70
7.70
Total
(Ge4�
19.80
19.25
14.30
14.30
67.65
url) ace
ota
I�
" Gutter
303
0 -50
51 -100
101 -150
151+
Across
ting
8.85
8.85
7.95
7.95
truct
11.00
10.50
8.80
8.80
(
19.85
19.35
15.95
15.95
71.11
Curb race
" Gutter
0_50
191 -150
151+
ve
ting
9.90
9.90
7.15
7.15
tr uct
12.10
12.10
9.35
9.08
ota
Down'
22.00
22.00
16.50
16.23
76.73
ITEM I TOTAL DOWN
(CC 271,32
IJ
lJ
•
•
r
L
ITEM II DRIVE APPROACH*
-rrice to include returns & wings, sidewalk to be completed per Item IV
C -2
L3
ITEM II
TYPE
CITY PRICE PER SQUARE FODT
STD M
A
Res iden t is
Approach
0 -350 351 -700 701 -1000 1001+ otal
Across
Remove
Existing
1.65 1.65 1.38 1.38
Construct
New
/ 2.37
2.31
2.25
2.20
Total
Down e 4.02 3.96 I 3.63
3.58
15.19
Commercia /
Industrial 306 0 -350 351 -700 701 -1000
1001+
Total
Across
Remove
Existing 2.20 I 2.09 1.98
I 1.10
onstruct
New 4.40
3.85 3.30
2.75
ota
Down 4;-Cr 6.60 I
5.94 5.28
3.85
21.67
C
Alley
Approach 0 -350
351 -700 701 -1000
1001+
Tota
Across
emove /�
Existing i/ 2.20
2.09
1.98
1.10
Construct
New 4.40
3.85
3.30
2.75
ota
Down 0. 6.60 5.94
5.28
3.85
21.67
ITEM II TOTAL DOWN
(;-Cr 58.53
-rrice to include returns & wings, sidewalk to be completed per Item IV
C -2
L3
ITEM IV SIDEWALK, SIDEWALK RAMP AND SIDEWALK TRANSITIONS
SIDEWALKS
ITEM s
IV
Y
CI Y
PRICE PE FU-ARE-FO-OT
STD
A
Depth
Sidewalk
0 -150 151 -500 501 -1000 1001+ Total
I Across
emove
Existing
1.87 1.76 1.10
onstruct
v
New
2.20
2.09
1.90
i 1.65
Tota
Down
(Gem
4.07
3.85
3.08
2.59
13.59
B
Depth
I6.
Sidewalk
307
0 -150
151 -500
501 -1000
1001+
Total
Across
Remove
Existing
2.20
2.09
I 1.43
1.10
Construct
New
2.97
2.86
2.75
2.20
ota
Down
5.17 I
4.95
4.18 I 3.30
17.60
C
IDepth
Sidewalk
306
0 -150 I
151 -500 I
501 -1000 1001+
Tota
Acro
I
Remove
Existing
2.53
2.42
1.76 j 1.43
Construct
New
3.41
3.41
3.30 2.75
iota
Down
5.94
5.83
5.06 4.18
21.05
C -4
Iq
]WtNALR MAL DOWN i
� 52.24
•
SIDEWALK RAMP
ITEM 8
TYPE
FClTY--T
PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT
IV
40.98
JSTD d
148.55
D
Ramp
0 -150
151 -350
351 -500
501+
Across
Remove
0 -750
I
151 -350
351 -500
501+
Across
Existing
8.80
8.64
8.41
7.70
on struct
New
5.94
5.94
5.50
4.40
/
o ta
Down
c1
14.74
14.58
13.91
12.10
55.33
SIDEWALK RAMP TOTAL DOWN
R 55.33
SIDEWALK TRANSITION
ITEM N
TYPE
CITY
PRI E PER SQUARE FOOT
IV
40.98
STD N
148.55
E
Transition
ota
0 -750
I
151 -350
351 -500
501+
Across
Remove
Existing
8.53
6.88
6.33
5.23
onstruct
A.
New
4.95
4.67
2.47
1.92
Down
ei
13.48
11.55
8.80
7.15
40.98
SIDEWALK TRANSITION TOTAL DOWN
(� 40 98
SUMMATION OF SIDEWALK ITEMS i�l A�l
SIDEWALK TOTAL czr
52.24 j
R-WTUAL cir
55.33
RAN N 0 AL 4;
40.98
ITEM IV TOTAL DOWN R�Q-
148.55
C -5
15
0
ITEM V P.C.C. DEFLECTOR CURB
i M a
TYP
CITY PRICE PER LINEAR F00T
V
STD #
A
6" Runoff
XX
Total
Deflector
0 -30
f 31 -100
101 -200
I 201+
Across
Construct
New
11.00
9.08
I 8.80
6.60
1 35.48
12" Overf low*
YY
Deflector
0 -30
31 -100
101 -200
201+
Construct
New
11.00
10.73
8.80
7.70
38.23
ITEM V TOTAL WWI(0:Q- 73.71
*P.C.C. Apron will be considered same as 4" P.C.C. Sidewalk for Payment Purposes
C -6
IN
•
•
CONTRACT PROPOSAL COST SUMMATION
Accumulative
Sidewalk, Ramp
& Trans. ITEM IV TOTAL
$ 148.55 X
Totals from
Multiply
P.C.C.Deflector
Proceeding
Adjustment
S 73'71 X
Description
737.10
Pages
factor
Sub -Total
Curb & Gutter
ITEM I TOTAL
$ 271.32
X 10
- 2,713.20
GRAND TOTAL (WORDS) Twelve
Thousand seven hundred
Drive Approach
ITEM II TOTAL
S 58.53
X 20
- 1,170.60
Spandrel & Gutter
ITEM III TOTAL
S 68.89
X 10
- 688.90
Sidewalk, Ramp
& Trans. ITEM IV TOTAL
$ 148.55 X
50 -
7,427.50
P.C.C.Deflector
Curb ITEM V TOTAL
S 73'71 X
10 -
737.10
GRAND TOTAL NUMBERS
[>
12,737.30
GRAND TOTAL (WORDS) Twelve
Thousand seven hundred
thrity seven
dollars and thirty cents
A-► Signature of Bidder
Phone t (714) 980 -51
Date:
C -7
17
SUPPLEMENT "A"
ITEM VI LABOR, EQUIPMENT AMU MATERIAL
Labor
a
Item VI
A
Job Classification
Hourly Rate
upervision -----
27.50
Wonisng oreman
27.50
2
inisner
26.40
La orer
25.30
*
rant End Loader
49.50
Concrete awl Per L.F. S )
Equipment
Item VI
8
Type
Hour y Rate
orming irUCK
60.50
i ass - - rans it Mix
Concrete*
27.50
2
Dump Truck Min. b Yd
49.50
*
rant End Loader
49.50
Concrete awl Per L.F. S )
66.00 Min, up to 100 LF
Jack Hammer ompressor
27,50
Concrete ump*
96.25 per 7 yd load
6.87 per yd over 7
m ite to include het up 6 iake Uown Costs
Material
tem v
C
Type
Cost/Cubic::: Yard
Crushed ggregate/ ag ase
60.50
i ass - - rans it Mix
Concrete*
55.00
*
C -8
1$
CONTRACT PROPOSAL `7 `b S `�
Concrete Repair
T THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCNMONGA:
The undersigned bidder declares that he has caref.illy examined the nature of the
proposed work, that he has examined the special provisions and specifications, and read
the accompanying instruction to bidders, and hereby pr000ses and agrees, if this
proposal is accepted, to furnish all miat=_rial and do all the work required to complete
the said work in accordance with the Special Provisions and Specifications, in the time
and manner prescribed for the unit cost set forth in the schedule on the folloNing
proposal.
ITEM I CURB AND GUTTER
ITEM I
TYPE
C; i'f
PRICE PER L:AEAR FOOT
STD
Total
1 •,
9" Curb Only
30i
0 -50 I
51 -100
101 -150
151-
Across
Remove
Existing
700
b SO
10.00
S•745'
Construct
New
rJ. 00
/o.SO
/0.00
/0.00
ota
Oown
(��'
14/.00
13.00
/a.00
//. 75
50.75
Z" CJrD Face
Total
w/13" Gutter 1
302
0 -50
51 -100
101 -150
151+
Across
Remove
Exi sting
$•oo
s•oo
b.00
6.00
C
Construct
New
00
9.50
7. 00
7.00
Tota
Down
(�'T
I g• Oo
N. 5(D
/3. Co
13-0U
lO J. S0
d' uro Face
total
w/24" Gutter
303
0 -50
51 -100
101 -150
151+
Across
Remove
Existing
�
8.05
$� OS
4.50
!/
onstruct
New
/0.00
9.5s
iota
Down
tQ
lA•05
17.100
14,50
I 14.50 � 64•G5
3
51 -1)0
1G1 -150
151+ iotai
w/24" Gutter
Across
Remove
Existing
9.od
I 9.00
I (0—so
6sI
o 1,
[
+e�struct
//•00
/ /•00
$,SO
8•JS
00
(GQ,
x0.00
ao.00
15.00
/y, 95 69, 5
ITEM I TOTAL OONN
�
(w av6,6S
la
II
ITEM It DRIVE APPROACH*
'Price to include returns & wings, sidewalk to be completed per Item IV
C -2
ao
•
E
•
f
DI
S-
A Residential
JU5
Total
Approach
!
0 -350
! 351 -700
701 -1000
1001+
I
Across
Remove
Existing
/r5o
1.50
/•�5
/. /S
'
Construct
�
I New
�. /g
�. /O
(
a'o� �
?•00
Total
Down
3.1-o
3.30 I
3•15
/3.70
Commerc, a l/
oral
!d
Industrial
' 306
0 -350
35 1 -700
701 -1000
1001+
I Across
Remove
i,
Existing
.7.00
/.go
/. $O
/,00
Construct
New
x/.00
, 3.50
3.00
.7.50
ota
01 own
(Q :
G,00
S.yo
Y 9-O
3,so
/9.70
Allej Appro._n
}
0 -350
351 -700
701 -1000
1001+
Across
Remove
Existing
x.00
/.90
/, 9-0
/.00
2
Construct
f
New
y.00
3. so
j 3.00
�•sv
- -3
Tata
Doan
(Q
(0.00;
S.yo
Y. &c7
3.so
19.90
ITEM II TOTAL DOWN
• /O
'Price to include returns & wings, sidewalk to be completed per Item IV
C -2
ao
•
E
•
ITEM III SPANDREL AND CROSS GUTTER
1 TEM III
TYP
CITY
PRICE
PER SQUARE
E00T
STD
Cr Cross
Gutter
0 -150 I
151 -300
301 -503
501+
Tot a1
Across
Remove
Existing
,.30 `
.2•10
/./0O
/. 30
r
Construct
New
3'/O I
3./O
, 3.00
I a•So
VIA
Total
Doan
S,yO
I 5.30
I y'60
3.&0
Spanore;
0 -150
I 151 -300
1 301 -500
501+
Total
Across
Remove
Existing
VON
S•co
945-
/,So
y.7S
Construct
New
7.15
I 6 •oo
i
6 ��
5.95
otai
Doan
1.2-7:5
I
/0-s-0
/C%OU
(/J 56
Y
II TOTAL
DOWN
«La•bo
C -3
al
ITEM IV SIDEWALK, SIDEWALK RAMP AND S! ^EWALK TRANSITIONS
SIDPWALKS
r�
ITEM
IV
I
CITY
, rRiCc
P.R SQUARE
r00i
'�
STD e
A
Si
JiU
0 -150
151 -SC0
501 -1000
1001+
Total
(Across
i
Remove
Existing
r
/.90
/.bo
/.00
Cans :rict
le.r
a.00
/•90
/.fro
/.So
� IJC3i
Donn
i
(
3.90
I 3.50
8
0" OePin
Sider�alk
301
0 -150
151 -500
501 -1000
1001+
Total
(Across
Remove
Existing
?,0O
1•90
1•30
1 /.oJ
Consuucx
7e"
x.70
7.bo
7.SO
I �.00
IOC31
�
Down
I <Q
y, 9d
I q,So
J. so
3, 0i)
C
Dean
Sidewalk
dewalk
1 306
0 -150
151 -500
501 -1000
1001+
Total
Across
i
enove
Existing
I R
30
?.,20
.
t
Cons:ract
New
3. /o
3.lo
3.00
iatai
/I
Down
«
S•Yo
S.SU I
y.6O i
3.81)
/ylU
SIDEWALK TOTAL
DOWN
«y7• ys
C -4
nn
SIDEWALK RAW
IT M >t
T'i E
CiiY
?RICE PER SQUARE FOCI
PER SQUARE rQOT --
,5O, 30
IV
IV
STD
STD s I
D
Ramp
i
0 -�50 li'- 350
351 -5u "0
501+
(Across
Remove
/
��
q
I
0 -150
I
r
351 -500 I
Existing
(Across
$.00 7, a:5
/•/nJ
7.00
Construct —Oe
Existing
/
% iS'
G•2S
New
y 7s
5,VO S.VO
S.00
y00
(�3
Totai
Down
j l� �
/`'.. VO ;
1 53.30
6(so
y 2S
SIDEWALK RA,vP TOTAL DOWN
/• 7S
SIDEWALK TRANSITION
ITEM -1
T'f PE
CITY
PRICE
PER SQUARE rQOT --
,5O, 30
TRANSIi,JN iJIAL
IV
39. -2 5
STD s I
E
Transi :ion
Total
0 -150
I
151 -350 I
351 -500 I
501+
(Across
Remove
Existing
/
% iS'
G•2S
( '-g•%S
y 7s
9/00,
Construct
New
6(so
y 2S
I J.'S
/• 7S
Do:4n
I (
i iz..7S
j /o,so
S.00
I �•so
325
SIDEWALK TRMSITION TOM DOWN
(
3'J,�s•
SUO!MATION OF SIDEWALK ITEMS i�, •�,
SI DE!JALK TOTAL
C -5
a3
GET
vi• yS
RAMP TOTAL
(CZF
,5O, 30
TRANSIi,JN iJIAL
(Q
39. -2 5
ITEM IV TOTALL OOWN
C -5
a3
ITEM V P.C.C. DEFLECTOR CURB
ITEM ,T
TYPE
f c,-,y
- rRIC
PER LiN c,;R
F00T
7
I
I STD
A
' RunOff
%%
Deflector I
1
0 -30
I 31 -100
101 -200
201+
Tota
Across
Construct
New
/o.00
I &.R5
&.00
&.00
1 very aww
YY
Deflector I
0 -30
I 31 -100
101 -200
201+
Construct
1 :m New
/o.00
I 9.95
9.00
9.00
3K7S
ITEM V TOTAL DOWN (w:
*P.C.C. Apron will he considered same as d" P,C.C. Sidewalk for Payment Purposes
•
•
C -6
P 7
CORTRACT PROPOSAL COST SU744ATION
Sidewalk, Ramp
& Trans. ITEM IV TOTAL S /35.00 X 50 = 730. n0
P.C. .Deflector
Curb ITEM V TOTAL $ 67.00 X 10 - G70. 00
GRAND TOTAL NUMBERS [ * //.574. SO
GRAND TOTAL (WORDS) /[yen - lhn�scnd -Fi ue_ hi..,&recC-
saner -EA- &,,, do / /ass and ran -is.
a—► Signature of Bidder:
By:
Phone =17/y� 9F0 -S /03
Date: '1Alsel
r�!C -7
oc ,7
Accumulative
Totals from
Mul tip I
' Proceeding
Adjustment
Description
Pages
Factor
Sub -Total
Curb & Gutter
ITEM I TOTAL S .2V(. c
X 10
.2
Drive Approach
ITEM [I TOTAL S S3.i0
X LV
Spandrel & Gutter
ITEM III TOTAL S 61. 60
X 10
Sidewalk, Ramp
& Trans. ITEM IV TOTAL S /35.00 X 50 = 730. n0
P.C. .Deflector
Curb ITEM V TOTAL $ 67.00 X 10 - G70. 00
GRAND TOTAL NUMBERS [ * //.574. SO
GRAND TOTAL (WORDS) /[yen - lhn�scnd -Fi ue_ hi..,&recC-
saner -EA- &,,, do / /ass and ran -is.
a—► Signature of Bidder:
By:
Phone =17/y� 9F0 -S /03
Date: '1Alsel
r�!C -7
oc ,7
SUPPL "' {EVT "4"
ITE14 VI LABOR, EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL
Labor
•
Item VI
C
Job Classification I
Hourly Rate
uperi ision
a s co
Working roreman
a5. 0c7
inisner
I aV.00
Laborer
a3, oC
�
I
I
Concrete aw(Per L.F. S 1
I
�
Equioment
Item VI
C
j
B Type
Hourly Rate
Crusned Agaregata /S ag 3ase
Forming 77 7-
C ass n2 -G h J n'ansit Aix
Concrete*
Dump Truck k1lin, 5 Yd)
/S.00
Front End Loader
y5. 00
I
Concrete aw(Per L.F. S 1
bO o0H ;A
acx Hammer/ Compressor
a oO
Concrete Pump*
917.50 rr
7 o< /oaf
6• .a5 p.r
d.e�er 9
*Price to Include Set up & Take Down Costs
Material
Item V
C
I Type
Cost /Cubic '!ard
Crusned Agaregata /S ag 3ase
( Sy •00
2
C ass n2 -G h J n'ansit Aix
Concrete*
SO CO
(
^cubic Taro rcace oases on ruii uucx beiivery
C -B
7/
0
J
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 5, 1984
T0: City Council and City Manager
From: Lloyd B. Hobbs, City Engineer
BY: Dave Leonard, Maintenance Superintendent
SUBJECT: Renewal of the Annual Supplementary Maintenance, Clean -up
and Emergency Street Repair Contract
IF,7
As provided in the agreement, the above mentioned contract may be
extended for an additional twelve months at the City's option provided
the base adjustment to the contract does not exceed 10%. Laird
Construction has agreed to continue the contract at last years unit price
for all items except equipment rental. Covering 39 items under equipment
rental, Laird is asked for adjustment of 38% of the equipment covered
under equipment rental. The average increase is 2 %. The above request
seems reasonable and the performance by Laird in the past has been
satisfactory.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that City Council accept Laird Construction's proposal
and approve extension of the contract by executing the agreement for
Citywide Supplementary Maintenance, Clean -up and Emergency Street Repair.
l Respectfully sub itted,
_ U
LBH. L:bc
Attachments
47
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 5th day of Jul 1984, by and
between The City of Rancho Cucamonga, a Municipal Corpora ion, ounty of San
Bernardino, State of California, hereinafter called the City, and
Laird Construction Co. Inc.
hereinafter called the Contract
NIINESSETH:
FIRST: That the Contractor, in consideration of the promises of the City
hereinafter set forth, hereby agrees to furnish all tools, equipment, and
labor necessary to perform and complete, and to faithfully perform and
complete, in a good and workmanlike manner,the several items of work described
hereinbefore in these Contract Documents, all in accordance with the plans and
specifications, Standard Drawings of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Said plans
and specifications, and the proposal of the Contractor, which is also on file
in the office of the City Engineer of said City, are hereby referred to and
made a part of this contract in like manner and with the same force and effect
as if incorporated herein.
SECOND: That it is further agreed that said tools, equipment, and labor shall
be furnished and said work performed and completed within the time as required
or indicated by said plans and specifications, under the direction and to the
satisfaction of the said City Engineer, and the Contractor hereby expressly
agrees to meet, observe, perform and follow every term and requirement of said
specifications.
• THIRD: That it is further agreed that in the event said Contractor fails to
furnish tools, equipment, or labor in the necessary quantity or quality, or
fails to prosecute the work or any part thereof contemplated by this contract
in a diligent and workmanlike manner, the City Engineer shall make verbal or
w, ^itten demand upon the contractor. If said Contractor after receipt of
demano from the City Engineer so to do, fails to furnish tools, equipment or
labor in the necessary quantity or quality, and to prosecute said work and all
parts thereof in a diligent and workmanlike manner, or after commencing so to
do within the time specified by the City Engineer fails to continue so to do,
within time specified, then the City may exclude the Contractor from the
premises or any portion thereof, and take possession of said premises or
complete the work contemplated by this contract or any portion of said work,
either by furnishing the tools, equipment, labor or material necessary
therefor, or by letting the unfinished portion of said work, or the portion
taken over by the City to another Contractor, or by a combination of such
methods, In any event, the procuring of the completion of said work, or the
portion thereof taken over by the City, shall be a charge against the
Contractor, and may be deducted from any money due or becoming due him from
the City, or the Contractor may be compelled to pay the City the amount of
said charge, or the portion thereof unsatisfied^
FOURTH: That the Contractor agrees to begin the work of construction
contemplated and provided for in this contract within:
Emergency Conditions: 2 (two) hours when specified as such by the City
ngineer.
Urgent 12dditans: 48 hours when specified as such by the City Engineer.
orma on i ions: 10 days after receipt by contractor of written
not ication y t e City Engineer to proceed with work.
Fn -G1
d6 '
FIFTH: Time is .declared to be of the essence of this contract, and should the
Contractor fail to complete the work required to be done hereunder, on or •
before the time of completion herein stipulated, together with such additional
time as the City Engineer of the City of Rancho Cucamonga may grant said
Contractor for cause, it is mutually understood and agreed between the City
and the Contractor that the City may exclude the Contractor from the premises,
or any portion thereof, together with all materials and equipment thereon, and
may complete the work contemplated by this contract in the manner provided in
paragraph "THIRD" hereof, and with like force and effect as if the Contractor
had failed to prosecute the work in a diligent and workmanlike manner. It is
further mutually agreed, by and between the parties hereto, including the
surety or sureties on the bond attached to this contract, that in the event
additional time is granted said Contractor within which the work required
hereunder may be completed, such extension or extensions shall not affect the
validity of this contract or release said surety on the bonds given in
connection therewith.
SIXTH: That the Contractor agrees to save, keep and bear harmless the City
and its officers and agents from all damages, costs or expenses in law or
equity that may at any time arise or be set up because of any infringement or
alleged infringement of the patent rights of any person, firm, or corporation
in consequence of the use in or about said work of any article or material
supplied or installed under this contract, which article or material was
furnished by the Contractor.
SEVENTH: That it is further agreed that the City shall not be held liable or
responsible for any accident, loss or damage happening to the works referred
to in this contract prior to the completion and acceptance of the same. •
EIGHTH: The Notice Inviting Bids, the Instruction to Bidders, and the
Proposal are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement.
NINTH: That the City agrees, in consideration of the performance of this
contract, to pay to contractor as follows:
The Contractor shall submit to the Engineer Labor and Material
Lien Releases and a written estimate of the total amount of work
done. The City Engineer will review the estimate and lien
releases and approve it or notify the Contractor of any
exception. The City shall upon acceptance by the City Council
and after deducting all previous payments and all sums to be
kept or retained under the provisions of this contract, issue
payment to the Contractor, No such payment or estimate shall be
required to be made when in the judgement of the Engineer the
work is not proceeding in accordance with provisions of the
contract. No such estimate or payment shall be construed to'be
an acceptance of any defective work or improper materials.
The Contractor shall be paid the total contract price in
accordance with the payment processing of the City. It is
understood tha any delay in the preparation approval and payment
of these demands will not constitute a breach of contract on the
City. •
F -2
TENTH: It is further understood and agreed between the parties hereto
as follows;
1. That the quantities are unknown and that all of the work
contemplated by this contract must be completed in ail respects in
accordance with the plans and specifications hereinbefore
mentioned, whether the quantities of mateirals required or the
work and labor to be preformed are greater or less than
anticipated.
2. That the Contractor shall not assign, transfer, convey, sublet or
otherwise dispose of this contract, or of his right, title, or
interest in or to the same or any part thereof, without the
previous consent in writing of the City Council. If the
Contractor shall, without such previous written consent, assign,
transfer, convey, sublet or otherwise dispose of this contract,
orof his right, title or interest therein, or lose or be deprived
of the same by operation of the bankruptcy laws or insolvency
laws, or in any other manner whatsoever, then and in any such
event this contract may be revoked and annulled by the City
Council at their option and in their absolute discretion, and if
so revoked or annulled, the City shall thereupon be relieved and
discharged from any and all liabilities and obligations arising
out of the same to the Contractor and /or his assignee, trustee or
transferee; and no right shall be acquired by any such assignee,
trustee, or transferee, or any one claiming under them or any of
them, either at law or in equity, to make or assert any claim or
• demand whatever agains the City, whether for monies due or to
become due under this contract, or otherwise whosoever.
0
3. That the words "City Council ", "Engineer ", or "City Engineer ", and
"Contractor ", when used in this contract, and /or the bonds
accmpanying the same, have the same meaning as when said words, or
any of them, are used in the plans and specifications for the work
herein mentioed and described, as said words are defined in said
specifications.
4. That this contract shall be bindng upon the City, its successors
or assigns, and upon the Contractor, his executors,
administrators, successors or assigns.
ELEVENTH: That the Contractor agrees, pursuant to the provisions of the
Labor Code of the State of California, to pay not less than the general
prevailing rate of per diem wages and not less than the general
prevailing rate of per diem wages for legal holidays and overtime work,
for each craft or type of workman needed to execute the work under this
agreemnt, as ascertained by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, said
provisions to be applicable to pay for all workmen employed either by
the Contractor or by any subcontractors doing or contracting to do, and
work under this agreement. Said rate and scale are on file at the City
offices, and copies may be obtained.
F -3
4.
TWELFTH: This Contract shall be for a period of twelve (12) months
commencing on the 12th day of July, 1984, and ending the 30th day of
June, 1985, unless terminated or extended as herein provided. The City .
reserves the right of option to extend this contrct from year to year
commencing on the first (1st) day of July of each fiscal year. In no
event shall this contract be extended byond the 30th day of June, 1986.
THIRTEENTH: In the event this contract be extended, compensation shall
be as defined in Paragraph "NINTH" adjusted as follows:
The City reserves the right to negotiate adjustment of unit cost with
the contractor at the beginning of each fiscal year. The unit cost
shall not be adjusted in excess of the change in consumer price index
for the Los Angeles -Long Beach Metropolitan Statistical Area as
calculated frm April 1st through March 31st of the previous fiscal
year. EXCEPT as determined by the City Engineer as follows:
Where labor benefits are increased in the contractors labor
agreement /contract in excess of the index and /or where prevailing wages
are increased in current publication of the CalTrans General Prevailing
Wage Rates in excess of the index and /or where material cost are
increased uniformly in the area commonly known as the West -End, San
Bernardino County, in excess of the index and /or where equipment rental
rates are increased uniformly within the sphere of the City in excess of
the index.
Adjusted cost shall be effective July 1st of each successive fiscal year
through the term of the contract unless terminated as provided herein. •
If the index is discontinued or revised during the term such other
governmental index or computation with which it is replaced shall be
used in order to obtain substantially the same result as would be
obtained if the index had not been discontinued or revised.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said City of Rancho Cucamonga has, by order of
its City Council caused these presents to be subscribed by the Mayor and
the Seal of said City to be affixed and attested by the City Clerk, and
the said Contractor has subscribed his name hereto the day and year
first above writte.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
By:
ayor o t e y o anc a ucamonga
ATTEST:
1ty er
CONTRACTOR:
Approved as to form and execution
CIty Attorney, City o anc o ucamonga
3/
l
`• CCNTRACT PROPOSAL
EMERGNECY AND ROUTINE MAINTENANCE
TO . THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA:
• The undersigned bidder declares that he has carefully examined the location of the proposed
work, that he has examined the plans, special provisions and specifications, and read the
accompanying instruction to bidders, and hereby proposes and agrees, if this proposal is
accepted, to-furnish all material and do all the work required to complete the said work
In accordance with the Plans, Special Provisions and Specifications, in the time and manner
therein prescribed for the unit cost and lump sum amounts set forth in the schedule on the
following proposal.
•
•
ITEM
I. ASPHALT CONCRETE REPLACEMENT - TRENCH REPAIR, POTHOLES, ETC.
(Does not include removal. See Item 3)
C -1
Item 2 TOTAL DOWN ./
L.__
AREA AND PRICE IN SQUARE FEET
THICKNESS
0-50
51 -150
151 -500
501 -1000
1001 -2000
2001 -5000
5001 "
10,000
TOTAL
ACROSS
3„ ,2S'
4.84
7,79
2.27
1. !7
1.81
1.53
1.24
'
4..
33
5.03
3.57
2.45
2.I5
2.02
1.72
1.42
5„ .42'
5.21
3,76
2.64
2.,A
2.20
1.91
1.61
6"
.j'
5.39
3.43
2.80
2.U0
2.37
2.08
1.78
•
1
'
Item 1 TOTAL DOWN
ITEM
2. ASPHALT CONCRETE' PLACEMENT - SHOULDER /TRANSISION PAVING OVER EXISTING
PREPARED SUB -GRADE
HICK14ESS
AREA AND PRICE IN SQUARE FEET
0-50
51 -150
151- 500
501 -1000
100, -2000
SOUL•
200a -3000 10.00n
TOTAL
ACROSS
3' .7.5'
4.84
3.39
2.27
2.27
1.83
1.53
1.24
4"
5.03
3.57
2.15
2.45
2.02
1.72
1.42
1
5' .42'
5.21
3.76
2.64
2.64
2.20
1.91
1.61
5.39
3.93
2.80
2.80
2.37
2.08
1.78
'
C -1
Item 2 TOTAL DOWN ./
L.__
CONTRACT ITEMS
ITEM
3. ASPHALT CONCRETE REMOVAL - INCLUDES CUTTING AND DISPOSAL
•
I[em 3 TOTAL DOWN
L� I
ITEM
4. 8 S.ASPHALT CONCRETE SKIN PATCH OVERLAY HAND E EQUIPMENT WORK
AREA AND PRICE. IN SQUARE FEET ,
HICKNESS
0- 50
51 -150
151 -500
501 -1000
1001 -2000
2001 -5000
5�0-
50.000
TOTAL
ACROSS
1.90
1.90
1.90
1,17
2 "/.17',
2.00
2.00
1.28
/
I} "/.13
3 "/.25'
5.56
1.85
1.11
0.56
0.42
0.25
0.25
2 "/.17"
4 "/.33'.
5.56
1.85
1.11
0.5E
0.42
0.25
0.25
2 } "/.21"
S "/.42'
5.56
1.65
1.24
0.62
0.49
0.31
0.31
ITEM Item 4 and 5 - TOTAL DOWN
6. ASPHALT CONCRETE OVERLAY- SPREADER 80X AREA AND PRICE iN 5 UARE FEE
6 "/.50'
5.56
1.85
1.24
0.62
0.49
0.31
0.31
1
I[em 3 TOTAL DOWN
L� I
ITEM
4. 8 S.ASPHALT CONCRETE SKIN PATCH OVERLAY HAND E EQUIPMENT WORK
t. J
? :? D -2
i
1
AREA AND PRICE IN SQUARE FEET
THICKNESS;
0- 50
0 -150
151 -500
500 -101101
1.90
1.90
1.90
1,17
2.00
2.00
2.00
1.28
/
I} "/.13
2.11
2.11
1.60
0.92
2 "/.17"
2.25
2.25
1.71
0.37
2 } "/.21"
2.38
2.38
1.62
1.03,
'
ITEM Item 4 and 5 - TOTAL DOWN
6. ASPHALT CONCRETE OVERLAY- SPREADER 80X AREA AND PRICE iN 5 UARE FEE
MUMLELI 0- 50 1
51 -150
151- -500
1 5)1 -1,300 '1001 -2000 .2001 -5000
5001110,000 TOTAL
•15' 5.35
2.49
0.98
0.61 0.64 0.45
0.45
.20' 6.96
2.61
L.09
0,75 0.75 0.57
0.57
Item 6 TOTAL DOWN
I
t. J
? :? D -2
i
1
n
7. ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVIt,- VICHINE OVERLAY - PRICE SHOWN -OR ONE LINEAR FOOT BY 10
FEET WIDE (10 SQ. FT.)\ i INCH THICK
8. EXCAVATION - INCLUDES REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL OF ALL MATERIAL AND SUB -GRADE PREP.
AREA AND PRICE IN SQUARE FEET
THICKNESS
0-50
51-150
0 -LOGO
1001 -200
x001 -5000
000 -10,00
5000'10.00
TOTAL
'10,060
TOTAL
ACROSS
4.70
1 3.07
Y.74
2.61
0.27
0.21
Item 7 TOTAL DOWN
4.27
8. EXCAVATION - INCLUDES REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL OF ALL MATERIAL AND SUB -GRADE PREP.
AREA
AREA AND PRICE IN SQUARE FEET
THICKNESS
0-50
51-150
151 -500
510 -1100
1001 -2000
2001 -500
5000'10.00
TOTAL
3"
.25'
6.43
4.27
2.S8
1.93
0.64
0.27
0.21
6.43
4.27
2.58
1.91
0.67
0.30
I
$"
,A 2'
6.43
4.27
2.50
1.9:1
0.68
b"
,S.
6.43
4.27
1 2.58
2.12
8'
6.43
4.27
2.58
2.12
8„
.66'
USE Eq
IPMEHT REN
AL FOR EX
AVATIONS
BEATER
7S,
THAN I
DICATEO IN
ITEM 8
10"
'
'.8
.92'
9. ASPHALT CONCRETE BERM PLACEMENT - PER CITY STANDARD #313 Item 8 TOTAL DOWN
0- 20
1 21 -50 1
51 -150 151 -500
501 -10�JU 1001 -2000
001 -5000
500 000
ACROSS
6.19
4.94
3.71 3.71
3.52 3.28
3.03
2.84
Item 9 TOTAL DOWN
i
i
AREA
AND PRICE IN SQUARE F EET
0- 20 I 21 -50
-51 -151
151 -500
501 -1000
1001 -2000
2001 -5000
10,000
ACROSS
0.62T x.11
0.25
0.19
0.16
0.08
0.07
0.06
Item 10 TOTAL DOWN
C -3
II. CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE - PLACED AND COMPACTED,
12. LABOR COST DIFFERENTIAL
AREA AND PRICE IN SQUARE
FEET
HICKNESS
0- 50 51 -150 151 -500 501 -1)00
10,01 -2000 2001 -5000 TO L
10,000 ACROSS
2"
16,
5,27
1.78
1.10
0.114
0.48
0.24
HOLIDAYS
3'
5.26
1.70
1.13
0.f18
0.52
0.32
RATE
1
.2 5,
Working
,
4'
46.10
46.10
46.10
46.10
46.10
35.35
5.29
1.84
1.16
0.1,1
0.55
44.70
44.70
. 1
5'
Laborer
33.70
33.70
33.70
33.70
33.70
.4211
5.33
1.87
1.19
0.54
,51
5.37
1.92
1.24
I
.66'
USE
EQUIPMENT
ENTAL AND
TIME AND ,.ATERIAN
FC1
AREAS
9"
GRE
kTER THAN S
10 WN IN IT
M 11
.75'
°"
I
e
11"
V.
t
Item II - TOTAL DOWN
12. LABOR COST DIFFERENTIAL
Callout cost must reflect the flat one time dollar amount
cost of calling out a man on urgent or emergency notice.
.,a After hours must reflect the rate for a second shift,
I.e., swing shift.
C -4
Item 12 - TOTAL DOWN ; I
•
URGENT
EMERGENCY
AFTER**
OVERTIME
SUNDAYS/
NORMAL
TOTAL
ITEM
RS
HOLIDAYS
HOURLY
ACROSS
FHOILOUT
AYOUNTT=
RATE
RATE
RAT
Working
46.10
46.10
46.10
46.10
46.10
35.35
Operator
44.70
44.70
44.70
44.70
44.70
33.90
Laborer
33.70
33.70
33.70
33.70
33.70
26.25
1
Callout cost must reflect the flat one time dollar amount
cost of calling out a man on urgent or emergency notice.
.,a After hours must reflect the rate for a second shift,
I.e., swing shift.
C -4
Item 12 - TOTAL DOWN ; I
•
�. LAIRD (.INSTRUCTION CO., I['%,.
Gonnal En inewin Connaam L.G. j °1e 1.
B 9 .a co.Tn -tton a.
4661 ARROW HIGHWAY MONTCLUiR. CALIFORNIA 91763 • A.AD CONSTRUCTION
MAI 626.3668 171 Al 96A -2268 . rAV we
GRAD...
GoN.n Re
.M[M1VV CDI11.M [NT 11[ryT AI
EQUIPMENT RENTAL RATES AS OF
September 1, 1983
1. D -8 Cat Dozer - No Rippers #8... .................... ...$112,00
D -8 Cat Dozer - W/ Rippers $9 ........................... 120.00
2. 980 Cat Wheel Skiploader (5� Yds.) .... I ................. 105.00
3. 977 Loader 3 Yds.) ...... ............................... 93.00
977 Loader with Rippers) ............................... 95.00
930 Loader ............... ............................... 70.00
4. John Deere 762 Self Loading Scraper ..................... 80.00
621 -B Cat Pull (2 each) .. ............................... 95.00
5. Blade Cat 14G ............ ............................... 79.00
Blade Cat 12G 43 each) ... ............................... 67.00
6. Roller 3 -5 Ton ........... ............................... 49.00
Roller 5 -8 Ton ........... ............................... 49.00
Roller 8 -12 Ton .......... ............................... 49.00
Roller 2 Ton ( Essicks) ... ............................... 47,00
• Roller 2 -3 Ton ( Essicks) . ............................... 47.00
Roller 12 Ton 3 -Wheel ( Buffalo ) ......................... 53.00
Roller 12' Ton (Pneumatic Rubber Tire) .................. 52.00
7, 580B Case Skiploader 117 .. ............................... 52.00
680H Case Skiploader # 11 . ............................... 65.00
8. Low Bed Tractor & Trailer (2 hr. Min.).. ................ 55.00
9. Water Waggon 113 (1,800 gal .) .:........................... 44.00
Water Wa on 48 (2,500 al. 51.00
Water Wagon 116 (3,600 gal.) ............. ................ 53.00
Water Pull 11613 (4,000 gal . } ............................ 58.00
10. Dump Truck 419 (12 Ton Bobtail) ....... ... ............. 42,00
Dump Truck 1122,23,24,25,26,27 (14 Ton Dirt) ............. 46.00
Dump Truck & Pup #22,23,24,25,26,27 (Dirt)............... 49.00
Dump Truck & Pup $22,23,24,25,26,27 (Rock & Concrete),... 51.50
ADD DUMP COST OF $20.00 PER TRUCK & PUP LOAD............ 20.00
11. Trash Truck with Trailer (High Side) .................... 63.00
12. Power Broom ..................................... I....... 47.00
13. Oil Truck # 6 ......... .. ..... I ....................... I... 46.00
14. Overhead Water Tank (7,500 gal.)(Plus set up and Down Cg)200.00/Week
15. 4 x 4 Sheepsf oot ......... ............................... 90.00 Da
5 x 5 Sheepsfoot.......... ,. .... 110.00/Day
16. Spreader Box. 2 130.00/Day
JULY 1, -1984
1. D- SK•CAT DOZER - NO RIPPERS -- -------------------------- $112.00
D- 8K•CAT DOZER - W /RIPPERS 09------------------ - - - - -- 120.00
2. 986C'CiiT WHEEL GKIPLOADER (5 1/2 YDS.) ------- - --------- 105.00
930 LOADER------------- ------ -- ------------- ---------- 70.00
3. 977L LOADER (3 YDS.)----------------------------------- 93.00
977L LOADER (WITH RIPPERS) ------------------------------ 95.00
4. JOHN DEERE 762 SELF LOADER SCRAPER---------------- - - - - -- 80.00
621 -B CAT PULL (2 EACH) --------------------------- - - - - -- 96.00
5. BLADE CRT 146------------ ------- ------ --- ---- ----------- 81.00
BLADE CAT 12G (3 EACH) ---------------------------- - - - - -- 73.00
6. ROLLER 3 -5 TON----------- ------------------------------- 50.00
ROLLER 5 -8 TON------------- ------- -- -- -------- -- -------- 50.00
ROLLER '8 -12 TON---------- ----------------- ----- --------- 50.00
ROLLER 2 TON ( ESSICKS) ---------------------------- - - - - -- 47.00
ROLaR,P -3 TON ( ESSICKS) -------------------------- - - - - -- 47.00
ROLLER 12 TON 3 -WHEEL ( BUFFALO ) ------------------- - - - - -- 54.00 •
ROLLER 12 1/2 TON (PNEUMATIC RUBBER TIRE) --- - - - - -- - - - -- 53.00
7. 5809E CASE SKIPL.OADER 07-------------------------- -- - - -- 60.00
680H CASE SKIPLOADER 010---------- ----- --- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- 66.00
S. LOWBED TRACTOR L TRAILER (2 HR. MIN.) ------------- - - - - -- 60.00
A. STANDARD PERMIT CHARGE------------------------- - - - - -- 30.00
.8. PILOT CAR--------------- --- ---- --------------- - - - - -- 25.00
9.; WATER WAGON 03 (1,800 GAL .)----------------------- - - - - -- 45.00
WATER WAGON 08 (2,500 GAL .) ----------------------- - - - - -- 52.00
,WATER WAGON 06 (3,600 GAL .) ------------------ ----- ---- -- 54.00
.WATERPULL 0613 (4,000 GAL .) ----------------------- - -- - -- 60.00
10. DUMP, TRUCK 019 (12 TON BOBTAIL ) ------------------- - - ---- 42.00
•DUMP TRUCK 022,23,24,25,26,27 (14 TON DIRT)------- - - - - -- 46.00
-DUMP TRUCK i PUP 022,23,24,25,26,27 (DIRT) -------- - - - - -- 49.00
..DUMP TRUCK i PUP 022,23,24,25,26,27 (ROCK d CONCRETE) - -- 51.50
w:(iADD DUMP COST OF $25.00 PER TRUCK b PUP LORD------ - - - - -- 25.00
i1.TRASH TRUCK WITH TRAILER (HIGHSIDE)------------- -- - --- -- 63.00
12.POWER BROOM-------------- ------ -- ------------------ - - - -- 47.00
37
lJ
LAIRD
CONSTRUCTION CO., IN(.
C4n]rd l4pin]v6lp tenMC(ar
�.e..��,.�...a,...,•
u: mxr•.e.•• ua r•..no
4411 A11ROW MIOHWAY • MONTCWR. OAURORNIA Yt70]
. noeo eennnurnen
(714/$!N$1$ (7141ON.22��
•.wviwo
ON1e1]e
�
• CONCIIRt
EQUIPMENT RENTAL RATES AS OF
• . ■eulrr Aw "
JULY 1, -1984
1. D- SK•CAT DOZER - NO RIPPERS -- -------------------------- $112.00
D- 8K•CAT DOZER - W /RIPPERS 09------------------ - - - - -- 120.00
2. 986C'CiiT WHEEL GKIPLOADER (5 1/2 YDS.) ------- - --------- 105.00
930 LOADER------------- ------ -- ------------- ---------- 70.00
3. 977L LOADER (3 YDS.)----------------------------------- 93.00
977L LOADER (WITH RIPPERS) ------------------------------ 95.00
4. JOHN DEERE 762 SELF LOADER SCRAPER---------------- - - - - -- 80.00
621 -B CAT PULL (2 EACH) --------------------------- - - - - -- 96.00
5. BLADE CRT 146------------ ------- ------ --- ---- ----------- 81.00
BLADE CAT 12G (3 EACH) ---------------------------- - - - - -- 73.00
6. ROLLER 3 -5 TON----------- ------------------------------- 50.00
ROLLER 5 -8 TON------------- ------- -- -- -------- -- -------- 50.00
ROLLER '8 -12 TON---------- ----------------- ----- --------- 50.00
ROLLER 2 TON ( ESSICKS) ---------------------------- - - - - -- 47.00
ROLaR,P -3 TON ( ESSICKS) -------------------------- - - - - -- 47.00
ROLLER 12 TON 3 -WHEEL ( BUFFALO ) ------------------- - - - - -- 54.00 •
ROLLER 12 1/2 TON (PNEUMATIC RUBBER TIRE) --- - - - - -- - - - -- 53.00
7. 5809E CASE SKIPL.OADER 07-------------------------- -- - - -- 60.00
680H CASE SKIPLOADER 010---------- ----- --- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- 66.00
S. LOWBED TRACTOR L TRAILER (2 HR. MIN.) ------------- - - - - -- 60.00
A. STANDARD PERMIT CHARGE------------------------- - - - - -- 30.00
.8. PILOT CAR--------------- --- ---- --------------- - - - - -- 25.00
9.; WATER WAGON 03 (1,800 GAL .)----------------------- - - - - -- 45.00
WATER WAGON 08 (2,500 GAL .) ----------------------- - - - - -- 52.00
,WATER WAGON 06 (3,600 GAL .) ------------------ ----- ---- -- 54.00
.WATERPULL 0613 (4,000 GAL .) ----------------------- - -- - -- 60.00
10. DUMP, TRUCK 019 (12 TON BOBTAIL ) ------------------- - - ---- 42.00
•DUMP TRUCK 022,23,24,25,26,27 (14 TON DIRT)------- - - - - -- 46.00
-DUMP TRUCK i PUP 022,23,24,25,26,27 (DIRT) -------- - - - - -- 49.00
..DUMP TRUCK i PUP 022,23,24,25,26,27 (ROCK d CONCRETE) - -- 51.50
w:(iADD DUMP COST OF $25.00 PER TRUCK b PUP LORD------ - - - - -- 25.00
i1.TRASH TRUCK WITH TRAILER (HIGHSIDE)------------- -- - --- -- 63.00
12.POWER BROOM-------------- ------ -- ------------------ - - - -- 47.00
37
lJ
l
•
13.0IL TRUCK
•
•
46.00
14.OVERHEAD WATER TANK (7,500 GAL.) ------------------ - - - - -- 200.00
plus set up and down charge per week
15.4»4 SHEEPSFOOT ----------------------------- per day - - - - -- 90.00
5X5 SHEEPSFOOT ----------------------------- per day - - - - -- 110.00
16.SPREADER BOX- -------------- ------ --- - - - - -- -per day - - - - -- 130.00
17.MAULDIN SUPER PAVER INC. OPER. 6 1 9CREEDMAN------ - - - - -- 91.00
ALL ABOVE RP-ES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE
•
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 5, 1984
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Release of Bonds
Tr. 9539 - located on the West side of Sapphire, South of Hillside
DEVELOPER: Brubaker, Davis, 6 Person
1106 W. 22nd Street
Upland, California 91786
Monumentation Bond $2,500.00
A replacement monumentation bond has been submitted and accepted and the
above referenced bond is not longer required.
CUP 82 -01 - located on 7th Street West of Etiwanda and on 4th Street West
of Etiwanda
DEVELOPER: Etiwanda Investment Co.
4209 Santa Monica Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA
Faithful Performance Bond (4th St.) $25,000
Faithful Performance Bond (7th St.) $18,000
The improvements covered under the above bonds have been completed and it
is recommended that City Council authorize release of said bonds. The
Labor and Material Bonds will be held for six months as required by law.
Respectfully sdbmitted,
LBH c
RIF
"WT AV A a XTPUA M TO a MANf!a
The attached quitclaim from the County of San Bernardino transfers to the
City a portion of land incumbered by the County. The land is located on
the North side of 8th Street West of Baker Avenue. The attached vicinity
map illustrates the locations.
0
It is recommended that Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing
the City Clerk to sign the quitclaim Deed on behalf of the City.
Respectfully sfbmitted,
LB JLM:bc
Attachments
n
U
1�6
STAFF REPORT
j'y
of
o
~� a
DATE:
July 5, 1984
1977
T0:
City Council and City Manager
FROM:
Lloyd B. Hobbs, City Engineer
BY:
John L. Martin, Assistant Civil Engineer
SUBJECT:
quitclaim Deed from County of San Bernardino to
the City
of Rancho Cucamonga
The attached quitclaim from the County of San Bernardino transfers to the
City a portion of land incumbered by the County. The land is located on
the North side of 8th Street West of Baker Avenue. The attached vicinity
map illustrates the locations.
0
It is recommended that Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing
the City Clerk to sign the quitclaim Deed on behalf of the City.
Respectfully sfbmitted,
LB JLM:bc
Attachments
n
U
1�6
RESOLUTION NO. ' %`f—fla
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A QUITCLAIM DEED FROM
THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO TO THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA.
WHEREAS, the City has expressed a desire in acquiring certain excess
lands from the County of San Bernardinc located at 8th Street and Baker; and
WHEREAS, the County of San Bernardino Board of Supervisors has
approved transfer of excess lands to the City by minute action on March 26,
1984; and
WHEREAS, the County of S.n Bernardino has provided the City with a
Quitclaim deed transfering said excess lands to the City.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
SECTION 1: That said Quitclaim Deed 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 transmit same to the County
Recorder.
0
M)
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION/ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
FLOOD CONTROL /AIRPORTS - - ENVIRONMENTAL
PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY
A +U)
Ent Third Streit San Bernardino, CA 92415L835 17141381 3771 ,.4
April 26, 1984
Citv of Rancho Cucamonga d•p68u WW40N6A
9320 Base Line Road ;R;lE7. ^.i0 DN'TON
Suite C
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Attention: Lloyd B. Bubb,
City Engineer
SUBJECT: COUNTY PARCEL AT EIGHTH STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Dear Lloyd:
Enclosed is the executed deed covering transfer of the County parcel
• along 8th Street to the City, which the Board approved on March 26,
1984.
When recorded, please provide a copy of the document so that we
may close our records on this matter.
Very truly yours,
QJHNYkJGRAY, Chie `�•
Design Division
Transportation Department
AJG:A44: j j
Enclosure as noted
Ii
L J
Het
�n nnn. +l.ne�.<aanle
- �•�.•.���`i CxiIM IFSna
amntTSea. 9. r1S, RIW MIFORAT 111O
r. Mmae +Nfb NT y. I.D00 /gO
.La, .. Oaitd 11
eim "eeea I M[ tt .al 1 I
"A VuwaE eONLDOI.nON. hW,Wl , pr an,N,. nwtp MgMraeM.
THE COUNTY 0f Sµ EERxAROI NO, a belly corporate ane esI nlc of the State of Ca l; fern i a.
dabs hereby h n'... release M I.mn eamwe le
The City Of RAYCNO CUCAMONGA, a A-060.1 Cprooration,
the follwrddR deatrlBM feel IbeRertl Le the City of Rmgho Cucamonga
Coonq of San Bernard i 1 , Rate of Ca1EfmmY:
All that portion of Lot 30, in Section 9. T01,nenip I south, tinge ] West. San Bernardino
<rldian, a coraiy w 1p of the Cucamnga Fruit Lanes, . corded in Sou 4 of Naps
pee 9, r ,cards of sale Counts. Ifi,e South of the Atchison T.,k. and Santa Fe Rail -
eay CanpanY'a 100 feet ,ride right -OiwY.
Containing ]'IS acres, rare or less
DATED: M2 e MiAI COUNTY OF RAY REMARD[No
CilA1RM.W. ROARO OF LPERVSROR9
+ItL
1 W.Insl IM AI^e al AW Iftm 01 aa Wd M S,ebnnm W . xd IM CamF W t^ to MANN
tgoes At tees...' ms 14Lh
NN A,ti I ,oar.
Si =T
STATE Of
CWNTV Of NN SERNARgfq
Apel1 5 ,If 4 . NW. aA ., >nyw.. mm� hbl.e .n b.a lee raa twwn MAm,
lanala epR✓ep .So. lem I. as IMC Iaahas M
I RNd N Sa s,w 1 .1 IM Gnle ANN ... In. whin oneam.nl en dNl I - Bede .11. ale I...
None, ,..md. M w.ne+Nal 1. NN A. N[h bell.11.[ are ehnses. M M w1A'n.mUA,Ten1 p AW W.
.N An Ime w . nMaAT al IN tale. As L bane.
\I mTNESF I ones — a4heY eel
hNr.. wIN .ee✓O mtAm
'� 3
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MARCH 26, 1984
:portation /8th Street
of Rancho Cucamonga
FROM: C. L. Laird, Assistant Director
Transportation Department
SUBJECT: TRANSFER OF SURPLUS COUNTY LANDS TO THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AT Bth STREET (APN 207 - 541 -60) SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT NO. 2
RECOMMENDATION: Declare 2.2S -acre parcel at 8th Street in the City of
Ranchonga surplus and authorize its transfer to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga; order execution of the quitclaim deed. (Four- fifths vote
required per Government Code 25365).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 1954, the County acquired this parcel for
possible road uses. However, this property has not been utilized for
these purposes and review shows that it is not needed for present or
future County purposes, The City of Rancho Cucamonga has expressed an
interest in acquiring this property for the City's street maintenance
and related public uses.
Public notice of this intended action has been published in a newspaper
of general circulation as required by Government code,
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION: This parcel, which lies between 8th Street
and the Santa Fe Railway, is a long and narrow strip and has limited
utility. By its transfer, the County will be relieved of maintenance
responsibilities and associated liabilities thereby reducing operational
costs. The public will benefit since the City intends to utilize this land
For present City needs.
REVIEW BY OTHER DEPARTMENTS: Review has been made with Deputy County
oul;�nse iE. H.
o obinsn on— rebruary 27, 1984.
cc: City of Rancho Cucamonga
c/o Transportation
Transp -A. ;Mercado w /document
11 - C.L, Laird
E.F'
Public Works
County Counsel
Roal Property
Surveyor
Planning
File
ACUon of the Board of ScFetv150r$
APPROVED BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
MOTION x x second 6sent motion
1 2 3 4 5
MARTHA M S,EKEER�AK, CLE ,OF THE BOARD
BY C �AHAC�f�fli.� 1';v%.ali� DATED MAR MAR 2 6 1984 `/
L
SAN BEANAADINO COUNTY
own. n
nit no.
AUG . ew
0
E
OTT ALA D A ATATIA OT TO A MATTO A
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 5, 1984
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
A
BY: John L. Martin, Assistant Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Lien Agreement for Guarantee of Construction of Street
Improvements aL 9460 La Grande Avenue
The attached resolution is for the approval of a Lien Agreement between
the City and Mr. & Mrs. Jensen at 9460 La Grande Avenue. The project
involves removal of an existing building and construction of a single
family residence in a previously developed art-a. It was Staff's opinion
that construction of street improvements at this time would create a
drainage problem for unimproved upstream properties. Therefore, in the
interest of safety and orderly development postponement of the
improvements until surrounding lots were concurrently improved seems
appropriate.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution
approving the lien agreement for Mr. & Mrs. Jensen at 9460 La Grande.
Respectfully submitted,
LBH:JLM:bc
Attachments
1116
•
.•
RESOLUTION NO. * '3q -1q3
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT
AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM MR. AND MRS. JENSEN AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted
Ordinance No. 58 on February 21, 1979, to establish requirements for
construction of public improvements in conjunction with building permit
issuance; and
WHEREAS, installation of curb, gutter, sidewalk and pavement
established as prerequisite to issuance of building permit for 9460 La Grande
has been met by entry into a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien
Agreement by Marlow K. Jensen and Cathrine Jensen.
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.
�q7
0
I
RECORDING REQUESTED IT:
aad
WHEN RECON090 MAIL TO:
CITY CLERK
CTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
P. O. Noe 007
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91]70
REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this __ day
of , 19 and between
Marlow K. Jensen and Catherine Jensen
(hereinafter referred to as -Developer -), and the CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter
referred to at 'City'), provides as follows:
WHEREAS, as a general condition precedent to the
Issuance of a building permit for House and Garage at 9460 LA
Grande development the City requires the construction of missing
off.sita street Improvements Including concrete curb, gutter.
drive appraoch, and asphalt paving 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 agree sole t0 .such postponement
provided that the Developer enters into this Agreement requiring
the Oeveloper to Construct said improvements, at no expense to
:he City, after demand t0 do s0 by the City, which said Agreement
shall aISO provide that the City may construct Said Ympr Ovements
if Lhe Developer fails or neglects to do so and that the City
shall have a lien upon the real property hereinafter described as
Security for the Oevelopli Performance, and any repayment due
City.
0
�Jme [J- �
NOM, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE:
1. The Developer hereby agrees that they +III
install off -site street improvements including concrete c,rb,_
gutter, drive app roam and .,,halt paving
in Accordance and compliance with all applicable ordinances
i resolutions, rules and regulations of the City In effect at the
s time of the installation, Said Improvements shall be installed
t
upon and along to Grande Avenue (9460 to Grande)
S
i2. the inf 41H[i0n of said Imp roremants iNaI1 D<
completed no later than one (1) yea following written notice to
the Developer from the City to commence installation Of the •
same. Installation of said improvements shall be at no expense
to the Cl ty.
G, in the event the Developer shall tall or refuse to
complete the installation of said improvements in A timely
manner, 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 cost, of completion incurred by the City from the
Developer.
a. To secure the performance by the Developer of the
terms And conditions of this Agreement add 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 by these presents grant, bargain,
sell and convey to the City, in trust, the following described
real property situated In the CIty of Rancho Cucamonga, County Of
San Bernardino, State of California, td-.it: •
Let 29, Tract No, 2126, Nmp Boue 12, page 45
n
0
•
•
5. This conveyance is In trust for the purposes
described above.
6. Now. therefore, if the Developer shall faithfully
perform all of the acts and things to be done under this
Agreement, then this cocveyance shall be void, otherwise, it
shall remain In full force and effect and In all respects shall
be considered and treated As A mortgage on 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.
1. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure
to the benefit of the heirs, executors, adminlstrators,
successors and assigns of each of the parties hereto.
B. To the extent required to give effect of this
Agreement as a mortgage, the term 'Developer' shall be
'mortgagor' and the City shall be the 'mortgagee' as those terms
ere used in the the Civil Code of the State of California and any
other statute pertaining to moftages on real property.
9. If legal action is cpmmenced to enforce any of the
provisions of this Agreement, to recover any sum which the City
is entitled to recover from the Developer hereunder or to
foreclose the mortgage created hereby, then the prevailing party
Shall be entitled to recover its costs and such reasonable
attorneys fees a$ shall be awarded by the Court,
66
•
•
OTT ADD a VrT7n rTTr a MnNre
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 5, 1984
1977
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technican
SUBJECT: Approval of Parcel Map 8298 and Bonds and Agreement Submitted
by Morris and Searles
The subject map was approved by Planning Commission on February 8, 1984,
for the division of 9.22 acres of land into two parcels within the Low
Medium (LM) Residential Development District generally located on the
West side of Turner Avenue at Palo Alto Street.
Bonds and Agreement to guarantee the construction of Turner Avenue have
been submitted in the following amounts:
Faithful Performance Bond: $84,068
Labor and Material Bond: $42,034
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution
approving Parcel Map 8298, accepting the bonds and agreement and
authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign same and cause said Parcel
Map to record.
Respectfully submit�ed,
l.J wjw,�/
LBH:BK:bc
Attachments
5
• RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 8298,
(TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 8298), IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT,
AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map No. 8298, submitted by Morris and
Searles, and consisting of 2 parcels, located on the West side of Turner at
Palo Alto Street, being a division of a portion of the Northeast quarter,
Section 2, T.I.S., Range 7 West, being also the South half of Lot 5, SEction
2, per Map of the lands of the Cucamonga Fruit Land Co., per Map Book 4/9, in
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California
was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on
February 8, 1984; and
WHEREAS, Parcel Map No. 8298 is the final map of the division of land
approved as shown on said Tentative Parcel Map; and
WHEREAS, all of the requirements established as prerequisite to
approval of the finai map by the City Council of said City have now been met
by entry into an Improvement Agreement guaranteed by acceptable Improvement
Security by Morris and Searles as developer.
• NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Agreement and said
Improvement Security submitted by said developer be and the same are hereby
approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement
on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest; and
that said Parcel Map No. 8298 be and the same is hereby approved and the City
Engineer is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to be filed for
record.
n
L J
6a
s
1
—
yW
OF RANCI -10 CUCAMONGA
ENGINEERING DIVISION
VICINITY NIAP n
///y���
�yA
ll\
title;
P.M. E298
raF�_
=7
0
DTENTATIVE MAP
PARCEL MAP NO 8296
iu Tx( CrIY R Ru.CxO CJC. rnOra6a
.) /w+la' • ,.xu t,.(t.�IU.Fa vr✓ n [rt•(n V r.1.
Nr ,� x rL ur 'rlr ..0 M nr.0 w rvs
r t i_ l._ 1 -. I wtltnY
r
P
IIIi
ji,
II'
��
1
-�� � f I Iry...•
1
0
DTENTATIVE MAP
PARCEL MAP NO 8296
iu Tx( CrIY R Ru.CxO CJC. rnOra6a
.) /w+la' • ,.xu t,.(t.�IU.Fa vr✓ n [rt•(n V r.1.
Nr ,� x rL ur 'rlr ..0 M nr.0 w rvs
r t i_ l._ 1 -. I wtltnY
r
P
Lo'..w W
•
S.F., O.N., MRS.. P.M.,COp %
CITY OF RANCHO CBCAMOR6A
INPRONEMENT AGREEMENT
FOR
parcel No Mo. 8298
RMOW All MEN By THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is
made and entered Into, In cO.fo,.,Dce with the provisions of the
H..,.,PaI Code and Regulations of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
State of Cal lfdrnia, a municipal to.... WSO, hereinafter ,eferr-
ed ep av ene Ciq, er �. /�d between said City
and WRRIG- R- SRARIES pile er 1 ft., referred to as
the ere oiler. Apo rc L'fkr E,•.dnfLES (.
THAT, WHEREAS. said Develop., deal,.. to develop certain
real property In Said City located op the Wet aide of Turner Avenue
South Of Baseline, and
WHEREAS, said City has established Certain requirements
to be met by Said Develop,, as pr.req.i,ite to granting of final
'
approval; and
WHEREAS, the execution of this agreement and posting of
❑pro, Went security as hereinafter cited, and approved by the
City Alto..... are deemed to be equivalent to slid, completion of
•
said reoulreaents for the purpose of securing said as prom 1.
NOW, THEREFORE. It IS hereby agreed by and between the
City and the I. v. loner as f.110.1:
1. The Developer hereby agrees to construct At
developer's expense all Improvements described on page a hereof
within 12 months from the data hereof.
'
2. This agreement shall be effective on the date of the
"Solution of the Council of laid 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-
%Ion of time has been granted by said City as hereinafter provid.
,d.
7. The Developer may request additional time in whlth
to Complete the provisions of this agreement, m .:sting not lets
than 30 days prior to the default date, and including . statement
Of circunatances of necessity for additional time. In Considera-
tion of such request, the City reserves the right to ,,vie. ins
provisions hereof, includl ng Construction Standards, cost
estimate, and sufficiency of the improvement security, and to
require adjustments thereto when warranted by vb%tantill changes
therein.
a. If in* Develops, fail, or n,gleftS to comply mite,
the provisions of this agreement, the City shall nave the right
at any time to came laid Plorislohs to be coeplead by any Ia..
ful means, and thereupon to recover from said Developer and /or
his Surety the full cost and expense lhcurrsd In so doing.
S. Construction permits shall be obtained by the Devel-
oper from the office of the City Engineer prior to start of any
fork .ithin the public Hght- df -e,y. and the developer shall
conduct Such Work In full compliance with the regulations
cdnaln,d tho.in. Non. compliance say 'fault In slapping of the
work by the City, and aStt,Smant of the penalties providA d.
6. Public right -df -may IN ........ t fork required Shall
be Constructed In conformance with approved Impfdraeeht plant,
Standard Specifications, and St, Adard Draoinga and any special
-1. '--
S.F., O.N., MRS.. P.M.,COp %
LOW-0 .
•
Amendments thereto. Construction Shell Inc lode any tram It l ons
and /or ether Incidental :cork deemed necessary for drainage or
Public safety. Errors or oulssions discovered during construc-
tion shell be corrected upon the dlr ACtldn of the City
Engineer. Revised more due to sold plan modifl.atloas shall be
covered by the pro. is, ons of this agreement and secured by the
Surety CC1.11n9 the original ptanaed mores.
T. York done within existing Streets shall be diligent-
ly pursued to completion; the City shat? hell the right to
complete .ny and +11 work In the event of unjustified delay in
and nd to recover all cost and expense Incurred from the
Developer and /or his contractor by any lawful ..anf.
S. The Developer shall be rmspemslbl. for replacement,
relocations, or ..... al of any component of say Iry lgatlon lite
i
system in confllCt with the required work t0 the 3atl sf S r tlop of
the City Engineer and the owner of the water system.
9, The Developer shalt be responsible for removal of
all loose rock and other d.brls from the public right -of -way.
10. The Developer shall plant and .1i nt+in parkway
trees ., directed by the Community Development Director,
11, The inprovement security to be farntshed by the
Developer to guarantee completion of the terms of thin agreement
thole be subj.Ct to the approval of the City attorney. The Prin.
.seal Amount of said Improvement Security shall not be less than
the Amount shown:
•
.2.
0
•
Wm r�1 CM—AL
FAITHFUL PERTONMANCE
Type: Prl"CIp1I Amount: 181,069
Name Ina address of surety:
MATERIAL AND LABOR
rype;
vrinciDll Amount; 312,031
Ram. and address of surety:
CASH DEPOSIT RORURENTATION
Type:
Frin[IPII Amount;
name Ina adored or surety;
TO BE POSTED PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY
IN WITNESS HEREOF, tN! parties Nfrf to have bused these
presents to be duly executed Ind ac 4nOmledge m1tW all (prmllltlei
redulred by I.Y on tAe an
S![ rortN
ppmsl[e their
119n +tares,
Orte H•tt•gry Uy
u Oe vl lODfr
olgna Wre
FMApK D. Mill S
e
Date
9n+ I are Developer
Rd}pdiT Pi.112Uej
Fri nted -
Accepte0:
111Y of Ranh Cucemonge, i11 Hornia
A MunlclD❑ Car ouration
Ay. Neyor
Attest;
;tr �
Approved: ' %"' f t--
y, eorney
DEVELOPER'S SIGNATURES BUSY BE NOTARIZED
-7-
57
•
E,gBt
CITY OF RANCID C)CNOM
solKmlw Oil
EIIOMACO RC /BRAT FEE SCIM-I
For I'..+ownt; Parte) Ma Is 8298
Oat*: pTu yt Ed Greer
FIT* Re ereMe: City Orwin9 tab
102: tM Let Ilcio/* M fee POP,
igF
Dwelt or pHlelewlt deposits
00Allfln MIT
ITEM
PRICE
w00AT
IN L.F.
P.C.C. curb - 20' C.F. 24' sister
9.0
6,3m
L.F.
P.C.C. Curb - 6 C,F. 26• gutter
6.00
-61�- L.I.
P.C.C. curb .15
5.50
"-TERr
L.F.
A.C.
S.F.
6• I.G.C.
C.C.
1.75
1.15
S.F.
oach(As
prlve wwoaN p1DAalt)
1.00
�eN
S.F.
e• P.C.C. erase easier (Inc, curb)
7.10
C.T.
Street nwrwim
1.50
-- C.T.
teportw a wewt
I'M
S.F.
Preparation of tobgrad*
0.15
--
S.F.
Crashed! a99. base (oar Inch Nicq
0.07
TOR
A.C. (over 1700 tons)
21.00
Tom
A.C. (900 to 1)00 tons?
25.00
TOIL
t
500 500
ISM
A.C. ( to tons)
65.00
-- Tom
A.C. N.", 500 tonal
60.00
S.F,
A.C. (3- thick)
0.55
-- S.F,
Patch AX. (trench)
1.75
S.F,
I• thick A.C. oval +y
0130
EA.
Adjust Sever mmnple to 911de
250.00
EA.
Adjust sever clean at to eras
150,011
_
EA.
Adjust wits, WIN, to grade
/S.M
EA,
Street light,
1000.00
L.F.
Wrtudes (intersec. 5500mtn)
1.0
L.F.
1 a a• reknood header
1: 5
ZN- S.F.
R.I.? Of A.C. 0.I~t
0.35
�-
I).zaa S.F.
116 L.F.
Aeeoral 01 P.C.C. movement
ReaoeaI of rubble curb
1.00
1.00
x�.2z0p0p
76
EA.
Street {lens
200.00
EA.
Reflectors and Colts
35.00
--
,;§__ L.F.
Concrete block will (3` high)
15.00
S.F.
Retaln109 rail
10.00
TOM
Aggregate base
1.00
--
Ce.
Concrete structures
425.00
J.
18' RCP (2000 D)
29.00
--
�- L.F.
24• PCP (ISM 0)
75.00
--
�� J.
36' PCP (2000 0)
49.00
--
'- L.F,
68' RCP (1200 0)
16,00
--
�- EA.
Catch basin 4 • o'
2000.00
-�-
-- a.
Catch be' In Y • 8'
2900,00
-- EA.
Catch basin M • 22,
,150.0
-- EA.
LOCAI depression 4'
SOO.00
EA.
Local depression 12'
1000.00
EA.
Junction structure
'500.00
EA.
Outlet structure, Std P5o6
150.00
-- EA.
Outlet structure, Std 0507
50.0
--
-- EA.
Guard Posts
40,00
L.F.
Guard pall (vow)
25.0
-- L.F.
Swcut
2.0
_� FA.
eedd.al' a8• ping)
1000,0
--
L.F.
Aedeood leader
1.75
--� S.i.
Lmdswptny t Irrigation
2.75
L.F.
Roll curb YP.C.C.)
1,50
TTY_ EA,
Street Trees
50.0
EMI NEER ING INSPECTION FEE 7.566 we Tom
' ESTORATiO1 /OELIREATIOM CASH 2.000 COMTINGEMCT COSTS
I.61a
DEPOSIT (REFOIOAILE)
FAITUM PERFOrAWI 100 (100)
aLtwl
NORIRIENTATIM SURETY (CASH) 1.700 LAIN 44 mTGIAL 100 (50)
a2.n31
e►r*etM to City It UKm* Cw�w1R� ImwielNl Caen, Title 11 Chapter I.W. WWI" Sw
% ASPRIM tDlmlty Code Titled, LMRtrl 1.8 a COIN mtwetlM /Alimtiw depMll gull
ee a Drier M Isswln Of w EIIglR i11M ClamsttnetlCN mmit.
rftft. Rwlsed 3/84
• CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AGREEMENT
This Agreement is entered into to the State of California by and between the
City of Rancho Cucamonga hereinafter called the CITY, and Walden Dahl
Maintenance, hereinafter called CONTRACTOR.
IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the CITY wishes to contract for Wilding maintenance services at
Its Lions Park Community Center, located at 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho
Cucamonga, and
WHEREAS, the CONTRACTOR has signified a willingness to provide building
maintenance services at the above cited Community Center.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by the CITY and the CONTRACTOR as follows:
I. The CONTRACTOR agrees to perform the work herein set forth:
• ARTICLE I - Daily Maintenance
1. Clean all restrooms to include, but not limited to
cleaning of sinks, mirrors, toilets, urinals,
restocking of paper and soap goods (provided by
CITY).
2. Sweep and deep mop all hard surface floor areas.
3. Empty and clean all trash containers.
6. Clean sinks and counter surfaces in gallery east,
gallery west, and lobby rooms.
5. Clean and wipe down all surfaces in kitchen.
6. Refill all paper and soap dispensers, as needed
(materials to be provided by CITY).
7. Sweep entry walkways and east steps.
S. Remove debris from ash urns at entryways.
•
�ia�
Maintenance Agreement
Lions Park Community Center
Page 2
ARTICLE II - weekly Maintenance
1. Vacuum all carpet areas twice weekly, Tuesday and
Friday.
2. Dust surfaces, excluding desk tops, but to include
window blinds, window frames, counters, etc.
3. Clean window surfaces at all entry points twice
weekly, Tuesday and Friday.
ARTICLE III - Twice Monthly Maintenance
1. Clean all outside window surfaces.
E
ARTICLE IV - Monthly Maintenance
1. Clean all inside window surfaces.
2. Vacuum draperies in porn stage area. •
ARTICLE V - Special Maintenance
1. Shampoo the floor carpet throughout the facility
at a rise to be scheduled four times annually.
2. As needed or at least once every three months,
scrub and apply finish to lobby and gallery east
floors.
3. Minor plumbing such as replacing of washers during
regular daily maintenance.
4. Minor plumbing such as unplugging of toilets
during regular daily maintenance.
5. Replace burnt -out light bulbs in all areas as
needed.
6. Replace soiled or damaged ceiling panels as needed
(panels provided by CITY).
II. In consideration for the above services, the CITY agrees to pay the
CONTRACTOR the sus of $WTOO per month. •
.. _c m
III. The CONTRACTOR agrees to supply his own consumable cleaning materials to
perform this contract; not to include trash liners of-any sort.
•
•
Maintenance Agreement
Lions Park Coounity Center
Page 3
IV. This Agreement shall be on a wnth- to-nonth basis through June 30, 1985.
V. Either the CITY or the CONTRACTOR may terminate this Agrement at any
time with written notice to the other party.
VI. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, hold harmless and define the CITY, its
officers, agents, and employees against all liability, claims, losses,
demands and actions for Injury to or deaths of persons or damage to
property arising out of or in consequence of this Agreawnt.
CONTRACTOR:
Walden Dahl
Date
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA:
Mark Lorimer, Ads. Analyst
Date
a�
tCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AGREEMENT
This Agreement is entered into in the State of California by and between the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereinafter called the CITY, and Walden Dahl
Maintenance, hereinafter called CONTRACTOR.
IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the CITY wishes to contract for building maintenance services at
its City Offices located at 9320 -C, 9330 -201, 9330 -203, 9340 -A, B, C, D, E, and
F Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga; and
WHEREAS, the CONTRACTOR has signified a willingness to provide building
maintenance services at the above City Offices.
NOW, THEREFORE, is is agreed by the CITY and the CONTRACTOR as follows:
I. The CONTRACTOR agrees to perform the work herein set forth:
• ARTICLE I - Daily Maintenance
I. Clean all restrooms to include, but not limited to cleaning of sinks,
mirrors, toilets, urinals; restock paper and soap goods (provided by
CITY).
2. Sweep and damp mop all hard surface floor areas. (Entry points and
kitchen /rest areas).
3. Empty all trash containers.
4. Clean and /or vacuum unusually soiled carpet areas.
5. Remove debris from ash urns at entryways.
ARTICLE II - Weekly Maintenance
1. Vacuum all carpet areas.
2. Dust office surfaces, excluding desk tops, but to include window
blinds, work area dividers, file cabinets, and book cases.
is 3. Clean counter at entry points.
Agreement
Page 2
4. Dust and apply polish to lobby counter and wooden furniture in City •
Manager's Office, Assistant to City Manager's Office, Administration
Conference, Room, and Community Development Conference Room.
5. Clean marking board in Administration Conference Room.
6. Clean window surfaces at all entry points.
ARTICLE III.- Twice Monthly Maintenance
1. Clean all outside window surfaces.
ARTICLE IV - Monthly Maintenance
1. Clean all inside window surfaces.
2. Scrub and apply finish to all hard surface floors.
ARTICLE V - Semi- Annual Maintenance
1. Clean all door frames. •
2. Dust surfaces and clean glass on picture frames.
3. Clean all light panels.
ARTICLE VI - Special Minor Maintenance
1. Minor plumbing such as replacing of washers during regular daily
maintenance.
2. Minor plumbing such as unplugging of toilets during regular daily
maintenance.
3. Replace soiled or damaged ceiling panels as needed (panels provided by
CITY).
4. Replace burnt -out light bulbs in all areas as needed.
II. In consideration for the above services, the CITY agrees to pay CONTRACTOR
the sum of $950.0o per month for maintenance services at 9320 -C, 9330 -201,
9330 -203, 9340 -A, B, C, D, and E Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga. •
Further, the City agrees to pay CONTRACTOR an additional $115.00 per month
upon completion of office space 9340 -F Base Line Road.
Agreement
Page 3
• III. The CONTRACTOR agrees to supply his own consumable cleaning materials
to perform this contract; not to include trash liners of any sort.
IV. This Agreement shall be on a month -to -month basis through June 30,
1985.
V. Either the CITY or the CONTRACTOR may terminate this Agreement at any
time with written notice to the other party.
VI. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, hold harmless and define the CITY, its
officers, agents and employees against all liability, claims, losses,
demands and actions for injury to or deaths of persons or damage to
property arising out of or in consequence of this Agreement.
CONTRACTOR:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA:
• Walden Dahl Ma—Fnfe—nance Mark Lorimer, AN. Analyst
Date Date
Form K
T Ll
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GuGA4
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 5, 1984 FII'
1977
TC: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician
SUBJECT: Intent to Annex Tracts 11934, 12044, 12045 and 12046 as
Annexation No. 5 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1
The attached resolution sets the date of public hearing as August 1, 1984
to Annex the above described tracts to Street Light Maintenance District
No. 1. Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 covers the arterial
street lights. The interior street lights for these tracts have been
included in District No. 3 set up for the Victoria Planned Community.
The Engineers Report is attached for your review and approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolutions
setting the date of Public Hearing for August 1, 1984 and giving
preliminary approval of the Engineer's Report.
Respectfully submitted,
LBH:BK.bc
Attachments
RESOLUTION NO.
•
U
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY
ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION NO. 5 TO STREET LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 `
WHEREAS, on July 5, 1984, the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga directed the City Engineer to make and file with the City Clerk of
said City a report in writing as required by the Landscaping and Lighting Act
of 1912; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has made and filed with the City Clerk of
said City a report in writing as called for pursuant to said Act, which report
has been presented to this Council for consideration; and
WHEREAS, said City Council has duly considered said report and each
and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said report is
sufficient, and that said report, nor any part thereof, requires or should be
modified in any respect.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
SECTION 1: That the Engineer's Estimate of the itemized costs and
expenses 775=iwork and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith,
contained in said report be, and each of them are hereby, preliminarily
approved and confirmed.
SECTION 2: That the diagram showing the Assessment District referred
to and descroe(T—in said report, the boundaries of the subdivisions of land
within said Assessment District are hereby preliminarily approved and
confirmed.
SECTION 3: That the proposed assessment upon the subdivisions of
land in said Assessment District in proportion to the estimated benefit to be
received by said subdivision, respectively, from said work and of the
incidental expenses thereof, as contained in said report is hereby
preliminarily approved and confirmed.
SECTION 4: That said report shall stand as the City Engineer's
Report for the purposes of all subsequent proceedings, and pursuant to the
proposed district,
/,i0
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA .
Engineer's Report for
Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1
Annexation No. 5
Tracts 11934, 12044, 12045, 12046
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 Description
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 provided 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 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.
L /
• The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No. 1
(including Annexation No. 5 comprised of 745 lots and 26 9500L street lights
is shown below:
1. S.C.E. Maintenance and,Energy:
Lamp Size* Quantity Rate **
-gwuC . 141 9.90
5800L 95 8.75
*High Pressure Sodium Vapor
Lamps Rate Mo's Total
141 X 9.90 X 12 16,750.80
95 X 8.75 X 12 = 9,975.00
2. Costs per dwelling Unit:
• Total Annual Maintenance Cost = 26,725.80 = 7.13 /year /unit
No, of Units in District 3750
7.13 divided by 12 = .59 /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 Lignting Maintenance District No. 1 ", Annexation No. 5.
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 'ot or parcel,
It is proposed that all future development shall 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.
�' l
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 form a District or abandon the proceedings.
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.
i 1
LJ
•
G�
I 1
U
9
EXHIBIT "A"
Properties and improvements to be included within Annexation No. 5 of Street
Lighting Maintenance District 1:
Tract . No of Units /Lots
11934
123
12044
177
12045
271
12046
174
745
�n
No of Street Lights
0
0
0
26
26 (9500L)
RESOLUTION NO. * �F4 —) — W .
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER
THE ANNEXATION TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
NO. 1, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID
ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION NO. 5 TO STREET LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING
AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE
FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting
Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State
of California, as follows:
SECTION 1. Oescri tion of Work: That the public interest and
convenience require an it is the intention of this City Council to form a
maintenance district in the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the maintenance and
operation of those street lights the boundaries of the proposed maintenance
district described in Section 2 hereof. Said maintenance and operation
includes the cost and supervision of any lighting and related facilities in
connection with said district.
SECTION 2. Location of Work: The foregoing described work is to be .
located within roadway rig t -of -way enumerated in the report of the City
Engineer and more particularly described on maps which are on file in the
office of the City Clerk, entitled "Annexation No. 5 to Street Lighting
Maintenance District No. 111.
SECTION 3. Descri tion of Assessment District: That the
contemplated work, in the opinion o said City Counci , is of more than local
or ordinary public benefit, and the said City Council hereby makes the expense
of the said work chargeable upon a district, which said district is assessed
to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and which district is described as
follows:
All that certain territory of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga included within the exterior boundary
lines shown upon that certain "Map of Annexation No.
5 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1"
maps is on file in the office of the City Clerk of
said City.
SECTION 4. Report of Engineer: The City Council of said City by
Resolution No. *—Fas approvR [he report of the engineer of work which report
indicates the amount of the proposed assessment, the district boundary,
assessment zones, titled "Engineer's Report, Street Lighting Maintenance
District No. 1" is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City.
Reference to said report is hereby made for all particulars for the amount and •
extent of the assessments and for the extent of the work.
��r
• SECTION 5. Collection of Assessments: The assessment shall be
collected at the same time an in the same manner as County taxes are
collected. The City Engineer shall file a report annually with the City
Council of said City and said Council will annually conduct a hearing upon
said report at their first regular meeting in June, at which time assessments
for the next fiscal year will be determined.
SECTION 6. Time and Place of Hearin,;: Notice is hereby given that
on AugustT —ig�- at the hour of pm in the City Council Chambers at 9161
Base Line, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, any and all persons having any
objections to the work or extent of the assessment district, may appear and
show cause why said work should not be done or carried out or why said
district should not be formed in accordance with this Resolution of
Intention. Protests must be in writing and must contain a description of the
property in which each signer thereof is interested, sufficient to identify
the same, and must be delivered to the City Clerk of said City prior to the
time set for the hearing, and no other protests or objections will be
considered. If the signer of any protest is not shown upon the last equalized
assessment roll of San Bernardino County as the owner of the property
described in the protests, then such protest must contain or be accompanied by
written evidence that such signer is the owner of the property so described.
SECTION 7. Landscapin and Lighting Act of 1972: All the work
herein proposed shall bane an3 came t rouga n n in pursuance of an act of
e legislature of the State of California designated the Landscaping and
• Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of
the State of California.
SECTION S. Publication of Resolution of Intention: Published notice
shall be made pursuant to Section 9 of Che overnment Code. The Mayor
shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and
the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published 10 days before the date
set for the hearing, at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general
circulation published in the City of 0ncario, CaTiTUrnia, and circulated in
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.
�, 1
ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM - -_
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO
ANNEXATION NO. 5
CITY OF R
" ANCHO CUCAMONGA
COtlbiTy OF SAN BMNARDINO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
4j
� E z
} NLLOYD NUE9 S. CITY ENGIIN ==R RC 2?PEg DATE 4`
page
ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
• STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1
ANNEXATION NO. 5
•
E
i"
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
p Tt, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO \ STATE OF CALIFORNIA N
LLOYD HU895. CITY ENGiN =R P, CE 23RB9 D page
-- g
ASS=SSMr=NT DIAGRAM
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO
ANNEXATION NO. 5
CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ue;
COUNTY OF SAN B
ERNARDINO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Vi •��
LLOYD N1199S. CITY ENGINEER F? 'E 2110-9
�—
N -
_,. DATE page
ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.I
ANNEXATION NO. 5
r 0.4CE
30
17
31
Bp `� .6
32
S 15
33
tl t2 14 w'
34
.0
13
35
01 r 19
36
L °LCUS CCLRT
77
66 67169 69
d
9
g
�O
64 63 02 6i 60
z
41
r
2
`d 97
m
"L
55 56 57 3
^.9
1 �
3 4 5 fi 7
9
0
µLtIGOLO CL11Ri 11
2
23 122 121 12C 119 119 13
o la
112 131H4 IIS 16 Ill �5
6
Lh945PLR PLACE 11
01 r 19
99 I n ICI C2 104 21
!03 22
99 J45NINE COp9t 2'
2E
96 95 91 93 92 91 T 69 2'
A
21
2
91 0� 33 31 d5 96 97 99
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
` STATE OF CALIFORNIA
un I I nvn Nt1RR5. CITY ENGINEER RCE.239e9 GATE
A
N
IItle;
page
n
lJ
d'hd recd! valy 5
ORDINANCE NO. 46- B6 -ek£t
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 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 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.
E
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 Number 202 - 181 -15, approximately 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 Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause
the same to be published within fifteen (15) days of +e^ its
passage at least once in The Dail, a newspaper of .f ..dl
circulation published in the City of Ontario, California and
circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.
7%
•
L]
nTmv nn n • wTn Trn nTTn • •.^%Tn
BACKGROUND: On May 23, 1984, the Planning Commission denied the Bates
Ashwi Hawkins) project due to inconsistencies related to the intent
of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and past Planning Commission Policy
related to the Haven Avenue corridor. In general, the Planning
Commission is concerned with: (a) linear or strip building
configurations and site designs; (b) common storefront architecture;
and, (c) the overconcentration of support commercial uses.
The Planning Commission was opposed to the Bates (Ashwill /Hawkins)
project and stated that the present architecture and building
configurations conveyed a predominant commercial image. The Commission
stated that the intent of the Industrial Park category of the Industrial
Specific Plan is to foster an office /professional image, while allowing
limited ancillary support commercial uses.
The Industrial Park category is designed to project a campus like image
for firms seeking an attractive and pleasant working environment and a
location with high prestige value. The intent of the Industrial Park
area, and in particular the Haven Avenue corridor, is to project a high
image office /professional complex while allowing ancillary uses such as
limited support commercial. In particular, Subarea 6 described
development on Haven as providing a high quality character associated
with office park type developments. The Planning Commission elaborated
by stating that the glass storefronts and building orientation with a
predominance of parking located adjacent to Haven Avenue, lends itself
to commercial uses.
7�
STAFF REPORT
Y
` c Ili
D
DATE:
July 5, 1984
1977
TO:
Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY:
Frank Oreckman, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT:
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION
DENYING
ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT AND
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
8 -
H - e eve opment o two
i ndustria /office bui dings totaling 29,184 sq. ft. on
2.09 acres of land in the Industrial Park district
(Subarea 6), located at the southwest corner of Haven
Avenue and 7th Street - APN 209 - 411 -01.
BACKGROUND: On May 23, 1984, the Planning Commission denied the Bates
Ashwi Hawkins) project due to inconsistencies related to the intent
of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and past Planning Commission Policy
related to the Haven Avenue corridor. In general, the Planning
Commission is concerned with: (a) linear or strip building
configurations and site designs; (b) common storefront architecture;
and, (c) the overconcentration of support commercial uses.
The Planning Commission was opposed to the Bates (Ashwill /Hawkins)
project and stated that the present architecture and building
configurations conveyed a predominant commercial image. The Commission
stated that the intent of the Industrial Park category of the Industrial
Specific Plan is to foster an office /professional image, while allowing
limited ancillary support commercial uses.
The Industrial Park category is designed to project a campus like image
for firms seeking an attractive and pleasant working environment and a
location with high prestige value. The intent of the Industrial Park
area, and in particular the Haven Avenue corridor, is to project a high
image office /professional complex while allowing ancillary uses such as
limited support commercial. In particular, Subarea 6 described
development on Haven as providing a high quality character associated
with office park type developments. The Planning Commission elaborated
by stating that the glass storefronts and building orientation with a
predominance of parking located adjacent to Haven Avenue, lends itself
to commercial uses.
7�
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Appeal - DR 84 -09 /Bates
July 11, 1984
Page 2
•
Issues related to the overall function and design of the Haven Avenue
corridor have surfaced recently with the Aja submittal (located on Haven
Avenue between 6th and 7th Streets) which was denied by the Planning
Comission. Planning9 Commission issues related to the Haven Avenue
corridor include: (1) linear or strip building configurations and site
design; (2) common storefront architecture; and, (3) the
overconcentration of support commercial uses.
Because of these two projects, direction from the Planning Commission
has directed staff to develop more detailed design and development
policies and guidelines for the Industrial Park category which will
include standards for site planning /architecture, and policies regarding
the balance between office /professional uses and ancillary support
commercial uses along the Haven Avenue corridor.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends denial of the
project due to its inconsistencies related to the policies and intent of
the Industrial Area Specific Plan for the Industrial Park category and
past Planning Commission policy related to the Haven Avenue corridor.
RespeAfully sabmi•tted,
Rick Gomez
City Nlanner
RG:FD:jr
4tachments: Letter from Applicant
Planning Commission Staff Report - May 23, 1984
Planning Commission Minutes - May 23, 1984
r1
\. J
i 17 CC
r- 411
June 26, 1984
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Rancho Cucamonga, California
RE: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84-09
Oear City Council
We respectfully request that the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga follow
their General Plan and Industrial Area Specific Plan as it is currently
written,
We represent ourselves as sophisticated developers and our track record will
reflect this, We recently purchased the southeast corner of Haven and 7th
Street in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. We were submitted the piece of
property by Coldweil Banker, who told us what we could do (their interpretation)
in writing. As a judicious follow-up, we picked up personally from the City a
copy of the General Plan and the Industrial Area Specific Plan and from the
Chamber of Commerce, we picked up the Executive Summary of the Industrial Area
Specific Plan. The land use plan of the General Plan (See Exhibit "A ") is very
specific in its distinction between the location of office uses and industrial
park uses. Our site is clearly within the industrial park category. On no
occasion were we forewarned of a change in thinking by the planning department
and planning commission. On the basis of the information provided, we closed
escrow on 2.1 acres. We had the buildings designed and presented a plan to
the City. It was only when we proposed to go before the review committee that
we were informed that in fact the planning department had a different inter-
pretation and an idea of what they wanted on Haven Avenue,
At the design review meeting we were informed that the City wanted only high -
quality, first -class office buildings located on Haven Avenue. In our submittal
before the planning commission, we were informed, along with our attorney, that
the staff and the planning commission had a different intent and objective from
the written industrial area specific plan. We vehemently objected and we said
then and we say now that the City should be consistent in following their written
ordinances and Industrial Area Specific Plan. Otherwise, buyers such as ourselves,
developers and anyone improving property would be in a precarious position trying
to interpret "seat of the pants" thinking not reflected by the written standards,
11
ASHWILL, HAWKINS & PARTNERS { J
Real Estate Development&Services 1805 East Garry St. #110, Santa Ana, CA 92705 (714)2SU971
June 26, 1984 •
Page Two
We feel that if the City has undergone a change in thinking from their written
ordinances and Industrial Area Specific Plan, they should have a formal process:
have their necessary hearings, staff studies, hold the necessary public hearings,
approve changes to their ordinances and adopt new resolutions.
Within only the past few months, the City has approved approximately 520,000 sq,
ft. of large warehousing and distribution buildings within a 1,000 feet of our
property in Sub Area 6. They have approved the same warehouse and distribution
facilities contiguous to, and with the trucks fronting the same area they are
stating should be high - quality, first -class office buildings. 7th Street is
projected to be a main arterial and it is estimated that approximately 2,200,000
square feet of warehousing and distribution truck traffic will funnel westward
existing on Haven Avenue on 7th Street. When you consider all of the above, it
seems ludicrous for the City to take a hard and fast stand in their position, at
lease as presented by the planning department and planning commission.
Our project has met all of the developmmnt standards with respect to general pro-
visions, minimum parcel site, set -back requirements, landscaping requirements,
parking and loading requirements, and the performance standards. We respectfully
request your approval and understanding. •
Very truly your 1'
J�n/e'Ashwill LC-
•
7 �-"
Fjwwrr fo"
-J
;U
L
:7
Figure III -1
LAND USE PLAN
RESIDENTIAL
I _ 1 VERY LOW <211',, c
L ._J LOW 2-4 DU'W C
f 7 LOW- MEDIUM- eW1 /A0
L J MEDIUM 1-14 WV�
C7 MEDIUM -HIGH 11-24 W',/AC
IIIIIIIII HIGH 14 -30 WL/,
m MASTER PLAN REQUIRED
COMMERCIAL /OFFICE
I• COMMERCIAL
F _- I COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL
I I NEIGHBORHOOD COMM.
OM REGIONAL COMMERCIAL
OFFICE
INDUSTRIAL
I INDUSTRIAL PARK
] GENERAL INDUSTRIAL
[:' ±:'] GENERAL INDUSTRIAL/
RAIL SERVED
W1102 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL
OPEN SPACE
I J HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL
I I OPEN SPACE
L i FLOOD CONTROL /UTILITY COF
SPECIAL BOULEVARD
PUBLIC FACILITIES
IT +•I EXISTING SCHOOLS
(•' PROPOSED SCHOOLS'
I. ' PARKS'fcxiSTw v KS gHpH,H v7
1 • I CIVIC.'COMMUNITY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
GENERAL PLAN
a;-_m
C
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT ,'P
DATE: May 23, 1984 - '
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY: Frank Dreckman, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ANC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -09 -
BATES A HWELL /HA7INS - The development of two
in ustria o ce u ngs totaling 29,184 sq. ft, on
2.09 acres of land in the Industrial Park District
(Subarea 6), located at the southwest corner of Haven
Avenue and 7th Street - APN 209- 411 -01.
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action — Requested: The applicant is requesting approval of a
precise site p an and building design.
B. Purpose: To create two (2) industrial /office buildings
totaling 29,184 sq. ft.
C. Location: Southeast corner of Haven Avenue and 7th Street.
D. Parcel Size: 2.09 acres.
E. Existing Zoning: Industrial Park (Subarea 6).
F. Existing Land Use: Vacant parcel.
G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North - Vacant, zoned Industrial Park.
South - Vacant, zoned Industrial Park.
East - Vacant, zoned Industrial Park.
West - Vacant, zoned Industrial Park,
H. Industrial S ecific Plan Des nations:
roject ite - ndu stria ark (Subarea 6).
North - Industrial Park (Subarea 6).
South - Industrial Park (Subarea 6).
East - Industrial Park (Subarea 6).
West - Industrial Park (Subarea 6).
7 ?E
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
OR 84 -09 - Bates (Ashwell /Hawkins)
Page 2
I. Site Characteristics: The project site consists of a
previously rough graded vacant parcel which lies within the
Haven Commerce (Cadillac /Fairview) complex. Currently, the
site contains a variety of indigenous field grasses and native
plant materials. The site has been improved with curb, gutter,
and sidewalk. There are no structures located on the site.
II. ANALYSIS:
A. General: The proposed industrial /Office complex (located along
Haven Avenue, a Special Boulevard), is designed to accommodate
a hybrid of Industrial Park uses which include office, light
industrial, and limited support commercial /retail uses (Exhibit
"A"). Typically, the complex will consist of two, single -story
concrete tilt -up structures (totaling 29,184 sq. ft.) with
riverrock columns and planters. Access to the project will be
provided via Haven Avenue and 7th Street.
B. Special Desiqn Parameters - Haven Avenue Corridor:
• Background: As you are aware, issues related to the overall
function and design of the Haven Avenue corridor have surfaced
recently with the Aja submittal (located on Haven Avenue
between 6th and 7th Streets) which was recently denied by the
Planning Commission. Planning Commission issues related to the
Haven Avenue corridor include: (1) Linear or strip building
configurations and site design, (2) common storefront
architecture, and (3) the over - concentration of support
commercial uses. As illustrated on the site plan (Exhibit "A")
the proposed project, as with the denied Aja project, is
indicative of the "commercial symptoms" outlined above.
E
The Commission has voiced strong concern regarding the negative
implications of establishing a strip commercial appearance
within the Industrial Park category of the Industrial Area
Specific Plan, in particular along the Haven Avenue corridor.
Recently, the Planning Commission has given staff strong
direction to prepare design and development guidelines for all
Industrial Park categories to include standards for site
planning and architecture, and a policy regarding the balance
between office professional uses and support commercial uses
along Haven, Foothill, and Archibald A,.enues. In the interim,
however, staff has prepared the following analysis designed to
review with the Commission the issues described above as they
relate to the proposed Bates (Ashwell /Hawkins) project.
i 'S 1
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
OR 84 -09 - Bates (Ashwell /Hawkins)
Page 3
Intent of the Industrial Specific Plan: The Industrial Park
category is designed to project a "campus like" image for firms
seeking an "attractive and pleasant working environment" and a
location with high "prestige value ", The intent of the
Industrial Park area, and in particular the Haven Avenue
corridor, is to project a high image office /professional
complex while allowing ancillary uses such as limited support
commercial activities for the industrial area. The Haven
Avenue corridor was never intended to support or encourage
support commercial uses exclusively in either its function or
its architecture. In particular, Subarea 6 described
development on Haven as providing a high quality character
associated with "office park" type developments.
C. Specific Analysis -_ Bates Project_ The following is an
analysis of the ates submitta as it relates to the intent of
the Industrial Specific Plan's Industrial Park category.
L
1. Site Plan /Buildin Orientation: The site plan (Exhibit
"A" ) Tens i t s e I f predominantly to support commercial
activities by: (a) providing parking adjacent to Haven
Avenue, and (b) emphasizing building orientation and •
excessive storefront windows facing Haven Avenue, thus
emphasizing retail oriented activities.
Parking: AS noted above, street front parking is commonly
associated with retail commercial activities.
Office /Professional uses typically provide pods of parking,
or parking located entirely behind a prominent street front
complex. Please note that the applicant is calculating the
required parking stall number using the multi- tenant ratio
(where office does not exceed 35 percent of the total
square footage) of one space per 400 square feet. However,
if the project is predominantly support commercial, the
site will be under - parked (1:250 required for commercial).
Architecture /Floor Plan: The floor plan of the complex has
been vide into many individual units (Exhibit "A ") each
with a storefront window area facing Haven Avenue or 7th
Street. This type of division is commonly associated with
retail commercial development, not office /professional
activities which require larger floor areas. Note that if
this project was not located on a major arterial, like
Haven Avenue, the viability of this type of building
configuration would be nil. It appears that the intention
of this type of configuration is to attract and accommodate
support commercial users. In addition, please note that •
portions of roll -up service doors will be visible from
Haven Avenue and 7th Street.
/ , n
C C
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
• OR 84 -09 - Bates (Ashwell /Hawkins)
Page 4
4. Future Commercial Viabilit : If predominant support
commercial activities are a lowed to proliferate within the
Industrial Park area, they will detract and weaken the
viability of existing "legitimate" commercial activities
throughout the City.
C. Den Rev iew Committee: The Design Review Committee was
F r%,_ cipa y oppose to the building site plan and architecture
style and use of materials (tilt -up concrete panels) and
recommended that the building be re- oriented In order to
project a definite high professional /office image.
D. Development Review Committee: The Development Review Committee
was concerne wit the proposed shared drive approach on Haven
Avenue and recommended that a 30 -foot wide approach be extended
50 feet from the curb. In addition, the drive approach is not
to be constructed on Haven Avenue until a right -of -entry
document has been obtained from the adjoining property owner.
E. GGrradingCCommit�tee: The Grading Committee approved the
• conceptual grading plan subject to approval of a final grading
plan.
F. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been
completed y the app scant and is attached for your review.
Staff completed the Environmental Checklist and found no
significant adverse environmental impacts related to the
construction of 0 project.
III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The findings listed in the attached Resolution
were supported by the following facts:
The proposed building design and site plan are
inconsistent with the current development standards of
the City.
The proposed building design and site plan is not
consistent with past Planning Commission policy related-
to the Haven Avenue corridor.
IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised for environmental
review in The Daily Report newspaper.
7q-k
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT •
OR 84 -09 - Bates (Ashwell- Hawkins)
Page 5
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission
deny the proposed development due to inconsistencies related to the
intent of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, and past Planning
Commission policy related to the Haven Avenue corridor.
Respectfully submitted,
Rick Gomez ,--�
Cit7 Planner
RG:FD:ns
Attathments: Exhibit "A" - Site Plan
Exhibit "B" - Elevations
i Initial Study, Part I
Resolution of Denial
•
•
/^ I
_I- J
C
\ORTH
CITY Or ITFNI:
RANCHO CUCAMONGA TIT'U::
PLANNING DIVISION LXHIBIT sc;\I,r.:-
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING DIVISION
KI
C
ITEM •
TITLE: G—e.-�/ InY1c
EXI I I IIM .112 SCA LB
%9 r
0
1
C
A
PLANT LIST
1PEE5 ..
Q
S
lOM 9N850 CilO1M COYEN •�.n.
O
E�KEA 1NEE5 � CAOIM LOVFII •.�..
V
NORTH
CITY OP rre.�I:
RANCHO CL:C —MONG.� TITt.I7
PLANNING DIVISION e\II1111T:
-� 5�- r
0
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:
EUVEN COMMERCE CENTER
APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Chris Bates
301 North Ramnart "C" Orange. California (714) 674 -4558
ga(e(n
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED
CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Chris Rates - 301 North Rampart "C"
nranae California (714) 634 -4558
9vnv8
LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.)
SF Corner of H d h h c t (" dd th/ tt APO 209- 411 -01
LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND
FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS:
I -1
7 GW
•
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The oraiect consisrs of [wn single
story buildings totaling 19 184 sq Fr Co nseruerinn -ill he rilr_ a
concrete with Rive.rnrb r,.l,,m.a and planter< The orngrrr will ha„o
extensive landscaping.
ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND
PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: 91.015 sn ^fr ,.f 1,-,
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):
The project site is within the Haven Commerce Center. a masr =r planned
• mixed use business community developed by
The lot is finishrd with ,H15rirs - rd_.r��gh 4'.Al- memoir r. A= ¢- h.
the topo, aphv is Level and there are no plants or animals to be affected
h.- n r davn�nomwnr TFrr ulrn..ai hi crrrirwt or = r a =nrrrs
particular to this r r t a a`he Propertv is bordered by Haven and 7th
and =rr�.jg orooerry i_ vacant at this time. There are no existing,
structures.
E
Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series
of cumulative actions, which although individually small,
may as a whole have significant environmental impact?
I -2
WILL THIS PROTECT: •
YES NO
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?
6. Create the need for use or disposal of
potentially hazardous materials such as
toxic substances, flammables 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.
CERTIYICATION: 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.
Date March 5. 1984 Signature
/ •Title Project 'Manager
?0
Gs: GAIp L„ C
$ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CL > Charles J. Buquet 11 Jeff rev Kin1
1977 Richard A. Dahl Pamela J. w'rieht
May 9, 1984
Mr. Chris Oates
Ashwell /Hawkins
1805 East Garry Street
Suite 110
Santa Ana, California 92705
SUBJECT: DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETINGS
FOR OR 84 -09 - ASHWELL/HAWKINS
Dear Chris:
The Design and Development Review Committees met to review the
development plans for a 29,184 sq. ft. office /industrial complex located
on the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and 7th Street. The Design and
Development Review process is provided so that major design and
• development concerns and adequacy of plans may be addressed early in the
review process. The following are the items of the concern as discussed
by the committees.
0
Design Review Committee
The Design Review Committee was primarily concerned with
the building site plan and architecture and recommended
that the building be re- oriented in order to project a
professional /office oriented image. The Design Review
Committee was opposed to the site plan configuration and
architecture as proposed, and recommended that design
modifications be provided prior to scheduling the project
for subsequent Planning Commission meetings.
Development Review Committee
1. The Development Review Committee was concerned with the
proposed shared drive approach on Haven Avenue and
recommended that a 30 foot wide approach be extended 50
feet from the curb. In addition, the drive approach is
not to be constructed an Haven Avenue until a right -of-
entr document has been obtained from the adjoining
property owner.
9020 BASELINE ROAD. SUITE C e POST OFFICE BOX 807 •RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA 91780 • 1711) 989 -1851
�)h 4
C �
Mr. Chris Bates
Ashwell /Hawkins - DR 84 -09 •
May 9, 1984
Page Two
2. The Development Review Committee was concerned with the
total amount of landscape provided (exclusive of right -
of -way) and recommended that a tabulation be provided
which illustrates the total amount of landscaping being
provided. (Percent of landscaping should equal 15%.)
3. The parking ratio appears deficient when related to
office /commercial users. The standard for such uses is
one parking bay per 250 sq. ft. of floor area.
Additional Information Required
8 1/2" x 11" transparent reductions of all plant.
If you have any questions regarding the above recommendations, please
contact the appropriate agency at the numbers listed:
- Cucamonga County Water District, 987 -2591.
- Foothill Fire District, Jim Bowman, 987 -2535. •
- County Sheriff's Department, 989 -6611.
- Building & Safety Division, Jerry Grant, 989 -1351, ext. 220.
- Planning Division, Frank Oreckman, 989 -1851, ext. 248.
- Engineering Division, John Martin, 989 -1851, ext. 244.
All of the above comments and requirements are given to help you revise
your development package in accordance with city standards and
ordinances. Please contact the appropriate individuals to discuss any
of the above requirements. Staff will be happy to answer any questions
you might have and meet with you concerning any unresolved issues.
Sincerely,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
Frank Dreckman
Assistant Planner
FD:ns
•
M
• Recessed
Planning Comm,,,,,, Reconvened
9;40 YlanninB
q:50
• , 0 8ET'�EEN Tk cerc —.
G. DEVELOP h1iop0h"ri Terra Vistan armed Community•
the staff reP°rt•
- A P to the comments, therefore
Pertaining ssermari reviewed There were no
Manager Lauren da Ublic hearing• that the
City t oDenad the P recommend
airman Stou s close d• Mogiel, carried, to
the Public hearin6 dad by Council•
RemPel• 9eOOn the City
Moved by t Proceed t° _ gATS
Motion: aBraemen 84_09
REVIEN trial buildpri K
development Industrial Par
» D DEVEOf t o 1 nA i the Avenue and
• SESSMENT of Haven
loPment
•
T
:1
NT AL AS - The dale acres corner
feet ° at2 the southeast
ENVIRONM.1 s ante d presented
(pS "'': / 29 KIB4) C located report an
totaling Subarea 6) 01•
209 -411- the staff
Dlstr ict ( - pYN rev ieNed
qth Street Planner, the project,
Assist for denial of
FranK 9rcecommendsti °n trial
riot to subma t
a
hearing. us
Ublic t P In
staff enact the P stated the the current In Lhri
Stout oP applicant, copy of established
Chairman California, a uidehnes s h stated chat
t
Irvine, he purchased the g 1 Specific Plan•
tes, , C1tY U folio£ the Resolutat,ian
Chris Ba had attemPed Indus i7 06 of the
this Pro ]act and condition one es of
the d that In the Industrial
is P1�` ob one
gpec i. t ke 4uestioned to tha
documen • d not conform advise specitled
Proje °t di t City Attorreouirements
Assistan the there ' .,art Other
Hopson, su'roades staff that uhicn °
Ted t Code b C gPacif is Plan on
DeveloPmen that the Resolut n
Specific Plan• t inform Further• the intent and
the uas no the Industrial .aith
Bates stated
that than a prof step tion•
ecL•
Mr• ants t Is incona, explana
docum of
ref f °stn es lthatn the lay °andtas'�ced for deve
,V"If lca, of the Industrial P
objecti es May 23, 1984
-g-
Plannin6 CO�iss ion Minutes
��1
( C
Mr. Hopson advised that staff does not make findings and explained that
Section 77.06.020 -F of the Development Code establishes findings that must be •
met in order for the Commission to approve a project.
Charles Doskow, attorney for the applicant, addressed the Commission stating
that the statement in the staff report under the facts for finding is that the
project is inconsistent with the Industrial Specific Plan. The applicant's
question, he stated, is just what aspect of the project is inconsistent?
Mr. Hopson replied that development standards exist within the Development
Code which are required prior to Commission approval.
Gene Ashwill, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission stating
that the parcel is 300 feet by 300 feet and is a difficult site to work
with. He advised that the intent of the building design was to provide
transitional uses from commercial to service professional uses catering to the
industrial area. He asked how the issue of an office and administrative
project in a campus like setting would be addressed when the back half of the
project faces a warehouse distribution use. He stated that he felt the
proposed use would be a good transitional use for this property in this it has
a different problem than other properties that front on Haven Avenue.
Chairman Stout stated that apparently the applicant views the property
differently than the City does and that in order for it to be developed as
envisioned by the applicant a zone change to commercial would be necessary.
He further stated that when he views the layout of this project as proposed it
looks like a shopping center. •
Mr. Ashwill replied that the configuration may look like a shopping center to
some, but when the depth ratio of the buildings and parking is considered the
project is not proposed as a shopping center.
Chairman Stout stated a guarantee could not be made that this applicant would
always own this piece of property and that the glass store front lends itself
to commercial uses and that people who are looking for office professional
spaces would not be drawn to this type of center.
Commissioner Hempel stated that a disservice had been done in not stating in
the Indistural Specific Plan that the intent of the office park category was
to have 30 percent service commercial and the rest developed in offices.
Further, that the City can't allow the service commercial ancillary uses to
take over the office designation.
Planning Commission Minutes -9- May 23, 1984 •
7C--C
C �
Mr. Ashwill stated that this presents a problem to the brokers who represent
• this property as service commercial and that he did not see how office
projects could be forced on an applicant when the area will not support more
offices. He additionally stated that guidance was not given by the City as to
the intent and objectives for the industrial area the interpretation does not
exist in the Industrial Specific Plan.
Mr. Hopson replied that under the Industrial Park category for Subarea 6 of
the Industrial Plan states that the land is reserved for industrial firms
seeking an attractive and pleasant working environment.
Mr. Ashwill stated that he did not think the average man on the street would
interpret the Industrial Specific Plan in this way and suggested that a
problem exists in the Plan's language.
Chairman Stout advised that the City is currently undergoing a study of the
Haven Avenue corridor to see if problems do exist.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rempel stated that a lot of work went into the development of the
Industrial Specific Plan, and no doubt there are areas which need to have the
language tightened up. He advised that the City's intent was that projects
located along Haven Avenue would be offices with their warehouses and plants
located in the back and the other permitted uses would be ancillary to an
office park. Further, that it was never intended that nothing but commercial
would be located along Haven Avenue. Additionally, the configuration of this
40 project lends itself to commercial uses. He advised that this project could
have been designed with an office building located in the front and the other
commercial buildings in the back.
Commissioner Barker suggested that copies of the Haven Avenue Corridor Study
be made available to brokers and Snvesters with an interest in property
located along Haven.
Commissioner McNiel advised that the City's position on Haven Avenue is very
rigid and that the approach to Haven Avenue has always been well defined. He
stated that when the applicant left the Design Review Committee meeting they
had a good idea of what was expected of a project on Haven Avenue, so this
should be of no surprise this evening.
Mr. Hopson advised that the Commission's position that the design of this
project is not consistent with the function or appearance of the Subarea in
which is located is documented within the language of the Industrial Specific
Plan. Additionally, that it is not the function of the Planning Commission to
indicate how a project is to be designed, but through their comments made this
evening help the applicant redesign his project. He advised that the
Commission has a professional staff at the City to more specifically guide the
applicant.
Is Planning Commission Minutes -10- May 23, 1984
��z
t �
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by MoNiel, carried, to adopt the Resolution
to deny the project. •
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL, REMPEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS NONE
• a • • �
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
I. BASE LINE MEDIAN DESIGN
Dan Coleman, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff's recommendation for the
Base Line Median Design. Mr. Coleman advised that the recommended
construction drawings indicate 15 gallon Goldenrain trees planted 20 feet on
center, with underplantings of Oleander and Natal Plum shrubs. Additionally,
he advised that the median design is proposed to include stamped concrete in a
pattern resembling alluvial granite stone. Further, he stated that a shrub
spray head irrigation system is proposed; however, it was staff's
recommendation that soil moisture tensiometers be included to adequately
control watering.
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Rempel, carried to approve staff's
recommendation by Minute action. •
OLD BUSI4ESS
J. CARY4 DEVELOPMENT (COUNTY PROJECT)
Tim Beedle, Senior Planner, presented an overview of the Caryn development
project proposed within the City's sphere of influence north of Highland
Avenue, south of Banyan, between Milliken and Rochester Avenue,
Joe DiIorio addressed the Commission and commended staff and Commission for
their input into the project.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, carried to concur with staff's
recommendations to the County and that the project proceed.
0 • a a
Planning Commission Minutes -11-
May 23, 1984 •
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -46
i�
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
DENYING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 84 -09 - BATES LOCATED ON
THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND 7TH STREET IN
THE INDUSTRIAL PARK (SUBAREA 6) DISTRICT
WHEREAS, an the 1st day of May, 1984, a complete application was
filed by Chris Bates (Ashwell /Hawkins) for review of the above- described
project; and
WHEREAS, on the 23rd day of May, 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:
1. That the proposed project is not consistent with the
intent objectives of the Industrial Area Specific
Plan; and
2. That the proposed project is not in accord with the
objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and
the purposes of the district in which the site is
located; and
3. That the proposed project is not consistent with
Planning Commission policies relative to the Design
and Development of the Haven Avenue corridor.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23rd DAY OF MAY, 1984,
10 :1 OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY
ATTEST:
lic) Gomez, ueputy becretary
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 23rd day of 'day, 1934, by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES:
CO6IMISSIONERS:
BARKER, MCNIEL, REMPEL, STOUT
IDES:,
COMMISSIONERS:
NONE
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
NONE
E
r1
U
9
nimv nn n
STAFF REPORT v� R, o "C
DATE: July 5, 1984
1977
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING A TIME
E XTENSION R CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 82-20 - HARMA -
Based upon non-compliance with the conditions of approval,
the Planning Commission took no action to extend the
expiration date for the CUP for the development of a 3,691
square foot elementary school and two temporary trailers
on 3/4 acres of land located at 9113 Foothill Boulevard -
APN 208 - 241 -09.
SUMMARY: The applicant has requested an appeal of the Planning
Commission decision not to approve a time extension request for only the
expansion of the Foothill Learning School and not the existing usage in
the current facilities. The Planning Commission, at its May 23, 1984
meeting, reviewed the current status of the property and the applicant's
non - compliance with the conditions of approval. Motions for both denial
and approval failed (2 -2); therefore, no action was taken by the
Commission on the time extension request. The City Attorney has
indicated that a lack of affirmative action by the Commission results in
the expiration of the CUP on the date first established
- May 10, 1984. The Commission's deadlock was based upon non - compliance
with conditions regarding certain improvements, as listed in the
attached letter dated November 12, 1982. Further, the applicant had
violated the conditions by installing a trailer on the property prior to
these improvements. This trailer was removed a few days prior to the
May 23, 1984 Planning Commission meeting. An inspectio- if the site on
June 26, 1984 revealed that no progress had been made toward completion
of the required improvements (i.e. drainage, parking, landscaping, fire
lane). These improvements were required to mitigate concerns with the
operation and appearance of both the expansion and existing facilities.
If the City Council elects not the extend the Conditional Use Permit for
the expansion, the CUP would expire and the applicant would have to
reapply for a new CUP to expand the school facilities. Attached for
your review and consideration is the Planning Commission staff report
and minutes which fully outline the issues applicable in this case.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Appeal - CUP 82 -20 /Sharma
July 5, 1984
Page 2
•
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends upholding the
current expiration date of May 10, 1984.
ResAhtfully,su4mitted,
anner
RG:DC:jr
Attachments: Appeal Letter
Planning Commission Staff Report - May 23, 1984
Planning Commission Minutes - May 23, 1984
•
r1
LJ
J
May 70, 1984
City of Ranr,ho C.- amonga
Planning Department
9740 Baseline Road
Alta Loma, CA 91701
Gentlemen:
COMMUN RgNCkO CUC
UNITY DEVE' OPMFNTM1DEPTA
AM JUN' 04 1984
718,900111E121112i31416 A
Y
This letter is to request an appeal of permit /182 -20- Sharma to the
,:ounr.il for their review and approval. Thank you for plao.ing us
• on the 'oun,"ll agenda in reference to this matter.
Sin,�erely,
i
N
ANDREW BARNAKIAN
P ra eident
AB /np
r , •c n,' ^ct,; rr:.. ...
. o erty r�an,igorrr r:
- ,iq,n
eu rrnq
r y
•
y
BARMAKIAN
May 70, 1984
City of Ranr,ho C.- amonga
Planning Department
9740 Baseline Road
Alta Loma, CA 91701
Gentlemen:
COMMUN RgNCkO CUC
UNITY DEVE' OPMFNTM1DEPTA
AM JUN' 04 1984
718,900111E121112i31416 A
Y
This letter is to request an appeal of permit /182 -20- Sharma to the
,:ounr.il for their review and approval. Thank you for plao.ing us
• on the 'oun,"ll agenda in reference to this matter.
Sin,�erely,
i
N
ANDREW BARNAKIAN
P ra eident
AB /np
r , •c n,' ^ct,; rr:.. ...
. o erty r�an,igorrr r:
- ,iq,n
eu rrnq
0
•
I*
PTmv nc D A NTPUn PTin A MnATP A
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 23, 1984'
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner
z.
F D e
19-17
SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 82 -20 - SHARMA -
The development of a 3,691 square foot elementary school
and two temporary trailers on 3/4 acres located at 9113
Foothill Boulevard - APN 208 - 241 -09.
BACKGROUND: The applicant, Satyendra Sharma, is requesting a
-monk th time extension for Conditional Use Permit 82 -20, as
described above. The project was conditionally approved by the
Planning Commission on November 10, 1982, per the attached
Conditions. The proposed elementary school was an expansion of the
existing Foothill Learning School as shown on the attached Exhibit
"B ". The two temporary trailers were intended to be used as
classrooms during construction of the permanent building
addition. The new addition would house a library /resource center,
offices and classrooms for kindergarten through 3rd grades.
The temporary facilities were required to be removed within two
years from the date of placement on the site or be removed from the
site within 30 -days from the date of occupancy of the permanent
addition, whichever came first. Further, the Conditions of
Approval required that building permits for the addition be
obtained within twelve (12) months from the date of occupancy of
the temporary facilities. To date, no plans have been submitted
for the addition. Also, the Conditions of Approval required
completion of certain work prior to moving the trailers onto the
property, as outlined in the attached letter dated November 12,
1982, sent to the applicant.
One temporary trailer was moved onto the property several months
ago in violation of the Conditions of Approval requiring completion
of certain items. The applicant was contacted and recently began
work toward completing these items. Recent inspections by the
Planning and Building and Safety Divisions indicate that only a
portion of the work has been completed. Further, the Foothill Fire
District requ''es installation of an approved water system and
on -site fire hydrant prior to occupancy of the trailer, as outlined
in the attached letter dated April 30, 1984. The applicant has
indicated that the trailer would be removed; however, as of
writing, it has not been removed,
r �
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Conditional Use Permit 82 -20 /Sharma
May 23, 1984
Page 2
•
H. ANALYSIS: The Conditional Use Permit approval will become null and
void if final occupancy is not issued for the temporary trailer or
building permits are not issued for the permanent addition by
May 10, 1984. The applicant is requesting a six (6) month time
extension in order to prepare plans for a new school prototype.
The project was approved on November 10, 1982, with an expiration
date of May 10, 1984. The Development Code permits applications
for CUP's to be valid for a total of four years from the original
date of approval with a maximum twelve (12) month extension
increment. Therefore, the Planning Commission could grant an
extension up to two and one -half years. A copy of the original
staff report, Resolution of Approval with Conditions, and Planning
Commission Minutes of the November 10, 1982 meeting are attached
for your review.
III. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission
approve a 6 -month time extension and direct the applicant to
complete those items listed in the letters from staff and the
Foothill Fire District,
Respectfullyrsubmitted, .
ioY
Rick Gomez
City Planner
RG:DC:jr
Attachments: Letter From Applicant Requesting Extension
Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "8" - Site Plan
Exhibit "C" - Elevations
November 10, 1982 Planning Commission Minutes
November 12, 1982 Letter to Applicant
April 30, 1984 Foothill Fire District Letter
Resolution of Approval 82 -107
Time Extension Resolution of Approval
E
�v
Z
• BARMAKIAN
May 3, 1984
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Attn: Dan Coleman
9340 baseline Road
Alta Loma, CA 91701
RE: 'Foothill Learning School
84 -131
Dear Dan,
'. N7 nFPr.
AM
✓�' 07 1984
71$9110,11,12111218i416 b
•
this letter is to request an extension of conditional
number 82 -20 for a six month period from May 10, 1984
use permit
at which
date the present approval will expire. Satyendra
K.
Sharma has
requested that our office prepare design studies
for
a new school
prototype. We have a meeting scheduled with Mr.
Sharma
next week
to determine his needs and establish criteria for
the
new
;hildren's learning center.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
ANDREW BARM.4KIAN
President
AB /np
.,., ,.r•.1 it :.. yr,�.., ^JB /IV r ^.,:'td q,o m.,,,.; :. � grr�;GC; .. -l1C U�n.�r ptq
('1 0
•
0
NORTH
CITY OF ITEM: — s.CS." Zo210 �D
RANCHO CUCANION A TITLE: Z-�%�� �1 •
PL,L \NI \G DIVISION L \HU3tT�- -SCALE_T-
,!S
411
'Ap
43
17
ot P
ITEM:
crry OF cuc\Nlo-,NGt\ TITLE RANCHO
pL,N"N'NINiG DIV610N
,,Ih ,_- L. t.
I
z�
1y
ii
0
1-1
L
CITY OF ITENIt 2 9
-6z
RANCID CMkNIONGA TITLE 1 W- 6�&5
PLANNING DIVDN EXHIBIT--Fo-� SCALE: 00-*
IS
"7
t: c"
• Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Stout, carried unan' , to adopt
Resolution No. 82 -05 approving zone change 82 -0 recommending such to the
City Council.
Motion: Moved by Rempel onded by Mc Niel, carried unanimously, to adoct
Resolution ;:o. 82- pproving Tentative Tract 12256 with the added condition
that the to ock access remain unobstructed and that this be shown in the
Cca 9I
Y e • t
H. ENVI10N, VITAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIO;lAL ❑SE ?�RMIT };0. 82 -20 - SHAFi1.4 The development of a 3,691 square foot elementary school on 314 acres in
the F -1 zone, located at 9113 Foothill Boulevard - APN 208- 241 -09.
Associate Planner, Dan Coleman, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman King asked where the temporary trailers are and whether they Would be
used during construction or to house new students in order to have new
construction.
Mr. Coleman replied that the students in the existing school would not be
affected in that the shift of Playground area would be the only change.
is Chairman Ring asked what happens to the playground when he puts up the
temoorary facilities, he constructs the facility, where then is the
playground.
Mr. Coleman explained the required minimum of playground space for preschool
children as mandated by the State code indicating that there is more than
double the space he reeds for outside recreation.
Chairman King asked why the applicant can't construct the permanent facility
before putting in the trailer.
Chairman King opened the public hearing.
Mr. Sharma, 7775 Sunstone, the applicant, replied that he needs the trailer
for the time being as he does not have space and is not in a financial
position to begin building right now. lie indicated he must refuse children
every day.
Commissioner ?o Niel asked, aside from what is .aid d;wn in the text re _.ard -ng
conditions, what his plan is.
Mr. Sharra replied L, _9 to build a new scr.00i in P.ancho Cucamonga.
C9:moissioner ;f.c;Iie, asked how far into t•,_ .,t,re t•,..s wouid b<
O
Planning Commission ;11mutes -td- :iovember 10, 1982
�.r ris
c � c
Mr. Sharma replied within 1 -2 years.
•
Mr. Coleman stated that he would have to move the trailers on within 18
months. During the 18th months he would have to get permits and begin
construction within one year with a permanent structure within two and a half
years.
Mr. Hopson stated that the trailer would be good for 18 months and could stay
there for two years so what the Commission is looking at is a three and a half
year total.
Commissioner Mc Niel asked what time period Mr. Sharma is looking at.
Mr. Sharma replied that he would like to do this in September.
Commissioner Mc Niel asked what kind of trailer this would be.
FT. Sharma replied that it would be 12 X 60 feet.
Commissioner Mc Niel asked how many students there would be in the trailer.
Mr. Sharma replied there would be approximately 30 in each trailer.
Chairman King stated it would be his feeling that condition two should read
that the building permit and the placement of the trailer on the premises
should be simultaneous and the trailar should not be allowed on the preai s=_s
•
any longer than 12 months.
Commissioner Mc Niel stated that if he understands the condition, it 'would
defeat the purpose.
Chairman King replied that perhaps it does.
Commissioner Mo Niel asked where it is proposed to put the trailer.
br. Sharma pointed it out for Commissioner Mb Niel.
Commissioner King stated that perhaps he is being unfair and unreasonable and
that he does not want to push it but earlier there were many problems wit:.1 a
conditional use permit compliance with the Shavia school and he does not,
relish seeing a trailer on Foothill Boulevard for three and a half years
considering the recent past history the City has nad 'with :M. Char a.
indicated that given the fact that this is approved, there will be trailers
with onnstrucnion over a three and a half year period and lie foresees the
playground conai— ons to be extremely cro;ced.
Commissioner jarxer askea if staff could ref =r to the generation of funds and
asaed :'r. Char.:a if ne could afford to do th:a in any otl;er way.
•
Planning Commission Minutes -19- .November 10. 1982
"r y
t �
Mr. Sharma replies that he only needs it for two years at the most and could
perhaps go into construction within one year.
24. Coleman asked if Mr. Sharma could generate the money.
Mr. S'nara .replied he probably could but it would be difficult.
Commissioner Stout asked how long the building permit would be effective for a
project i"ce this.
Commissioner Hempel stated that it depends on certain phases of work being
performed within certain periods of time.
Dan Coleman stated that the City Attorney has requested that conditions 2 be
modified to read that the temporary facility shall be removed within 2 years
from the date of occupancy or shall be removed from the site within 30 days
from the date of occupancy of the permit addition, whichever comes first.
Commissioner Rempel stated that in other words, the trailer cannot be on the
site for more than 2 years.
There was brief discussion among the Commission on how long the trailer could
occupy the site.
• Commissioner Harker stated that for 2 years of occupancy, or whichever came
first is the wording that is not there.
is
:Ir. Vairin stated that if the applicant decided to build earlier, say a year
from now, and he occupied it, then he is not going to maintain the trailer, he
will have to remove it and that is why it is worded in this manner.
? Mtion: Moved by Rempel seconded by Stout, to adopt Resolution 4o. 82 -107,
with a revision to item one under Planning conditions, revising the time
period to two years from 12 months.
Commissioners Barker, !I!c4iel and King voted no and the motion did not carry.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barker, carried, that the word occupancy
be changed to the word installation in the previous motion.
Chairman :King voted no because of his previously stated concerns regarding the
applicant's adherence to conditions imposed by the Commission.
wmec rem;nce .. this meeting would adjourn to ::ovember
i8 for an c,. n:anda Zp ecific ?Ian Naar ng.
Planning Commission Minutes -20- November 10, 1982
7�
CI GasOI.
iA
F_I Z
1977
November 12, 1982
{ C
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
.vese.Jon D. Nlikels
Charles 1. Buquet II Jam.. C. Frost
Richard H. Dahl Phillip D. Schlosser
Satyendra K. Sharma
9113 Foothill Boulevard
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 140. 82 -20
Dear Mr. Sharma:
•
The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission at its meeting of November 10, 1982,
approved your request for Conditional Use Permit 82 -20, subject to the •
attached conditions of approval. In order that the preschool expansion may
proceed smoothly, I would like to clarify your responsibilities under the
conditions of approval. It is our understanding that you intend to move
the temporary trailers onto your property by September 1983,
Prior to moving the trailers onto your property the following work nust be
completed:
1. The parking lot must be expanded to add four parking spaces -
Condition =4.
2. Trees and shrubs must be planted along property lines, This
requires submitting landscape and irrigation plans to Planning
for review and approval - Conditions =6 and =C -1.
3. Striping the driveway "Fire Lane" and costing ";o Stopping"
signs - Condition =8.
4. Drainage improvements to the existing parking lot - Condition =9.
9320 BASELINE ROAD. SUITE C e POST OFFICE BOX SOT a RANCHO CCCANONGA, CALIFOBNIA 91730 a 17151999.1951
•
C
Satyendra K. Sharma
November 12, 1982
• Page 2
Please contact Jerry Grant, Chief Building Official, concerning drainace im-
provement questions. I would recommend that work on the above - listed items
begin as soon as possible to avoid unnecessary delays next fall. Should you
have any other questions, please call me at (714) 989 -1851.
Sincerely,
COi•1MONITY DEVELOPMENT D�i"RTMENT
P�r'�`1J4FN6.,IZI'J ISI OiI �/ �
r..z ^rra
DAN COLEMAN _.
Associate Planner
OC /kep
Attachment: Resolutio of A ?royal with Conditions
Negative Becfiarggion
• cc: Jerry Grant
r ,.
FOB HILL FIRE PROTECTION D ,_fRICT
P. 0. Box 35
v 1 51 6623 Amethyst Street
CITY OF RAIICHO CUCANIONGA Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91701 (�( O •
COMMUNITY OEVEI OPMENT DEPT. O
(714) 987 - 2535
MAY ? 1884 Q
t1 0
7i8191t01111121112t3�o 30, 1,e4
fir. Satyendra Sharma, owner
Foothill Learning School
9113 Foothill Blvd.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Dear Mr. Sharma:
This letter of intent will reflect the under-
standing reached at our meeting April 27, 1984,
concerning the Foothill Learning School:
1. The trailer presently on the property
cannot be used in any way until an
approved water system and hydrant are
installed on site.
2. Water system plans will be submitted to
this office within 30 days from this date.
3. The trailer will be removed from the •
Property within 30 days from this date
if you fail to submit water system plans.
4. Any future construction projects of any
type or size will not commence until such
plans have been approved by this office.
This includes portable construction such
as trailers.
We look forward to your cooperation in this matter.
'Very truly you r', J
Susan. D. Wolfe Jim W. Bowman
Fire Prevention Inspector Fire Marshal
mbm
cc; City of Rancho Cucamonga, Debt. of Comm. Development
City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Commission
State of Calif. Comm, „unity Care Licensing
State Fire Marshal's Office
•
7�
v
4D RESOLUTION NO. 82 -107
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 82 -20 FOR TEMPORARY
TRAILERS AND BUILDING ADDITION FOR A PRESCHOOL AND
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LOCATED AT 9113 FOOTHILL IN THE R -1
ZONE
WHEREAS, on the 3rd day of September, 1982, a complete application
was filed by Satyendra Sharma for review of the above- described project; and
WHEREAS, on the 10th day of November, 1982, the Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the above - described
project.
follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as
SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met:
1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General
Plan, and the purposes of the zone in which the use
is proposed; and
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; and
3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the
applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the
environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on November 10, 1982.
SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 82 -20 is approved
subject to the following conditions:
PLANNING DIVISION:
1. The temporary facilities are approved and shall be
removed in two years from the date of placement on
the site or shall be removed from the site within
thirty (30) days from the date of occupancy of the
permanent addition, whichever comes first.
2. That building permits shall be obtained for the
permanent building addition within twelve (12)
months from the date of occupancy of the temporary
facilities.
-/1�
J
Resolution No. 82 -1(
Page 2
3. As a Conditional Use Permit, this approval shall
become null and void if final occupancy is not
issued for the temporary facilities or building
permits issued for the permanent addition within
eighteen (18) months from the date of approval,
unless an extension is granted by the Planning
Commission.
4. The temporary facilities shall not be located on the
site until the parking lot expansion is complete.
5. Expansion of the preschool beyond 48 children or
expansion of the K -3 beyond 60 children will require
approval of a modified Conditional Use Permit.
6. Landscaping, including trees and shrubs, shall be
planted around the south and west perimeter of the
property, and between the parking ]at and the
playground.
\J
7. All laws and regulations of the State relating to
the licensing of children's day care facilities and •
Qelementary schools shall be complied with.
8. The existing circulation aisle along the east side
of the existing structure shall be provided with
pavement striping stating "Fire Lane" and "No
Stopping ", signs posted in clearly visible
locations.
9. The following improvements are required in the
existing parking areas to the satisfaction of the
Chief Building Official: (1) repairing depressions
in the pavement for proper drainage, (2)
construction of a drainage structure to carry water
from the parking area to the drainage opening in the
south block wall, and (3) removal of the curb along
the southerly boundary of the parking lot and
replacement with a Portland concrete cement curb and
gutter in accordance with the approved Grading Plan
for CUP 81 -08. These improvements shall be
completed in conjunction with the parking lot
expansion prior to occupancy of the temporary
facilities.
10. A sample of the building materials shall be
submitted to the Design Review Committee prior to
issuance of building permits.
7�
0
CJ
Resolution No. 82 -1U1
Page 3
ENGINEERING DIVISION:
11. A landscaped median island is required along
Foothill and a median island lien agreement on in-
lieu cash deposit shall be required prior to
issuance of building permit.
12. Street lights are required along Foothill Boulevard.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1982.
PLANNING CWISS,ION OF TjK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
1, .LACK LAM, 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 10th day of November, 1982, by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Stout, Barker, Mc Niel, Rempel
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: King
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
7ro
OfPAMORIII OF f0'Chilii TY DEVELOPMEMI
STANDARD COnDITIOMS
dpphcant- - - -__—
Sic torn - rEi- --Gtrsl�
*nose I[eas clears die tnnill n,r:[ DF
APrIIUaI SILhL GJb IdCI IuE DV.YII :n: OIVISIMI FOR COMPLIAIICE Nllu ME FOILF1MIlIG
c0110111;i,S - -
k.. Sit, OCvelnp vet
1
sit, 11,131 nn u, �'. ^la r••l id,, - mrdaonm [lm mr ..proven I'll 1.r:[ on isle
or.vs:.n nd [I, ! ohs lnnw iota .... I'l P
X2. P—,yj Ut 1
I' ke mil L;:Lhnq hee.at ions i vpnra[mg all <I Jilin", of
D :r. rill inJl let mtLV to the Dl omn9 phis nn .r for t0 Itivanle Uf
to lJ mq ...ipso ls- ..a. of T tor` Lin 11al u:,.. a "mW .II IO °Ut rrd 111 ...Tian! Ntn all sin ions of
tliiu of OurlJml I'n art rslwn. e�r aVPl bible fl[Y ON mantel in off at
-_ a- rnr fere'oprr JI 104 vrtn .,lain lr I ecL
Recr Atbn Venrtle s[uragr Durzwn[ to in s "'l "r 11411.14 area for
are,. n of be .n.ln
r v s.d by a : root nigh m, ,
`1l o6:[nr[mq g.trs Dms rn[ [n ptJ SLanJaNS. lOtellon[ihal lrpl w'[n
so
NJct to a;LrOVI by t6. Flom....- Dn urpn.
J6. A s .p le or t,e n:u.....mini shall la• wbw [feu [u lte Clann urg
I for ter .n an.1 ,n.Vrov el .true to IS .." of pwr l Jing Derml4. Orris Ton
). Al l rw( .rppv. Ieu.m..v. r is luL ny mr In"Its
I "[rgrytl's buffr , sllall be J,I'edt cto rat Jy
Any slreels d[ 'e prod Ine S.,,• vuffert•J .ri. 1 . pr o. e: '.d'
' "M nY Ine Dlenn mg and p tlJ mq Olv' ...... ar I !en[
9- P,,or L ,, r0( O+ ._,rct "" Ur euvnrss albeit .e
tl er3 Jn� All r ml�t, ons of al'Pr vv.J a y er lnq co:o rn.vd
Ine usr.c ban Of it., Dlr ec [Or F On [.hoed n`r2m s all be eoii :pletad l0
0 Cm.whIty 0.
9. Ilea eypf..al snail 1.. moll and vvd if b.,
mr mn prp Jr Ct .,In inuir rev from
he date of
pr: nags .re not ISS neJ
I,yrcL rrmrA 1.
[ha[ Imlrll she 11
(JN) n •ivt h: v date f on lv trc.. until m::L v ::I
[ �Ir rr. ar V, drJ i Df r:.,r Are Isla or
l .rJ ^
pi rn 5r. 11 Le ...l'orded to en:1 a mrr vcn p, mr - •f red b I.e CIA L, ys „ae oInlJreq n. :ro.l
Tan shr4 ,n.0 utr
SI, :e IJ : :, ). Ito Il'dc'r: /
Sndll JJ rfrselY d((e![ aJJ acri :Lop pert.... of
12. f.11 poolYin.41led At the tame Of initial develop,.( dull be
SD Tar hwtrJ-
11. re.tunze9 Prd•ztrien patn.ra Yt el ro [z crquletian e"I” toll be Drpvlded
re[rayFrv,e l,r J_`rel n,
mbo.Al uta- rent to co mtt[ d.el flays with a0e^ snot Ana
vroJecl no. b C. 'F0
_— la. An vesn DIc, up znnl be rUr in" J"'1 u .:lh an r aptaa <y shielded
bn+r pr'oIK view, I( no cm [rdllteJ Ire sn receptacle are Drpr ide.l.
15. 5tanna rJ palm ro er plans mall be sulmitted to and approved by the City
Planner and au lilinq ofncgl prior t. it"W ncY of the first unit.
16. All hvlld ied'S moaner, and IndlvlJuel
Add conc ise m-it' mall III identified In a 11 nr
manner, including proper Il lumin. tl On,
IF In in is prat e se ltd mfe er ter for Agars, t t. Sesurl [r dead
o dcn nn fy bolts and lady sm11 be InslIllea
I8. securi [Y d,Vlces such a window locks shall he ms 411 ed on each unit.
- -_- 19. 1.1 unity wile in Ims dire l"A"..t -hall be Preplumbed to be adapted (or
ul ai wirer neat log un t
-- 10. [^`or9Y can se ring this building
prose ma l er ills and apDtianfel ere r qui red to be
Gorated rin [a this cl [n include lath [moss ai but not hml [Cd to
eedrted [ m.t ran I.— needs, .edit grade Of Insdlat ton, double paned
wl ndows, extended overnangz, pi{n tlesf e,Dlienc¢3, etc
21. This delloV ^ent shall provide In option to name haters to pwcna se a solar
water healing unit.
1L C¢crgencr yemndar, aCctsS snail be provided In [Ms l4ct to the $itip
Nilson If [he Faotnill Fire Protection Olstr it [.
i9. LOCii end ros4r Pi An
t ntt Ina U donee ..to tA. e(muesblan r is " :all D.. sild"is -d 11,I
I's" the
Irml plan ma Oat in9 �idUis, bail plan. A let uleA e•hvs lion
And .., eJ contra 1, 1- eaor,Imce vrtn* slops, Cl :ry icdl mndiuunz, trot l ng
he su6 :tilled la and ap C1lr ewes tr r ar, rani slenrprds, sMll
relordatiian of the fI.Al omap. b% the C1, Y Planner pant to approval end
2a. rms [ra rl yne 11 form or a to a intend ace dis [f In IUr malnlenenCe of
equestr Tan trans. Anne ass
-- 25. Brent naves snefl p¢ reyl ¢.:eJ And epOrpvbl he the fit- Pl annrr In agardance
. to We adnDleJ Street Nan mg MI t:'. prior to he City and r¢<a to 1110 o/
the Iinal map,
16. If this dmel0t,Or Intends to res[rfCt e0uesbiAn or
animal .el prd ores 1
most pee i suh:lltted to pled ter es en en .r,,, [hen a CDpy 01 tire C.C. 6 R.'s
hvl nian. r " d er tine Orr rte nuer 0,1., to arVrOral of
— 21. This pronr(( snail ulh, e
,en"m% nlomante ..,o Ce C arrmv mle fouling and /Or
nr rd .lelmed i e C.,o so ttna glinnl u".g,pUl It ies e..1 n,r• musing
!fe linC eo /e�u IFl ruction e1rset titer, rCn:S dnilnn ed lnnf�U nl 1prl i 11 1h.111
-Ff—ld Ir l,r CiIY rla nn^rtnC Ci OJ CC I. An ag, err..n[ IO nself l rCl At
pn Or ID Iysuante O! .e :IJ mi °rll Oe
Darsln A V,Alcular A..... 1 perm r {s-
I. All pe.A 9 lot 4nJHnPCd hlandv 5Nil pave a Ore vJe duns TOn
of s' and -hall Ton l ale n IA" walk ddb cent to par bra ztall.
A2. Perking lot bell shall ee A mmnum is gallon arc.
• ' • 0
' �J. lwY aisle ad[US shall
be a mlmmw 0116 L•e[ wWe.
\I
9. 'he final JP'olo of ton
'I� e. [ " ^r .•nrY J tlrl ll Ir Irr yr JrJY
rn llneJ[rnl rl r[
perimeter Ivy 6.3 Y:. wa115. Ia nAtcJpin9 a'IJ slJe-
\S indll !P rrClu n:J rn
of :a lets rll t t JU r In rr rnn,n
lr tons ([l
Inc r c V arJJn
tr.e rf0urrr:l lendtcdre DI
SJ11 feet lO Jn3 end Shall be
.11inIel
lyre Ilrt[r r[t rl[rr.n rn tt. a vl t+r In�[Urll
by Ine Cl aUnlrl•) (Iry l3lnn.
5. TII Carf tog {p ¢,y [tall b, n.,,
— - 10. A torn rrvr:m ul S 0I IM traei VUntad wltnm the
-Nees.
...... a.
zVe[lacm tlae D +o
let t. 5N I1 be
B. All unit' shall be Prnn,l" with alt -r—tic garage door oVrneri.
___ 11. 51 ^c.nl larr.ltr rpe lea lures
L Ur4r gnJ3 cJ ruI[nr prrl rng Jr, az Shall be twl Ll
s in as nxr..nJ ln.
nr ^t, mIan er uaq vdfnlls ILO(n r.r[rtai�mel narl ion tai cnungelmandilrz
rn lent/lt
Vra eA,
e0nl dnrls:u Vln9, is repo V¢d along
ll.e rnr t'rra r.l i, C.,r`[ arul fr SLIMIVnt SI:JII rPtll l(I
D.
_
Lgnt
(IIC :[Or Jr
¢lilt un uraz 'rte mJes[ tneY are tl.e pr inn Ple zwrae u/ transyurte(IOn anal
for Lye
A,
oarfr.
-L[ L Arry "In, 11.11olll for tnr5 Jr rr lulr+rnl snail b^ -
1f n.l i
9. to pry \rng Shall Cx p. r. -rt (rJ ni[Irin [nf in [Cr io and a l inn ai
5 rC
nnlnr, ance
.ntn ore Cor enrnv ve Lyn Ord,"I'll 41.4 mall e rpv It anJ pDrOrel
b' III' planar ng 011l3lon
{le ..11r.r loan
[r0 vr5 Ir:r I .,.1 ar rrt. CV Vrrr:nit, Oar[. Jul 1[r tlr
norm
prior to Instal latlOn OlrOn
SU C11 Srr102,v
t[eJ to tee Cst Ylau.
l; rr l3Pr slyly I.hczrr[ ng Y urq
Onrllton
r von Pn ar to sa.a n,. V! WrlJ mg
- -� Z' A" vgn ,r
rl n xU fn /Or Oriz .. +rI OI - "•'nI I'l lI be
per
yer.at,.
rng lv lath [nbv[trd IO the
rt"i their III-e- and appr
-. terrJ4r eLnJ
—I I. rot in I44vame a( 1
1 per.nr [a. ^
I. Adttu llalau.l ; <el ±Jn.1 rlTr Iran Plan sM1.11l
Si. n:r
__ J. 11.. , ...b ca led o n the sal mllteJ pLInPS a not aDVra..`J ill
dlgr0u I
be tvLUl [trd In nrl
a a rpr uvrJ
nY Inf rl arrn lnq nrrftru.l I•, r..r [o II.P IS
end will rfgur a SP a his
r P rJ [[ SI'1'r I yr ry Jr.d
IU antC OI Lu 11 JtOg D[. 5.
wl[
apl`IOrJ .
Z. f[ Rmg Err <,...11 F.•
L
Ad M1[unal LVyr'nrals BI•r(u ,,
r[J n.J n^ e v IIO stl.h n n
r
•,i,....y
c its OYrt [+ ^_ r zJltl pi JUOtn,[i lI ^ ant I'l .•rsi..11 1.,.
c I'° III, Into
.lI
o..•Inn.•rnt uerr re mall be ac 3 prior to Lne r n
PeI rl t. cmm� r neJ ttna cr Of
i Building
yraa...In ..tort b...- ar .r a mt Ine p.w.nt..J
r. , rv..l. Ir m n l armnat,tanJ wo'...
vv
a
r.
41.11 . n 1.f planlJd L.r ..;. Llr.......rc O! r
. rd nrrz. the Illan 1 •e.Lnred
to bf SuIm 111rJ t0 n.l
___ I. Urr,. InVnf,.t Brnew sod 11 be acmepl isb,,j
ICl.r oral Iry Ihu Pho.n., pry it ion Vr lnr lO ,IIrV'oval
01 the Irnal
tuC.h vlyon mn p. poor in rPCUrJnIrOn O( in, Ifni
g. oin..l pl.,n.
1 Sn ff[ trees, a enn '.m of IS g.11rm tree or 1 d..l.'r,
— ,, APP.mJI Of ientali VP fleet IM.
II [I. ^r [I.rl Lr In[I.11.0 rn
n[ Ip t:r, Ilan of Rr. et frrr3 for tl.r (r[y
'..q
_ _ _
al . '4 rl......0 5ubl e<[ an in, JI'proral
G,. r[.n.a soil I nl Nu,
p1
r[ a ave.age every JO' on ln[r.
ran •S
_ ._-- _.-- __._ -_�
P.r fClrl
SIr PC It anJ 2U Lu mr
[r ir•[i!
__ -d. II r14 IVrnll [r:.n Jl Utf rpr ell[ :5 gran l.•J !nr
\
I. rr
a 1•r nrl of rvan tl.(tl e[
" rl -o.ny Ca...n ysran mJl JJd o. ae feu eonG LL.a.n o
O.e C..onvlvnal Vzx Perm.[_ r re \e
_. l d c.n.n OI Su t. r.�• 1 y,n unP115eJ of [ne Inf lVU.n.I s
nil Ee
ro
IIrnur.4I .rID rn l0e Jerf II,P -n l; Z0. ZJ- tut a, far y.r, ]0e., j5
O.I ion, ,o.J 10: -5 fun.
_ 5. Il.e .rlu:e'r n rcJ•ared to oLUm in, lollo,..n
q,l
5. •II Ian.Itor.,•5 t..a[
p'rn lr rtea 0! Iur pS vL.[h hi /e d prl vdlC o ] z: goof silt n rnL DO
ad,. [�•n[ to [nCrr Pr Op ¢, [J. r DuUl rf f'I u ^4[r lJn Ira 11 n <f
v rll Gc nni t rota In a heal tnY aid [Lrrn ny c -
JI[run, on
(PPP Iron .rrJ[, Ir atn, dn.I,dCLrr i.
6. ale'
In Purr I —., ilia hone IOCatCd nn IUL _
nl r r n
s:u r m.a` .n .., r e,Si r r[ ur uc.l ro•i^prt anJ of 5'1 n I
-
wrq °�41 dLJ LLat 5a10 lot Vm L1, 5 rl r3 ar.s 1
qr al•vlsl p•• .r 11 Ir Lr.,a:, .r y ^J ...1 4r1 . ""I'd, .u"I Sl ul•
Dlanlu
osol"U[ I
fns far u.t parlou Of "a 11 It 11 rt LIP1.1at
,
rr l'ar r[i of IL. t¢v of 1•rnOn (uu.nnvP Lrt tl qr I.4n bl:g
••
c. n Or
� a
9.in eKCS S. ••na 0
lr'Y •n
situ- t e all .. aplmbuq anJ ......... a on �I
Sidoes
rl Liu
r n rrn
a r,r lot ,t, , tI nq e.n.I,"" L U.r Jc.rin •. /n
mJ.rr rul
- ...at ntrl
- r5 '. IJ an'1 O�4u)r r nY toil bn y e.. r. rOr LO I[•I .ng a.
rvtI
.cna ,er
c carp CJt
IPr Il o:e v - - OI the sl u pet ...I11 :f cr p t..•I
'in
LY fns rlann.nq
SnJ tta lew[ya rS t0 be Lied C Ilm J +re
still IO In JLn It IS In 'atr51dw o I. Lu.4.lran.
pCuprna l Y IOpfr wr[n !ne LIIY prior IO
1. All rvt..... afro :11 -1. m..t I t.wrn wq Lull hr lull/ -nnU .na ar r
I.: rr •r.l
-.
-- 6' r'r'r [n Jn.nrJl anJ. C[ni Of
.r'. t'. c rJl r:n Or _
.,.ans al l-11011 Lle to thf tit, - <o 1.
o i..i.r r r/ ..'r.
01 mn.. L'n .n[C Sna 11 Le vu ber[L'J
I... I.Irnl .•. tt. vv.. ra :ut I.r.:.a.r rrV 't n
j
pn in .'Iqn vat and r r,lapo of the e..
air. ihe.,q 11"na..J,. a .... my .l ul r:rrV i[ •I+i in u. +
r l n r.Ir ur rr L�nL db,p- ,it
:r p[
1 .,.I c 1. rllirt�nl p "jv�I' •d. "n hP' "I O
r' ,, r,r ".,9 J s. I.. o. tn.'�.l II. •'I.., v.
r,Ir nl rJl ,,.•at I On In 11.11 t o Jl 4P rr It rtlrrr n',
r rr •
r P'.
I. M1r Vf vu. Lr a., ut mr ... I•Im tmt Iv ......... ilLr.n l.lP
n.. .n I .....
ta.P a[,
JI r .:.f., 1. "[ "IV. "ncty. all rto r.
Cr tr. 9 n'1trv. rrr] yr..nl m,. SnJtl
B.
T-11 J , al :r, JI b, rvll
vn n .leiIs r • I IL') rr o.raunb. ,l r. r mny n Varr
.n S rt
:1 in't 1 r r n I.1 � rit., mt volr _on I rvm rS ..n ,
meV
g•nnt.`J by t'.,, rl.r r., nl Lr .rvn rt a'u rr.
9. Irrrt zr. t.l r. r z I.....r tut 'rr [I'd at a trite] Jvr el ui. c-cI Vita It;, Jnd r
ra I n ra tin, mla r, bi tt... dnyrq: •,1.
t. ur
Lne .nv L41 S.t.e.. a. r , r In l.1 ],.V1 ] n
I gu r n) t. L[• der, 1" ", Jt Ice[ M.n s-
.APPLIOYI Stmt Oct to [I IuE 1V1I pI Olt V. IrIC I,, COr IVL IhICE A1111 lu[ T011011:,,
101.111111 IS
P. Srtr r..n,Plnlr,rnt
I. le.c ,rglr rrt S JII
u „r ,rn r , ail o,. nL nit iii n"ri, JJUVLrJ tin lf.,. rn onrlJmy o,nr•
all unrr , n:.b m9 Cale. HLL onnl E]tR n. Co"'. "d
al pl r. plc u'. +nJ .. duun[ns I. elle[t e[ [I,P tine of 1
o! rela lire poi yr n. ,. ssuann
$.
1'114r In I n -P oI IurlJ rr.g VPrrnr [t /nr [nmbui[r blP tnnz lr "I y Pr rJ rn,P
ell !P sSi I',, l [
n till Iur J Ire JtJ'II JiSb rt Irrr [nrcf it 'I
J rrre Pm Icc t r nr 1+ .t o1ra. rs slit blc.rG orbng [unglcb n. ol�•r ra n.Jnn
1 Pr rtls )o tnt ♦e cf ;o n ]nJing VPrmit f., a lieu vJ. ntlal ,L,cll u..l
Jn 'lor lrl [ . r euslir', un'I (sL Uu r o Pl It .sire "0 1 y.r[
Ir. r !r;lr ,a rr SnrA It.,, r,. l rr .Inrt
r le+, rJ f[ Ii,. tn. nl ytl ens
no, "”, on,Ying Irmo. Jr "rl sco,fl 1I"' s
t. Prrar in t,b, z r'r[e nl a on" .]rn.I prim"[ .... J
a'1 d,, :c eu zUag Jerel vf:.•e t. Ura of rt rrl y lint r,t. ul
Ie•e lcrn.ntt U. rst ra "..r ivpI¢urt will I,y
Irnr trJ tu -t Slit, la It a -Pot let, Iln ln'n It rt " . .. In ",, Lnt '.at
rea- nr! enl 91_
s. tt rrr! aJJre:ut v..al Le
I__ by :Jm nuilmng nrn[u 1.
_ "I t le r ronrrr,[,,,+l [eJ -I'. Ilre rrl+rJ rn[ mtl rf lal ,rn.l '...n-
). All mn r J...I""" zr.,ll nerP tby pudding rl PVa t r cn Ieu rig [rrr ttrn t
enzr rj r`I .r rb +I I'll—Il r, .J If -unit ur nil..lit a
,.r n.I-. 11.r d i,..].. to nI
-
I. Prnv "Je [emp ,-rI1 vIth Il.c lo,fc, Bui l,bn Cade (o
[aria War frig n.e, aru enf !,n re. n[ueo. stg or e r p'cyr rly Im [L•a, . "n a.a
. Ittrn•J Lu rIJ "n It �•
bc,l.[1 " :1 [I "II
lyn,ng ragnW m tar tLx mtmml.. tyycn °' ✓IY
J u or [br bn r l'I "n] ""111 11,l1 [.r "b„ il.t4[J.
]. [. ,: brit s qr n. a•ovl I,!,L U. I snit]) be
naift II- L.
1p � + "t„ f1... Lm la,a Pl groin 1
g CyJe, and 4.n fo,.t fu, IJ...g
c v$'
P,.,c,t Inc. O7•'J�.
u. In
r`dl,,g of III svblect n,
Om la trig c.rJ.. 6ty p+. inJ 11 I. u.m Jen[c rtn the nnilann
IJUCeI'1ua1 U in LtJJ InY 41e 11 Le in mUa lz nil a[unfy nndo't•I.R U( [dPS, Ili,
theP
l r , n uM1UI ymvtd
via 11 Le "c""'J by d pmt] licit cnglneer IltenseJ by the
Slate ! Llr ruin ra lu V"rly nn u n wM1.
A 9PSUyg I[.IJ alvlt G'le of J Ppared by + T"Wied mglnerr or geolo9lit
a'.J in, it 1.•
PI•Lm uyn for gr eding pLn [lice 1.
a. I,., IlnnC m r'Iing Jlan inau b! Ginn] +ct to r aonraval by Inc
SWmv'IVU...... V or usmn[e of c NIe L•J lira" I. acl,rJetro ul .u¢ (Ina]
o/ W,lu
In g v,.nn It chilblllr Ccnll licit.
Costa. -lol subdivision, Inc fyl ly "ling Ix•ry,r —,bft, spell
a- o"ru[Y 'bat Ue apr ePn,:nt a grid r]n let rn et:
I all Co-site JOa,c'gc alecrlrt res ' ]rya led'Jern [Prl rig all [p
to [Iie sat(SIJ[Iiun o! tic Building and Safely O'vlsmn. a.�' \wr
b. Avprnprule ees :ern tS, for safe m1,.,nI nr d,l rnlr rater amt are
mrindid unto o "I ea + "I yb eels „are to Ire del inellerl and
reem Jed to [Le sa [is la cl ion of the Rnl),o.g and EJI I rs lJn
e u' -sr U. u.a ]nave unprnnn¢nls, ncces.... Inr nrnrrt. i'. Or vprnla tin
!` snni lv i1c, Properllct, are to be u[tldllcd prior to is1rrant, of Y
to! ornf........... .0 di abnl, tan uPJn inf ( c,l Ib,I urY Le to oi"It
Panel re!vure to vincn a bm la mYrVe. mtrI, Anru,J, or .item a
J.
Final gr..,og plena in, 11,
elY Division for t Var :el J e lu bP '"trotted In !Lt Oc.111ny
uJ Sa( 111 1al r
�fln .uy be n Ur -ru ,tat or Vc'p. "sue, cn o! building p .It ,
” ernl.nti n. b]N S.I
e. SII orng�.tlPki t in V...... ou e fa r1 el "n P ",t "cal bP"'prl bid nl
nl q'.w Jr ,,, .ribs alte1t l.a ni n rr rt,v. •n tlal : nn ,n m:aleum
Sri. "I1 Is n"o.id.line nt.,I'c[. r of In- Uu �lJ eyrV.......1" rI lrshnmr"
o ye'm. "rata ntbv Seel a..a rrn mla "n rg
n rnunth, alter 'J'J.•tu to a Pu nit
AI'I'I I[A'Il SIrBLI [UOIi.0 ihE Cr;.:1LE(HIIIS Oljl_:IV_' IOq C"UIIMICE WIN 111C IaLW111G
C[A 111Od
n.I "u Mont ,Ipp ;•eh "g ��Ipr p:pryi
vaJrte inn Sb'n rr. ],IP by ru ]I n ur
r / ]nit S'II n, ...a ar "a . .,.L; • "p'Ir n. alo rile " tf r,.[ ri llrl s.
'• J' .n r.
-- P'nu uyn sry 11 Ut nude to
5t "P: [i ! the follm.mg rlgbtc.c L.,r IJIIOV(ng
:
r,rt In,
Lcet no .
(uf."er p: ,.l evl/ me :dJ, ui :a'I Cf re lu] Ver C "[Y t11nJ l:.la,
1. All r,q.0 y! v:A ¢vin- 911l I..". dnJ egr I,, fill, n [lull ba• deJ,tatlJ
t (UI IJ.
5. yrc p.. ocal e,x "d, 51.01 be I'ro a".I.J v ling
vn 1, Jrivr{. oncvnrrcng ! a vh I"'." _ {
p all
LIx lie 'netnbe 114 Out) It, n.Jp pap fl{
li d e
J.
.I
6.
9.
�h'1'u le Dror is ions s,,III Le n.IJe for the inure ts, 19re13 aaJ inh nql
braid UOn n! ,uI the l5 union r[I1 pe I,,d for ,Irh veer er 9uo.f5 to
lrrP p. ol. r[r e. rn nl'e .ru can o! the D'ol'es r•,1 tnezz.
" bus
pr rye La` Jry In.L4e eI full for [ru55 -lot Jra uingr shot? Le r ea
Y•J aoIH nc ell rural%. nr nalrc ail - lhr /rnal ny p_ e'lu"
FII a is t irvj a sr vit1 1 ln9 -1 thin to lure right -o/-
qn 1111 Io .'.1 or rin Lr jr bneuN on the u'[Y du In p,.
m1V per City b.g.n b z req,.bmu'n t s.
.hero e5ry for ola, lntaan1er for Llle 1 5n+ll 1•e JrJ I[eteJ to the CI11
.here a gel per ra[ ,
pro er [y.
S[r eee Le+ __
fnnstf -t lull tt r.rt Impfnee0enf5 including, hot not
orb and u(tr:, A. ;. cult, ni,lik, Jrbe hue tied
lo,
[r ae5 ,nJUS r..[ +n all 1 terror z tree t z. opprv+c a par vY
2. or- ,I y Snv llul[r +[A' 1 ^car ,nt -thin a 40-font uI,,. JeJrule,
"" rn LruRed for d11 h[I I- tect,on arealy.
g. Cmnt-ct it, loll- ,vmgun hit rmpmrements m[IuJ-
IuniteJ lo. Ing. Wt m[
S1Pr[I :r;aE i.blliN P,:p �. f ':I[Ulbl
___ _ : a :J YR. 'IGIIIS 0"1 P1 AY I$l AilU
THAN. - - -- IIIrI - - -- --- - -- RuRN
•Sn[luu e: Lnasu - - - - -- — —
Open.) vn.. ,rr r.Jf;lun can nielef.
eA. 1, for Iv +n, u., ;r¢^ ferfoloh-j In the
roll [e fa.l m.l .n: I. iuhl l[ r19Lt.. [.v ry.
Oty [n 'r'nt Vei met h.rll to Lt , In +n ....m t
91n�a rs mna. I. r.aal u..,. to am Darr rrr.n rts „y,...r ,.'.
Sbe[[ r III,
D, a N.•q lz terrJ Cnll fn alIer 11. h1 LLe fIIY [n9 f,,r Ind YI %p,i eJ
r ..C'en[t IS'I aIf l be Col•'Ir e.l, !car III SO 1.
Vlevi old t, III ''S'tl`a 11 :, J'rt, of .cal ,• aeLi enf ref In r t. IIn II
buhl¢z —lain In, lo[a ban u! all ua is bnl .'.1 ,,
r:4h [.a t -.a Y.
6. Sw eh 5[alI "' pn:'., III a t .p r e.n e. e[u L.a ¢(.w.
oL Ire cru• r... .. IL �. lly or, II n.r, rl..I nc
or r 1 r 5 I
1^9[
r tr E [
li le trun
ISSU,na / lu.lu.nJ f•.r nr t:. _ roar .1 JI 1n5. mIr I
y nt.
L ).
All vtrr et i -p,n rr-r n[5 5211 hC Invtalled to the SItlS ,ct,on tr t,e
ertr fng l nee r. p. or I. crc vn +n[Y.
rn t[,IIeJ IR,p um •ro;,�n v: and street Dune 519mng ln,ll
...... ou rvyul r 1 rya m•s lru Lr lr Lzno l l ar
eras ,e at aJe',u, to J.. I m.nndo, l ng [ nz t rut I I ... rorA
[•.n Iri n: [l 5:+11 r. rIy •rr r.l [: Cnr r the fast u(ugr 1.1..,4 rn.l
.r'J..n n :r.,ll L^ I (ua.lri oI cnrtpl [t ion Il Inc can, t rust run to
me
'o on of Ine I I t E., ill, r.
I
10. p+ll.+rs Sa r 1 p,
peJeslr n nf [ . oYlem btwl[n public lic' -1111 '-it Dn -tlee
71 11. his]"is ha la bxal vs tdl ltdrto scaly "' C'nlp. slJeralls. Under liGewlk
II. All energy dr... I.,o, and /ur Croslnn Control rx'I,.... IN 11 be Installed
Au letter aolsac "" ' of cat ne CRY Cug ln•r dl Me Ind of S, I Slr eels.
cal'I mfe f Jralmgx runoff 11 -h Lne h—,li -eon pmpe rty
o.,.an s.v❑ E[ nqulre.l.
k. 0111-9,n.l fluor?_ Co nl
The dplll i[dut -111 be retDUn,lblI to, Cohltrucon of all om 31 [e
nn l,wge /ecitlbes required by the fbr, En9.ura
1. In tersea mn drams will CC regvi red at u.e folloring to Ions:
t.
The Noposc'd P-Jnrt 11115 unpin - calf- a
ILO^ bail. —I
the hu, lanol flood Inset u r r tuhj e[tuLJr[t to
P V /VY 4 of flat V /a9 /+m dnJ fttYdO� - -J In.�[n�ImudnJl t
A Jrolnl9e li-holl and/or fl nut 111nlra ll do anti alit Lr repo irCJ to
pm ter[ tiv s[ru[f ores 61 Jiver 11 ^9 sheet runnel to zber[y, car to a
u m.
5. fur fare Jraly if tan: 'ball be nd•lo fur ar nI J1al...I
[.'r once J 1 of
+' r ing tilt` "w"
/ p ^/ly Ir ov JdJ.I[r.11 al [.15.
6. letter of J[[e05. pen (i
r
il"i, runoff -o Inc Ira[[ flnusaor�ta rcpe'ty r..nrrz 'lull Le regal red
rr.. one p, ovrn.r 5.
—_' (tr dv ii requvup amtimebm of Ir l•, 9a 1'I n ..h,. turf [ In'I
/ullla.J y u t urb nrl lr.t5, r rr rYidl
Irn ls. nJ% r•lanii[,ped r[rr Lcrmi and ro IIN ZJr'r VwJd,'d {f•LL mn
' I a pro? ertr
,h% ;a.l lr.r rnq unrm Jrun sn,n Le rnzunal to Wr ullsrac uon of
lira' CI [I ErrJln a cr':
r l.. li Eur Iha' Yr, lr.f I.,1
1 be tu[n1teJ to Ur" Oli fng mar !or )
1�y I. thov l.!a +el ut.l ... i
rrA fl, zt 1lrre ova lot .LJI ) 1 r .
ntlnn.>tt-
.,.:I,..h,.l „t,Iltlezna
;pc �)ar t+. ter cats feu tl,m 12 ,vLUUnJ
X' t ✓r mq ut.11y Cal ll.mt as el %J to Ine q.lilf,ut
+nJ .on of tnr
a'v C' 'Y Lrgm
_�i. vt, M1tlnz zetll Lr zr Lle fur u.a rclu [r,
'• I.Irvdl can cacao^ a! w'bu9 Vubil[
_ 5. Iv.r lot •/ zl.+ll Lv ,r.pantln
Cllv fnr b.e mzlelllUUn or zb rr'I I14LI Ing
In J[¢rJ VCp ultp :avV.e.n l llo.ny IJ ISVn G„Invy ..n.1 el.Y Sb,:JJrdt.
Y6. Va trr e.rJ t r flan' 'bill Lf JatlgneJ nJ ( nib u. furl <o uuvt
nl Ilr.. Cr, ce lgelru [nr.,rcr 1.e [11 olun[[ ([rml. Irr rL,rr l
i o ru irL �'�}t is" urr !rr vr,an rrmtel "I"ll Ui n.p pLn ...,t if
Llrc w..rnY
.I Sen Y'uw,.h nn. ale tie
pn.v m ,....rd mon r 01 vxael Lrrr.e Imrn [rno .111 Lr, erpr lr e.l
nt 4.. .. e.i fim
iLl.li nt •[but rrevl'n 11111 —J 1f,
R am Wem p v111 Le!wLlatl to ..'LJ
rt
I.ry
r'rlrrinnr.rr rt .rn.L Tl.l.rnv,lt
! \_ 1. frrv.r[t Ir..n ..In.r e.:..uc.�r%i 111 Le reVU, rIJ ea IVl lurt:
Xo. folt �..i,. ,fr'u�!fi1LL pWD.
fli,da :onL
__ u. au1.L�� rob mu, lrt
_ d. a c..r Jr 1.d [,..:.:no.. cnnJlt font ala murmt mat (c.
if urr 111111J.nerl M1Unc iYt LOO. s 4t)
W
e n, ud t a .r 1" 1111, tI'... L (qt r Inr ttol nrr Shell e this ,1.o
(Y,
1. flndl { cl dr.d nect m aVS he
R«u.l nt.
mnf'— to Ot' sLdnOa rds and
'1. a I'Lral naf iRJI Le r orJrJ pr LOr to first Dhese 'uLJlvR mn la
prevurl ute[mn o! ulu, ugnlmJ Pdrteli.
5. Pnnr to r n.; .t,all, a rynl tte o! nt ration Id Nis d J a
LnrJSr bl.l fuJ i l'.[L.g ! r.b ¢I, Buell L.• ILlnl . n l ( In Iru.uu
b r itp 3Le
L,I Y [Ilr J., et.ly J. It.rvlt J n 01a [rl [[ IJ r..ull4n hrli Le W,nt
LV Le dl'nlnrJ
Ier.J aV[ u„Ln ltr.ent e�Jlttr ra t. rt Inlo lt..
1 ]. IJOJ'adI'Im� n11J Lrr r.le [1.,n SYi l,n1 1111.111.0 to ... roil.. lrl
19t.1 r Ictr t u, 1 Vnl.l r.
• 111 .1.•l .��I lr .ull, [r rt
I.,.n. r � 1 v[rJ 4Y II.e tCl tY 1.1.11 .1.rna .. .
•
LVI
irR)ett bp.g[2:-W
0 •
rdftl
II
' Mr. Sharma replied that it would.
Mr. Coleman stated that if the Commission did grant a 6 -month extension the
applicant would have to occupy the temporary trailers within 6- months or have
building permits issued.
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Stout, to deny to time extension request
for Conditional Use Permit 82 -20. Motion failed.
Motion: Moved by Hempel, seconded by McNiel, to approve the time-extension.
Commissioner McNiel advised the applicant that the commitments and agreements
made should be followed through because the Commission's deadlock now is for
that reason. Motion failed.
Ted Hopson, Assistant City Attorney, advised that it an affirmative action
cannot be taken by the Commission the Conditional Use Permit for this project
Proceeds until it expires on the date firs`. established.
Is Chairman Stout asked when this project e.pires.
Mr. Coleman stated that based upon Mr. Hopson's statement, the Conditional Use
Permit expired on May 10, 1984.
B. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL. USE PERMIT 82 -20 - SHARMA
Commissioner Barker stated that there were a number of items of concern when
the project first came before the Commission which resulted in conditions
being placed on this project; however, these conditions and requirements have
•
apparently been ignored by the applicant. He asked Dan Coleman, Associate
Planner, if the trailers have been removed.
Mr. Coleman replied that had been removed last week.
Commissioner Barker asked. if there were other items in violation of the
conditions of approval.
Mr. Coleman replied that on his last visit to the site some landscaping was
not completed and a chain link fence across a portion of the parking lot had
been extended.
Chairman Stout asked Mr. Sharma to come forward. He asked Mr. Sharma if his
intentions are to restore this facility with the same type of architecture or
if he was planning to change that concept.
Mr. Sharma replied that he has recently employed Andrew Barmakian to work on
plans and a decision on the architecture has not been made at this time.
Chairman Stout asked if 6- mont.., would be a realistic time in which to
complete these plans and submit them to the City.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- May �3 t984
11
•
' Mr. Sharma replied that it would.
Mr. Coleman stated that if the Commission did grant a 6 -month extension the
applicant would have to occupy the temporary trailers within 6- months or have
building permits issued.
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Stout, to deny to time extension request
for Conditional Use Permit 82 -20. Motion failed.
Motion: Moved by Hempel, seconded by McNiel, to approve the time-extension.
Commissioner McNiel advised the applicant that the commitments and agreements
made should be followed through because the Commission's deadlock now is for
that reason. Motion failed.
Ted Hopson, Assistant City Attorney, advised that it an affirmative action
cannot be taken by the Commission the Conditional Use Permit for this project
Proceeds until it expires on the date firs`. established.
Is Chairman Stout asked when this project e.pires.
Mr. Coleman stated that based upon Mr. Hopson's statement, the Conditional Use
Permit expired on May 10, 1984.
• ORDINANCE NO. 225
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 2 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER 2.52 THERETO TO
ESTABLISH A -ARK DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION WITHIN THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does
ordain as follows:
SECTION 1�: The City Council finds determines that the implementation
of the Parks Element of the General Plan can be enhanced through the
establishment of a Park Development Commission.
SECTION 2: Title 2 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby
amended by adding Chapter 2.52 thereto to read as follows:
Sections
• 2.52.010
2.52.020
2.52.030
2.52.040
2.52.050
2.52.060
Chapter 2.52
PARK DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
Park Development Commission.
Membership.
Chairperson.
Administration.
Duties of the Park Development Commission.
Meetings.
2.52.010 Park Development Commission. There is hereby created the
Rancho Cucamonga Park Development Commission.
2.52.020 Membership. The Park Development Commission shall consist
of five (5) voting members, subject to the following conditions:
A. Commission members shall be residents of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
B. Commission members shall be appointed by the City Council.
C. Commission members shall serve for terms of four (4) years,
except that two of the members first appointed shall be designated to serve for
a term of two (2) years, and three a term of four (4) years, so as to provide a
continuity of membership on the Commission. Thereafter, the term for each
voting member shall he four (4) years. An appointment to fill an unexpired
term shall be for the remainder of such unexpired term.
D. A Commission member may be removed upon the majority vote of the
entire City Council.
Ordinance No. 225
Page 2
•
2.52.030 Chairperson. The Mayor, with the approval of the City
Council, shall appoint the first Chairperson from among the Commission member,„
subject to the following conditions:
A. The term of office of the Chairperson shall be for the calendar
year, or that portion remaining after said Chairperson is appointed or
elected. Thereafter, when there is a vacancy in the office of Chairperson, the
Commission shall elect a Chairperson from among its members.
2.52.040 Administration. The Community Services Director shall act
as Secretary to the Park Development Commission and shall be the custodian of
its records, conduct official correspondence, and shall generally coordinate
the clerical and technical work of the Park Development Commission in
administering this Ordinance. The Community Services Director may designate an
alternative to serve as Secretary during the absence of the Director.
2.52.050 Duties of the Park Development Commission. The Park
Development Commission shall review matters relative to park and recreation
facility development on behalf of the City Council and provide comments or
recommendations to the City Council as may be appropriate.
2.52.060 Meetings. Regular meetings of the Park Development •
Commission shall be held at such time and place as is determined by Resolution
of the City Council.
SECTION 3: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk
shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage
at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published
in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 1984.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Jon D. MSkels, Mayor
•
Beverly A. Autbelet, City Clerk
IC 7
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -124
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SETTING SCHEDULE FOR REGULAR
MEETINGS OF THE PARR DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does
resolve as follows:
SECTION is The time and place of the regular meetings of the Park
Development Commission shall be held on the third Thursday of each month at
7:30 p.m, at the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Ease Line Road, Rancho
Cucamonga, California.
SECTION 2: Special meetings may be held in accordance with City
policy.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 1984.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
49
Jon D. Mikels, Mayor
•
is
11T 1 n1 n A Alnvn nr 1n . vnvn .
STAFF REPORT
' \
oil �.
•
� �r
June 28. 1984
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Building Officials 31 *1
SUBJECT: BUILDING FEES - 6318 EAST AVENUE - GAGLIO
I have discussed the above subject with Mr. Gaglio several times over
the past year or so. His viewpoint has consistently been that the
fees required conditional to issuance of a building permit should not
apply or should be modified in his case because the building would be
a replacement of a structure that had previously existed. Upon
questioning Mr. Gaglio acknowledged that the house had probably been
destroyed prior to incorporation.
I indicated that in my interpretation the words "reconstruction ",
"alterations ", and "additions" as utilized in the ordinances
establishing the various fees were intended to apply to developments
or improvements in existence at the effective dates of adoption rather
than to structures existing at some time previous but removed prior to
enactment. The city attorney concurred with this conclusion.
If Mr. Gaglio's reasoning was to be applied, any parcel that contained
a struct.re at some time through history would be exempt from or subject
to reduction of fees.
A search of the records and review of the data in the letter of request
generated some additional information:
a) The Tax Assessors office verified that the property was destroyed
by fire on January 18, 1973.
b) The original structure was approximately 720 sq.ft. in area.
c) Fees for a new structure of the size described and constructed
on the referenced parcel would be as follows:
/G6
Staff Report - Gaglio
June 28, 1984
Page 2
1.
Building Permit
415.00
•
yes
2.
Plan Checking
311.25
/.
3.
Plumbing Permit
50.00
4.
Mechanical Permit
30 00
9q
5.
Electrical Permit
40.00
6.
Sewage Disposal System
29.00
7.
Drainage Fee
2268.00
ZZ (�
8.
Systems Fee
902.00
3 4 e i
9.
Beautification Fee
560.04
10.
Park Fee
300.00
11.
Chaffey H.S. District
600.00
12.
Etiwanda School District
1100.00
Considering the intents and purposes outlined in most of the ordinances
establishing fees it seems clear that the City Council wanted to solve
rather specific problems existing in the city at the time of adoption.
Reduction or elemenation of fees intended to address those problems
would dilute the progress currently being made in those areas and if
approached from the reasoning expressed by Mr. and Mrs. Gaglio would •
establish an -=din, Precedent,
Recommendation
It is staff recommendation that the request for modification of fees
be denied.
I / ep
•
16-7
Home Phone: (714) 982 -6477 1147 E. Oli Court
• work Phone: (714) 987 -0075 X7732 tario, CA 9
June 6, 1984
e City of Rancho Cucamonga
City Hall
Atten: Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
9320 Base line Road
q►� Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
p, Ref; Property located at 6318 East Avenue, Etiwanda
Dear Ms. Authelet:
As owners of a single family residence at 6318 East Avenue, Etiwanda
-� which burned down several years ago, we are requesting a review of City fees
imposed by the new City Charter.
At the time the house burned down, we were financially unable to rebuild
because the house was uninsured. In 1981 we tried to purchase and move a
house onto this lot, but interest rates were prohibitive.
In communicating with the City Planning Dept., we were informed that on
• a particular house we were considering, (approx. 1,800 sq.ft. plus 1,000 sq.ft.
garage) the following fees were quoted:
1. Building Permit f 304.00
2. Inspection Fee 50.00
3. Plumbing Fee 50.00
4. Electrical Fee 40.00
5, Cesspool Fee 29.00
6. Drain Fee 1,400.00
7. System Fee 539.00
8. Beautification Fee 560.00
9, Park Fee 300.00
10. Chaffey School 600.00
11. Elementary School 1,100.00
He have decided now to reconstruct instead of moving a house onto the
lot, so we feel that some of these fees could be reduced considering that
this is a reconstruction.
He would appreciate your considering this matter on your City Council
Agenda for June 20,
Sincerely,
is Gus and Carol Gaglio
/6
0
0
r-1
u
AX VILLLIM L1- 0:r�Cirt�iCii7�
19 CORPORATE PLAZA. P. O. BOX 7520, NEWPORT BEACH. CA 92658 -7520 - 1714) 933-3d,N
June 27, 1984
Mr, Loren Wasserman
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P. 0. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
RE: TRAINING IEVEE PROPERTY NORTH OF FOOTHILL
RANCHO CUCA4DNG4, CALIFORNIA
Dear Loren:
Attached is my letter to the owners of the property which the Training Levee
crosses. I believe this letter fairly well explains our position. The appraiser
that was used was referred to us by Wayne Blanton, one of the owners of the
property, and his use was approved by Mr. Blanton. Now the appraiser has completed
his work at a value of $20,000 per acre and this rnmber appears to be unacceptable
to Mr. Blanton and his partners. We have pointed out, as was pointed out to us by
the appraiser, that the property in question is in a flood zone and is zoned two
to the acre, which definitely affects value.
• We also believe that our offer to purchase the whole western half of the property
is cmre than generous as it may only be necessary for us to purchase a portion
of it.
Since we have reached an impasse, we would like to request that the City undertake
a new appraisal of the property necessary for the Training levee which, when
analyzed, may be smaller than the piece we have offerred to purchase. _W ee
to pav for this appraisal and are requesting that this appraisal be approve
use in possi.pie cony - a
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to intact me.
Sincerely,
THE WILLIAM LION COMPANY
'c ar S. Robinson
Vice President/Treasurer
cc: Jack Lam, City of Rancho Cucamonga
Lloyd Hubbs, City of Rancho Cucamonga
Is John Mikels, Mayor - City of Rancho Cucamnga
Dick J. Randall, The William Lyon Company
James E. McNamara, The William Lyon Company
Steven Ford, The William Lyon Company
REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT
C ?
A1eeAV1LLI _N1 LYO\�6miav/
19 CORPORATE PLAZA, P. O. BOX 7520, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658 -7520 • (714) 833-3600 •
June 11, 1984
Erhard G. Unger and Hilda E. Unger Richard Saint and Carolyn Saint
1714 Ivy Bridge Road c/o Roland Lang
Glendale, CA. 91207 131 North Hudson Avenue
Pasadena, California 91105
Martin E. Sack and Alice Sack
c/o Erhard G. Unger
1714 Ivy Bridge Road
Glendale, California 91207
Charles V. Soper, Jr. and
Virginia A. Soper
1191 Pebble Beach
Upland, California 91786
Peter F. Fuss and Monika M. Fuss
2604 Sea Pine Lane
La Crescents, California 91214
Roland H. Lang and Christel U. Lan
131 North Hudson Avenue
Pasadena, California 91105
Wayne D. Blanton and Betty M.
Blanton
1297 North T)wne Avenue
Pomona, California 91767
RE: TRAINING LEVEE PROPERTY NORTH OF FOOTHILL
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Dear Friends:
Most of you (Peter fuss, koiand H. Land, Lrhatd G. Unger's Son and
Wavre D. Blanton) were in attendance last week when we presented our
offer to Durchase vour property. As you will recall, it was suggested
that we obtain an appraisal to evaluate the property needed for the
Training Levee, and to see if, based on this appraisal, concurrence
could be reached between the parties without having to go to the
City of Rancho Cucamonga for condemnation.
Wayne Blanton provided us with a list of appraisers. With his
concurrence we engaged Ray E. O'Bier, MAI, and Albert W. Pattison,
RM,
The above appraisers analyzed the property and the Training Levee as
it affects the property. They determined that the Levee does have
an affect on the western 35 acres of your property, which would be
Assessor Parcel Nos. 225- 262 -32, 225- 161 -33, 225- 161 -34, 225 - 161 -35,
225- 161 -36, 225- 161 -37, and 225- 161 -38, and as the eastern portion
of your property, its only affect is to Assessor Parcel No.
225- 161 -10 and only as to the actual size of the Levee as it
encroaches on to this parcel which is approximately 3500 square feet.
The appraisers felt that the balance was unaffected since
REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT
P.1
June 11, 1984.
• Page Two
an efficient lay -out of lots could be mapped on the forty acres
without the 3500 square feet.
The above- mentioned appraisers have completed an appraisal dated
May 15, 1984, appraising the western 35 acres of your property
(225- 161 -32, 225- 161 -33, 225- 161 -34, 225- 161 -35, 225- 161 -36,
225- 161 -37, and 225 - 161 -38)at $20,000 per acre.
Although there may be a different position that could be taken as
to the impact on the western 35 acres, i.e., an easement for the
Levee for a period of time until the flood control measures are no
longer necessary, we felt it was in your best interests to offer
u a cash price for the whole 35 acres at the appraised value.
At our meeting I had in my possession a check in the amount of
S700,000, which I was prepared to deliver to escrow with closing
only contingent upon your obtaining release of the mortgage dated
December 21, 1978 and recorded February 8, 1979, Book 9618, Page 293
due to Irene D. Carlson et al, which covers this property and title
being as set forth on the attached Title Prelim. As to the portion
of the Training Levee that is in Parcel 225- 161 -10, we would be
willing to purchase that piece at the same value per acre as the
• approximate 35 acres.
The closing for this 3500 square foot piece would be subject to
our approval of the matters affecting the title and obtaining a
parcel map for it.
There was a concensus among the parties present at the meeting,
from your ownership group, that our offer was unacceptable. We are
still willing to hold this offer open uutil June 22, 1984 should
you be willing to accept it. For acceptance we will need written
acceptance by all parties including their wives, by that date.
In analyzing our offer, please keep in mind our offer is all cash
with virtually an immediate closing and we are purchasing a piece
of property which is highly impacted by flood problems. In order
to develop the property either the Day Creek Channel must be com-
Assuming you do not reconsider our offer, you leave us no choice but
to go to the City and ask for condemnation.
THE WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
Is chard-S. Robinson
Vice President /Treasurer
cc; Jack Lam, City of Rancho Cucamonga
Loren Wasserman, City of Rancho Cucamonga +��
John Mikels. M. mr Ci �; R
0
•
11
MEMORANDUM' ,
re r
>II S
1977
TO: City Council
FROM: Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
At the time the Agenda was assembled, information had not been received
from the County. However, the Council must at this meeting certify the
results from the Mello Roos Mail Election which was conducted on June 26th.
A Resolution will be provided Council as soon as the information is
received.
ba
►ia
• M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Lauren Wasserman, City Manager
FROM: Robert E. Dougherty, City Attorney
DATE: June 12, 1984
RF: Elected Mayor
Should the City Council choose to submit the question of
having an elected Mayor to the electors at the general election
on November 6, 1984, the two enclosed Resolutions may be used for
that purpose.
Government Code §36516.1 provides that additional compensa-
tion for an elected Mayor may be provided by ordinance adopted by
• the City Council or by a majority vote of the electors, if such
question is submitted to them.
In anticipation that the Council might opt for the first
alternative, I have not included the issue of salary in either
Resolution.
RED: sjo
Enclosures
p.s.: The Government Code quotes the language which must appear
on the ballot measure and it uses the word "councilmen ".
I do not recommend any redrafting for the purpose of re-
gendering the ballot measure.
03
RESOLUTION NO. 84-
'i -
• A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SAN
BERNARDINO TO CONSOLIDATE A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALI-
FORNIA, TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 6 1984, WITH
THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO DE HELD ON
NOVEMBER 6, 1984, PURSUANT TO SECTION 23302
OF THE ELECTIONS CODE.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, has called a special municipal election in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, California, to be held on November 6, 1984, far
the purpose of submitting to the electors the questions of whether
the electors shall thereafter elect a Mayor and four City Council-
men, and whether the Mayor shall serve a two year or four year term;
and,
WHEREAS, it is desirable that said special municipal election
be consolidated with the statewide general election to be held on
the same date and that within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Cali-
fornia, the precincts, polling places and election officers of the
• two elections be the same, and that the Board of Supervisors of the
County of San Bernardino canvass the returns of the special munici-
pal election and that said statewide general election and special
municipal election be held in all respects as if there were only
one election;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cuca-
monga, California, does hereby resolve, determine and order as
follows:
SECTION 1: That pursuant to the requirements of Section 23302
of the Elections Code, the Board of Supervisors of the County of
San Bernardino be and it is hereby requested tc consent and agree
to consolidation of a special municipal election with the statewide
general election on Tuesday, the sixth (6th) day of November, 1984,
for the purpose of submitting to the electors of the Cith of Rancho
Cucamonga, California, the following questions to appear.on the
ballot as follows:
11 Lf
YES
SHALL THE ELECTORS ELECT A MAYOR AND FOUR CITY
COUNCILMEN?
NO
YES
SHALL THE TERM OF OFFICE OF MAYOR BE TWO
YEARS?
NO
11 Lf
SHALL THE TERM OF OFFICE OF MAYOR BE FOUR
YES
YEARS?
NO
SECTION 2: Said Board of Supervisors is hereby authorized to
canvass the returns of said special municipal election which it is
hereby requested to consolidate with said statewide general elec-
tion and said election shall be held in all respects as if there
were only one (1) election, and only one (1) form of ballot shall
be used.
SECTION 3: Said Board of Supervisors is hereby requested to
issue instructions to County Clerk and /or the Registrar of Voters
to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of said consol-
idated election.
SECTION 4: The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, recogni-
zes that additional costs will be incurred by the County of San
Bernardino by reason of this consolidation and agrees to reimburse
the County of San Bernardino for any such costs.
0
SECTION S: The City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, is hereby directed to file certified copies of this
Resolution with the Board of Supervisors and the County Clerk of •
the County of San Bernardino.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of June, 1984.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
11J
MAYOR
•
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -)?y
• A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND
GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A SPECIAL MUNI-
CIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN SAID CITY ON TUES-
DAY, T!iE SIXTH .(6th) DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1984,
SUBMITTING QUESTIONS TO THE ELECTORS OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONCERN-
ING WHETHER THE ELECTORS SHALL THEREAFTER ELECT
A MAYOR AND FOUR CITY COUNCILMEN, AND WHETi!ER
THE MAYOR SHALL SERVE A TWO YEAR OR FOUR YEAR
TERM.
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to submit to the electors
of the City the questions of whether the electors shall thereafter
elect a Mayor and four City Councilmen, and whether the Mayor shall
serve a two year or four year term; and,
WHEREAS, the submission of said questions to the electors at
a special election held for that purpose is authorized by Govern-
ment Code 34900;
NOW, THERE ?ORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cuca-
monga, California, does hereby resolve, declare, determine and
order as follows:
SECTION 1: That pursuant to the requirements of the laws of
the State of California relating to general law cities within said
state, there shall be, and there is hereby called and ordered to
be held in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino,
State of California, on Tuesday, the sixth (6th) day of November,
1984, a special municipal election for the purpose of submitting
the following questions to the electors of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California, to wit:
"Shall the electors elect a Mayor and four Citv
Councilmen ?"
"Shall the term of office of Mayor be two
years ?"
"Shall the term of office Of Mayor be four
years ""
SECTION 2: That the special municipal election hereby called
for the date hereinabove specified shall be and is hereby ordered
consolidated with the statewide general election to be held on
said date, and within said city the precincts, polling places and
officers of election for the special municipal election hereby
cited shall be the same as those provided for said statewide gen-
eral election. The Board of Supervisors of San Bernardino County
is hereby requested to order the consolidation of. -the special
;
municipal election hereby called with said statewide general
election, and said Board of Supervisors is hereby authorized to •
canvass the returns of said special municipal election and said
election shall be held in all respects as if there were only one
(1) election, and only one (1) form of ballot, namely, the ballots
used in said general election, shall be used. Said Board of Super-
visors shall certify the results of the canvass of the returns of
said special municipal election to the City Council of said city
which shall thereafter declare the results thereof.
SECTION 3: That the polls for said election shall be opened
at 7:00 a.m. on the day of said election and shall remain open
continuously from said time until 8:00 p.m. of the same day when
said polls shall be closed, except as provided in Section 14436 of
the Elections Code of the State of California.
SECTION 4: That in all particulars not recited in this Resol-
ution, said elections shall be held and conducted as provided by
law for holding municipal elections in said city.
SECTION S: That notice of the time and place of holding said
election is hereby given and the City Clerk is hereby authorized,
instructed and directed to give such further or additional notice
of said election in time, form, and manner required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of June, 1984.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
� F?
u
is
0
rONNNAW IVIM §awl
ru�wf�Ialll a0aw by lalri), o-W, a Iw
ox,.1 as �lallm.allf.a Sfr.f 1. !�.
rm Sa9MalY►
Put 11aw dW by Sba,19M. M a)SI.
I L adairy b or ewMlma)ma d +Taa d mm3
ydtlmaaw d wa.,. d. nm0 damia w. mimW
i lama c IU]. P MS1, I ). Sw. row, FicC
Uwaay malwaaa
Mwdpd lbapmaaiam a In-
CJs MmJdm1 Caapomtlaaa 0 PL O).
M am w 3011110, boom y Bw1aIM a 374 ps, "It § I
Ilya NOW asem of am. I Map b pow mad
bill f1MA
SIM9 to 31101, 649wbd by 8Ia6aM74 c SM ►17M 1 0
tb a0mlad wmiaa liam, so madmtaly of dly ppyy Sta1910, . ryL a ))1. 1 1. Sa man. WscC
m meths body damad by or I a d{wda .mr awd 11 35M n rim{.
1MW ■eposm N SlaWM4 c I14 A 171A. 1M
YaTha livid wags mabda w dm daaloa d aurae alyd. y l: Stal71L chat. a ly3.11.$6. tan.
Inl1rii suAarnis ay.acf ))Im
ARTICLE i Et.ECTM MAYOR
Bae.
• SON. pesi/utiou of ona offtw w two par term: wbrgwet fm year tarn.
Beadier of Article d formerly Artirh 3. wse mumbo ed An"@ 3 aad asdW Ay
3tda1➢A, t lad. P 1770. 1 11.
Former Aetlde 4 "Rdiarirtigr of City Lyslwi. RodY E(wbd By Or From Dioarktp^
added by RMra1970, n 37A P, aj, 3 4 4umtior of H aism to um was mpaabd by
Btatal", a !d0. P 1770. 9 9.
1 349M. 9abmbaNa of 4a411ea w dwtan
At my peenl municipd daetiun, or M a special daetien bald fw that purpose. the city woncil may
submit to the eketon also gusetiom of whether aleetan "I thuafter asset, a mayor. and four city
.Moodessast a4se p .dv
(Amadnd by RtaM.19M. a f91, a 1llL 1 L)
Os Salwsw him as, mumpm Wmam ndm mopmwwn Ise tam
Appm meet. aural law dpm Iwr4 dICW awy. alts W as Ne dsbta robs a uw wapeaaw d dw
m, sm I am. aym i empwsxn d a mmauopd aisuoo m by m
mabmP 64.00 by dw my maaaol 31 OPL R .(isaa
--
66, 13 -10-14.
400 .11 Dammam Tba ala a as d • amvd W. dry do am tsa s Va
t. b tASd �cou dh ss1Mhmn Ian y to 1w "ass. m tin
A mmym of a awmd W .y aapamdy dead m aampabn of Its umm d mayor WMA a is v sm
arA pwwaa m I Map a m1. say mows oraoa� wdw uaa aswn ad 1 Mai. .Sa 0mnnv.Gn In.
Dan as mays b adlom w aoaprm mrdwa by bib).
1 HIMI. tom of gwatlaa a Was
The • • • ISMIIMI shill be pnatod ou the Wbta used at the deotion in mbetatially the fdbwia
fhem:
"RWI the dodo, ekd a mayor aad fpm aty omumimaar
42 p MmdW • • IMlwm dMaYwla by wamaldwwd
19
H11
0
4W. EEC':ONS COCi
authored the material In qu nnon mall be named as the real party in interest.
(Amended by Stotts. 1981, C. 1114, §9J
Chapter L Municipal Elections
Article 1. Initiative
INS. Scope of article
Ordinances may be enacted by and for any incorporated city pursuant to this
anncle.
(Added by Slats. 1976. c. Ne, §3.)
401. Proposed ordinance may be submitted by petition.
Any proposed ordinance may be submitted to the legislative body Of the city
by a petition filed with the clerk of the legislative body, in the manner hereinafter
prescribed, after being signed by not less than the number of voters specified in
this article. The petition may be in separate sections, providing that the same
complies with all of the requirements of this article. The first page of each section
shall contain the title of the petition and the text of the measure . The petition
Sections mall be designated in the manner set forth In Section ]Sid.
(Added by SUM. 197& c. 118. §9.)
/NL Notice of ibteat ta circulate petition shall be published: form u
suttee. •
Before circulating
Of an territory by ave y. the n ns any city, of any petition issoing to
the annexation O S ccity, the consolidation a cities, or me ntion so to
of a city, the Proponents hall be c such matter shut punish a notice of Intention so to
do, which notice mist be accompanied by a written statement not in excess of 500
words, Setting forth the reasons for the proposed petition. The notice shall be
signed by at least one, but not more than five. proponents and shall be in
substantially the following form
Notice of Intent to Circulate Petition
Notice is hereby given of the Intention of the persons whose names appear
hereon of their Intention to circulate the petition within the City of for
the purpose of . A statement of the reasons of the proposed action as
contemplated In mad petition is as follows:
!Added by Sara 1976, C. 118. §J)
eNL Where mulct Is published or posted.
A notice Of Intention and statement as referred to in Section 1007, Shall be
published or posted or both as follows:
(a) If mere is a newspaper of general circulation, as described in Section 6000
at Seq, of the Government Code, adjudicated as such, mid notice and statement
shall be published therein at least once; or
(b) If the petition is to be circulated in a city in which mere is no adjudicated
newspaper of general circulation, mid notice and statement shall be published at
least once. In a newspaper circulated within the city and adjudicated as being of
general circulation within the county In which the city is located and mid notice
and statement shall be pasted in three (0) public places within the city, which
0
II
ELECTIONS CODE 4.
public places shall be those utilized for the purpose of posting Ordinances ss
required In Section 36933 of the Government coda or
(c) it the pel man I$ to be circulated in a city in which there u no adjudicated
newspaper of general chcumtioO. and mete is no newspaper of general
circulation Adjudicated IS Such within the county, circulated within the city, then
Me Said Andre and statement shall be pasted in like manner described in
subdivision (b) of this section.
(Added by Stan,. 1976, C. 768. 47J
asaa filing of i n illcatiaa affidavit.
Within 10 days after the date of publication or posting, or both, of the notice
at intention and Statement, the proponents snail Ilse a copy of the notice and
Statement as published of posted, or both, together with an affidavit mode by a
representative of the newspaper in which the notice was published or, it the notice
was posted, by a voter of the city. certifying W the fact of publication or postlug.
Such affidavit. together with a copy of flit notice Of intention and statement
shall be filed with the clerk of the legislative body of the city.
lAdded by Stan, 1976, c, 748. §Z)
Sotl. xfba "001111 may be circulated-
Tweatyome days after the publication or posting or both of the nuke of
Intention and statement, the petition may be circulated among the voters of the
• city for signatures by any registered voter of the city. Each section Of the petition
shall bear a copy of the notice of intention and statement.
(Added by Sian,. 1976. c. 748, f3.1
ttaa. securing at slip amres end petition fillet time,
Signatures upon petitions and whom thereof shall be secured, and the
petition. together with all sections thereof, shall be filed within 180 days tram the
date of publication or posting or both of the notice of intention and statement, or
in the case of a petition relating to the annexation of lerrllory to the city, within
Igo days of the date On Which me first signature wait affixed to said petition. It
such petitions are not flied within the time permitted by this section, the same
Shall be void for 911 purposes.
(Added by Stab. 1976. C. 748. 91)
ANT. Affidavit latched to petition.
Each section shall have attached thereto the affidavit of the person Soliciting
the signatures. This affidavit shall be substantially in the Same form as set forth
in Section 3519.
(Added by Stats. 1976, C. 718. i3.)
4016, Filing at petition.
The petition shall be filed by •.he proponents or by any person or persons
authorized in writing by the proponents. All Sections Of the petition shall be tiled
at one time.
When the petition IS presented For tiling, the clerk shall
1 a! Ascertain the number at registered voters of the city last officially reported
to the Secretary of Slate by the county clerk and
chi Determine the total number of signatures affixed to cue pennon. If. from
this examination. the clerk determines that the number Of signatures. prima facie,
equals or is to excess of the minimum number of signatures required, the clerk
^J
W& ELECTIONS CODE
shall accept the petition for filing. The petition shall be deemed as filed on that
date. Any Sections of the petition not so filed shall be void for all purposes.
(Added by Stern 1976. C. 219. §3.)
1111 Eaamlastion of signatures.
After the petition has been fit", as herein provided, the clerk shall examine
the petition in the same manner as are county petitions in accordance with
Sections 3707 and 3708 except met. for the purposes of this section. references to
the board of supervisors shall be treated as references to the legislative body of
the city.
The petition mall be preserved by the city clerk in the mine manner as are
County measures as set forth In Section 3756.
(Added by Slabs 1976, C. 248. §3.)
010. Petition Signatures; adopt erdloance or order special election.
It the initiative petition is signed b10al2am to= 15. percegL"A votes Of
the city according to the county clerk's official report Of registration to the
Secretary of State effective at the time the notice specified in Section 4002 was
published, or in a city with 1.000 or legs registered voters the signatures of 25
percent of the voters or 100 voters of the city, whichever is the laser number, and
contains a request that the ordinance be submitted immediately to a vote of the
people at a special election, the legislative body shall either •
(a) Introduce the ordinance without alteration at the regular meeting at which
it Is presented and adopt the ordinance within 10 days after it is presented: or
(b) Immediately order a special election. to be held not less than 88 nor more
than 103 days after the date of the order, at which the ordinance, without
alteration. Shall be Submitted to a vote of the voters of the City.
(Amended by Seats. 1981. c, 1043, 0.1
1111. Petition signatures; ordinance submitted at next regular municipal
election.
If the initiative petition is signed by not les than 10 percent of the voters of
the city according to the county clerk's official report of registration to the
Secretary of State effective at the time the notice Specified In Section 4002 was
published. or In a city with 1.000 or les registered voters by the signatures of 25
percent of the voters or 100 voters of mid city, whichever is the lesser number.
and the ordinance petitioned for is not required to be, or for any reason Is not.
submitted to the voters at a special election, and is not passed without change by
the legislative body, then the ordinance. without alteration, shall be submitted by
the legislative body to the voters at the next regular municipal election occurring
not less than 88 days after the order of the legislative body.
(Amended by Stags, 1991, C 1041..3.)
4112. .Mayor may veto.
In cities having a mayor. or like officer, with the veto power, when me passage
of an ordinance petitioned for by the voters Is Vernon. the failure of the legislative
body to pass the ordinance over the veto shall be deemed a refusal of the
legislative body to pas the ordinance within the meaning of this article.
(Added by Seats. 1976. c. 249. 4.)
L�
� >I
— EC710NS cocE 4015.5.
011 Valid ordinance If majority.
If a majority of the voters voting on a proposed ordinance vole .0 Its favor, the
crdmance shall become a valid and binding ordinance of the city. The ordinance
;hall be considered as adopted upon the date that the vote is declared by the
legislative body, and shall go into effect 10 days after that date. No ordinance
proposed by Initiative Petition and adopted by the vote of the legislative body of
the City without submission to the voters. or adopted by the voters. shall be
repealed or amended except by a vote of the People. unless provision is otherwise
made in the original ordinance.
(Added by Slats. 1976. c 118. pJ.(
4114. More than one ordinance at fame election.
Any number of proposed ordinances may be voted upon at the same election,
but the More subject matter shall not be voted upon twice within anv 12-month
period at a special ejection under the provisions of this article.
(Added by Stars. 1976, c. 248. 3J.)
011. Arguments for and agoin0 ordinance.
The Persons filing ac initiative petition pursuant to this article may file a
written argument In favor of the ordinance. and the legislative body may submit
an argument against the ordinance. Neither argument shall exceed 300 words In
length, and both arguments shall be printed upon the same sheet of paper and
mailed to each voter with the sample ballot for the election.
• The following statement mail be Printed on the front cover, or if none. on the
heading of the first page, of the printed arguments:
"Arguments In support of or in opposition to the proposed laws are the opinions
of the authors."
Printed arguments submitted to voters In accordance with this section shall be
filled either "Argument In Favor Of Measure -" or "Argument Against
Measure accordingly. the blank spaces being filled in only with the
letter or number. If any, which designates the measure. At the discretion of the
clerk. the word "Proposition" may be substituted for the word "Measure" In such
titles. Words used in the title shall not b, counted when determining the length
of any argument.
(Amended by 5mts. 197 C. 197. j4.)
015.1 Rebuttal Arguments.
(ai If the legislative body submits an argument against the ordinance. It shall
immediately send copies of the argument to the persons filing the initiative
petition. The Persons filing the initiative petition -is prepare and submit a
rebuttal argument not exceeding 250 words, The legislative body may prepare and
submit a rebuttal to the argument In favor of the ordinance not exceeding 250
words. The rebuttal reguments shall be filed with the clerk not more than 10 days
after the final date for filing direct argument. Rebuttal arguments shall be
printed to the same manner as the direct arguments. Each rebuttal argument shall
immediately follow the direct argument which it seeks to rebut.
Ibl The provisions of subdivision jai shall only apply it, not later than the day
on which the legislative body calls an election. the tegislauve body. by a majority
vote, adopt It provision: in which case, the provisions of subdivision i a i shall
apply at the nod ensuing municipal election and at each municipal election
n T.
0
4015.5. ec _NS C-D
thereafter, unless later repealed by the legislative body m accord with the
procedures or this subdivision.
(Added by Stab'. 1977, C. 701, 91.)
Nil Conflicting ordianaces.
It the provisions of two or more ordinances adopted at the same election
conflict. the ordinance receiving the highest number of affirmative votes shall
control.
(Added by Srers. 1976, C. 118. 43.)
4417. Legislative body may submit proposed ordinance to voters.
The legislative body of the city may submit to the voters, without a petition
therefor. a proposition for the repeal, amendment, or enactment of any ordinance.
to be voted upon at any succeeding regular or special city election. and if the
proposition submitted receives a majority of the votes cast on it at the election.
the ordinance shall be repealed. amended or enacted accordingly. A proposition
may be submitted, or a special election may be called for the purpose of voting
on a proposition. by ordinance or resolution.
(Added by Staff. 1976, c. 148. f1.)
4411 Copy of ordinance mailed with sample ballot.
Whenever any ordinance or measure is required by this article to be submitted .
to the voters of a city at any election, the clerk of the legislative body shall cause
the ordinance or measure to be printed. He shall man a copy of the ordinance or
measure with a sample ballot. to each voter at least 19 days prior to the election.
The legislative body may direct that Its clerk include In such mailing. as official
matter, the provisions of the proposed ordinance or measure, showing therein the
difference from existing provisions of law, by the use of distinguishing type styles,
It such ordinance or measure exceeds 1.000 words in length. the local
legislative body My direct [bat a synopsis of the ordinance be prepared, to be
mailed to the voters in lieu of the ordinance. The synopsis shall be prepared by
the city attorney unless the ordinance affects the office of the city attorney. In
Which case the clerk shall prepare the synopsis. Immediately below the synopsis
there shall be printed in 10-point bold type a legend substantially as follows:
'The above statement us a synopsis of Ordinance or Measure Number
and is not the complete text of such ordinance or measure If you
desire a complete copy of the ordinance or measure, return the enclosed prepaid
postcard and a copy will be maned at no cast to You."
If the clerk, at the direction of the legsative body. mails only a synopsis of an
ordinance or measure. the clerk shall enclose a postage-paid postcard which may
be used by the voter to request a complete copy of the ordinance or measure .
which shall be mailed to such voter with postage prepaid.
(Added by Stab. 1976. a 148.93: Amended by Solis. 1976. c 613, ;1 1
4111. Enacting clause of ordinance.
The enacting clause of an ordinance submitted to the voters of a sty shall be
substantially In the following form:
"The people of the City of do ordain as follows:'
(Added by SAILS. 1976, C. 148. i3d
04 •
13
11
3314 Fern of 111"I flow slgastare W aNrN.
The petition sections shall be dW ped so that each slpler shall personally aMz
his or her.
(a) Slgnsture;
(b) Printed Mme:
(c) Residence address &J" street add number, or If he street or number
ewes adequate designation of residence an that the location may be readily
ascertained: and
. (d) Name of mcorpontetl city or unlncorPorlded community.
Only a person who is a quallRed re"ered voter at the time of syning the
Petition is entitled to AW it
The number of signatures attached to each section shell be at the pleasure of
the person soliciting the signatures.
(Added be Stott. 1916. c. I68. 63.)
•
(P4
L
3516 Afflgnit of asllelter,
Each section shall have Stec:. -d thereto the affidavit of the person soliciting
the signatures st/tng
(a) The qualifications of the solicitor.
(b) That all the signatures affixed to the sector, were made in his or her
presence.
(c) That to the best of his or her knowledge and belief. each signature is the
genuine signature of the person whose name if purports to be
(d) The data between which all signatures were obtained.
No other affidavit thereto shall be required.
The affidavit shall be verified free of charge by any officer authorized to
administer Attu.
Petitions so verified shall be prima facie evidence that the signatures thereon
are genuine and that the persons signing arc qualified voters . Unless and until it
be otherwise proven upon official investigation, it shall be presumed that the
petition presented contains the signatures of the requisite number of qualified
voters ,
!Added by Shia, 1979, c. 118, P..1
•
19.5
0
Use. preaervstla ad deatractise of eetltleau
An inilative or referendum petition received or filed in the office of the county
clerk shall be preserved until eight months after me certification of the results
of the election for which the petition Qualified or attempted to quality for
placement on the ballot. Public access to my such petition Mall he restricted in
accordance with me provisions Of SecUOrt 6253.5 of the Government Code. At the
end of the eighteoonth period, the petition shall be destroyed as soon As
practicable unless it is to evidence in wine action or proceeding then pending, or
. unless the clerk has waived a written request from the Attorney General. me
Secretary of State, the Fair Political Practices Commission. a district attorney, a
grand jury. or the governing body of a county. city and county, or dMrict including
a school district. mat the petition be preserved for use in a pending or ongoing
investigation Into election irregularities, or in a pending or Ongoing Investigation
Into a violation of the Political Reform Act of 1971 as set form in Title 9
(commencing with Section $10001 of the Government Code.
(Amended by Sets. 1977, C. 356, §1.)
0
7 (G
0
EiECTiONS CODE 4050.1.
4021L Condition for special election; consolidation with regular election.
When a special election is to be called under this article. it shall be held not
less than 88 nor more than 103 days after the date of the presentation of the
proposed ordinance to the legislative body. and shall be held in accordance with
me provision of this code. To avoid holding more than one special election within
any six months. the ate for holding the special election may be fixed later than
100 days. but at as early a date as practicable after the expiration of six months
from the last special election. When it is legally poAlble to hold a special election
under this chapter within sit months prior to a regular municipal election, the
legislative body may submit the proposed ordinance at the regular election
Instead of at a special election.
(Amended by Sacs. 1981, c. 1013. ;EJ
1621. Scope of &dale. •
This article does not apply to any Statewide initiative measure.
(Added Dy SafS. 1976 C. 248. 0..)
•
I��
�T
0 0 0
Leonard says state prison site
e• Thu,"ay. June 26, 111M a TM ISlIn — , A —%
at Adelanto not a sure thing yet
By HARVEY FEff
s„n Ibekal aawr
A9 blyman Rio Leonard.
reaffirming file opposition to loca-
tion of another prison anywhere
in San Bernardino County. said
Wednesday he is not ready to con-
cede that a prison at Adelanto is
inevitable.
Leonard said, however, that
there's little chance of getting
enough legislative support, with-
out the administration's concur
n•nrr, to reverse a 11 Mr2 law pro-
vidutg for the facility at Adelanto.
"The attack needs to be point-
ed toward the administration:' he
sand.
Leonard. a Redlands Republi-
can, sand the Adelanto Proposal
will come before the legislature
again peat Year in the form of
budget propambfur,omlrucuun.
leonard said he will attempt to
hold up the eonstrm96011 allm"a
nom when the appropriations sub-
cummunre on ho-h he serves
anmulers the proposal If the con
-
structnn request for i5e tnljl ,
pra al a gaiBe soma th
st to and makes Ina way l9to the
state's ovenli budget, Leonard
said he prohebly would vote fa R
rather than hold up the Metal
The 1982 low. SBId09. autnotea
by state Son. Robert Presley. D
Riverside, provides for trees PF11"
construction at Fbbom prison and
at Adelanto. The measure adds
that funds for the attupaney of
the Adelanto prison shell not be
allocated until a site his been aP
proved for a new prYOb to Lisa
Angela County. The bill further
provides that the permanent de-
sign capacity of the Adatento Pris-
on shall not be expanded beyond
1,150 inmates and that water Shall
be provided from the Mojave We.
ler AgeucY^ allocation from the
Stale Water Project.
Leonard was asked why the
Adelanto Bite was included in the
bill to Begin with.
Leonard mid he was told pri
vateb by Oeparu,,nil of Corree-
Bill Leonard
units officials that they had not
thought of Adelanto as a site until
Adelanto officials made It propo-
sal by letter.
"That's the reason n her any
0
vuhdny."Leonard said.
The deadiine is Past for submit-
ung new tolls to reverse BROW
this year, Leonard said. However,
language could be amended into
related bills, he mid.
Such an attempt would be
donated for failure, he said, unless
an alternative she could be point.
ed out; legislators, would be I Muc-
tint to move the prison site out of
San Bermudian County for fear It
would be [mated in their districts.
Leonard said county legis-
hilors, headed by Sen. Ruben S.
Ayala, DChmo, had found alterna-
live sues at lone and Avenel in
Fresno County. But corrections of-
fietala included them in their ba-
sic plan while retaining the Ad
elantu sire.
Leonard has drawn heavy fire
since the Legislature passed his
budget amendment that would
have let San Bernardino County
auperviews select a site at Glen
Helen for the prison in place of
Adelanto. A commitment for lab
nelbon to state jail ,'utulnirtlun
funds onus utfored it Uic eouWy
madethechange.
Supervisors have backed away
from the offer In the taco of
heavy public opposition.
To clarify his position. Leonard
submitted a letter to The San to
which hefald:
"Ever men the suggestion wait
made that the UMe Ceoatrum yet
another prison facility In San Ber-
naedmo County, l have been vehe
mently opposed to the Depart.
ment of Corrections' efforts to
locate a prison site anywhere In
this area, whether In Adelanto,
Chino, Baker, Glen Heen or any -
whereelse.
"At every opportunity that I
have had. either on Individual
pieces of legislation regarding
prison autherrratbm W during
budget negotiations over the pal
several mouth$. I have consis ent-
ly opposed the construction of an-
other state prison in our county.
"Many battles have been
fought and, until recently, loot
over the proposed prism site at
Adelanto_ With the consistent sup
•
port and assistance from a num-
ber of county residents the oPK,
silion to the Adelatito site is
finally being heard and taken as,..
rtotuly in Sacramento. ...
.'The Department of Correq`,
tlom, however, has sleadlWly re,
fused to drop Adulation Y a Pro-
posh prison rift uuttss another,
location is suggested m us place. .;
"Merefore, my Intent in offer -,
lag a budget amendment wait 0;
give the officials of San Bernarcii
no County a say in a prison site It
They believe that another prima
in inevitable.
"Al no time dim 1 recommend;
Glen Helen u a proposed site.
"1 remain convinced that we
must be satisfied with nothing lam
than a repeal of the, IN2 law. I
have fought against the eapMion
of Patton and Chino. 1 fought the,
proposed prison al Baker, a" 1,
am not ready to give up now."
Leonard "lied on all County.
citizens to join in opposition to•
new pnsona anywhere in the
county.
•
E
I
Supervisors say
no to state bid
for prison site
By MU ROGERS
sea sae veZ
SAN BERNARDINO — The
co gBb Roard of Supeivlson on
WeddZy unanimously rejected
a sure request for county support
foe construction of a state prison
in the Glen Helen arm.
The action came after a week
of heavy public protest against
the proposal amid reports that the
county, was being offered a "deal"
assurug SW million, of state fund.
ing for local jad construction H
supervisors backed a sate move
to build a prison at Glen Helen
rather than in Adeunto.
The supervisors expressed
their position in a letter to the
state Department of Corrections
that also reaffirmed their opposi.
non to construction of a prison to
Adelanto or anywhere else in San
Bernardino County.
The hoard's letter was based
resenting the Department of Cor-
rections first official proposal in
the matter Townsend previously
was the only board member de-
elmmg to r.omm t himself on the
issue. pending receipt of such a
proposal from the state.
Recalling that the supervisors
have repeatedly opposed con
struction of another state prison
In the county, Townsend said
board endorsement of the Glen
Helen plan would be 'inconsistent
and inappropriate.'
The hoard declined to support
the Glen Helen site when It was
first debated a near and a half
ago, but at that time nled only Its
refusal to endorse legislation that
would have exempted a prison
plan there from environmental re-
Ile..
30
a Anemblymas Bill Lessard
soya be'a sat ready m cascede tae
I'm of a prima is Su Bersardum
Cab. Page A.S.
e OMdah in Adeusle say they
go ex" fleet, city to be a pri ms
sue. lalsad Empire, &1.
in a separate action Wednes
da;. the board endorsed legls•
latmn under which M million of
state bond monies for local lad
construction would be made avail.
able to California counties on a
'first-come, first served' basis.
The legislation would enhance
San Bernardino County's chances
of obtaining Sm million to help
finance a 50bed lad next to its
new West Valley law and justice
center under construction in Ran-
cho Cucamonga.
County 4dmmistraucr gffir va
Robert Rigney said .bar.': rs fur
;awn '.,dn ,h,. ,r'. rr r< •,,.
trwl ludge Re bert Takawgt asx:a
as he rink the henr.h The juror'
nodded
4nm� nir,r�
. 1: •'I FBI'II1'1-r^ . P"'rat li
Prison --
,Continued from A-Is
cause of its refusal to cooperate in
siting of a new state prison and
because its request for pit fund.
ing from the state has never been
supported by the Department of
Corrections.
Board Chairman Cal McElwain
and Supervisors Robert Hammock
and Barbara Riordan previously
had expressed opposition to the
Glen Helen proposah leaving de
Bert- mountain Supervisor John
Joyner as the only board member
favoring it, largely on the basis of
protests by his Victor Valley cog
stftuents against the Adelanto
plan.
Joyner made the vote on the
siting issue unanimous Wednes,
dey after other board members
acceded to his request that they
reaffirm their opposition to con•
struction of a prison in Adelanto.
Viewing the letter from the
Department of Corrections as an
admission that the ddelanto plan
Is a mistake. Joyner commented.
'1'm happy to �ee'here Is that rec.
ogmtion on the part of the state.
"Hopefully,' he added. 'the
state would consider sumo means
by which this prison could be re
moved from the county entirely
The letter from state Director
of Corrections Daniel WCarthe
reported to have been recec.ed
here linnday said the ^.epz, —in. ra
world •, rein t •-111'11 If `- w
to Glen Helen if the county "fro
vites or otherwise requests" It. If
the county supported or did not
oppose legislation to exempt the
project from environmental re•
view and H the county assisted the
state in acquiring a site at Glen
Helen.
Righey noted the letter did out
offer jad construction funds to
the county in exchange for its sup
port of the Glen Helen site, and he
added that no such "deal" was
suggested at a Sacramento meet.
Ing on the issue Tuesday that he
and Townsend attended with de�
partment spokesmen and state
legislators from San Bernardino
County.
The administrative officer pre.
vlously has said that such a deal
wait "inferred" in the process of
efforts by Sen. H.L. Richardson, R.
Glendora, and Assemblyman BW
L,ehf ard. R•Redlands, both to gain
lad funds for the county and to
satisfy desert constituents by gee
ting the prison plan moved out of
Adelanto.
But Blaney told the board
Wednesday. "I think weve been
able to uncouple the SM million
from the slate prison .site. They
are separate Issues entirely."
At the Tuesdav meeting. Rlg-
nev said, corrections department
officials did express Interest In
their chances of moving the arts.
on to rlIn Ifelen and Indicated
that beraus+ of various emtron
menial pn,hlems. the At !aI
I z�I J
plan was "becoming a more diffi.
cult problem to deal with."
In their letter of response to
the department Wednesday, the
supervisors said they "must de
cline to either Invite the state to
build a prison or otherwise indi-
cate" support for a prison at Glen
Helen or Adelanto.
The board's letter complains.
that prisms in the county already
are amount; nearly a third of the
moutes in the suite penal system,,
contends the department should
tint look for sites in other coup,,
ties and says "we do nth feel that
our community can further ac
commodate this type of program, I -
The letter says any judgment
on whether to waive environmem
ml review of the Glen Helen pro
posal is a state rather than a coun.
ty responsibility, and it adds that
county assistance in acquiring a
prison site at Glen Helen "would
be Inappropriate and inconsis.
tent" In view of the board's "long'
standing position" opposing more
pmmns in the county.
Townsend urged that the state
legislation to provide pd funding
for the rnunty should be actively
+upporled by' cities here that
sited opposition to the Glen He -7
len plan — "especially the clues
that were a little parochial on the !
thought of another ,prison In San
Bernardino County
Hammock added that he hopes ;
the cities will support the hill "Ic'
f •t and eff- ct?"l•. as Theo ud r.
nppnyng Inc p ^!tan
E
•
•
•
11
Editorial
The Sun Wednesday, June 27, 1984
SA County needs unity
to defeat prison plans
By raising their voices in righteous anger over an appar-
ent backdoor, 11th -hour deal to put a new maximum - security
state prison in Glen Helen, representatives and citizens from
throughout the San Bernardino area have thrown down the
gauntlet to the State Department of Corrections.
They should be commended for losing no time in begin-
ning the battle, and it's possible they're on the way to win-
ning the war.
Assemblyman BBD Leonard, R- Redlands, one of the prin-
cipal negotiators in the deal to switch the prison site from
Adelanto to Glen Helen, admits as much. He conceded this
week that the protest may have killed the proposal. Leonard,
many of whose Victor Valley constituents oppose the Adelan-
to site, added: "The only thing I can do now is try to make
lemonade from a lemon and ask that the people opposing the
Glen Helen site fight as hard against the Adelanto site as they
did against the Glen Helen site."
Leonard, in his attempt to set one community against
another in the prison controversy, has revealed the serious-
ness of the challenge San Bernardino County faces. And he
has made it clear that unity offers the best chance to defeat
any prison plan for the county.
From the events of the past two weeks, it's obvious that
officials of the Department of Corrections have no qualms
about fobbing off another prison on a county that is already
overstocked with them.
In Adelanto, strong public opposition doesn t bother
them. An unjustifiably high per -bed construLtion cost doesn't
bother them. Noise from George Air Force Base that could
trigger lawsuits doesn't bother them. Lack of an environmen-
tal impact review doesn't bother ' hem. Inadequate water and
sewage treatment doesn't bother mem.
With minor variations in specifics, the arguments aeamst
Glen Helen apply equally to Adelanto. The theme remains
identical. San Bernardino County has paid its dues in housing
the state's inmates and its time that other counties did their
fair share.
There's no reason for public officials to scamper around
trying to cut the best "deal" for the county. What the county
wants is no deal at all.
We don't want to become the prison capital of the United
States.
Leonard, trying to serve his district, and his political
leadership, got his ears boxed by public opinion. He now has
made his call to arms and we should follow It. Our legislative
leadership needs to be unified against a prison in this county.
The state needs to hear the message loud, clear and of ten.
i� ul' 1�1I1�It1n�u Cc C;t�Cu,,„,,�
CAI,IF0R \IA J
Z���glb� ✓�
C
June 28, 1984
Honorable Jon D. Mikels
Mayor and City Council
City of Rancho CucaIa nga
P. O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, C}1 91730
Dear Mayor Mikels:
As you are all aware, the Adelanto City Council supports the siting
Of a maximum security prison in this city. For six years - through
three elections, pro prison industry candidates have been overwhelm
ingly elected or returned to office.
We could appreciate your Council taking no action to oppose Construction
of a maximum security prison facility within the corporate boundaries of
our city.
The inherent right of self - govern nt beCoMs tmre endangered with each
Passing day. Therefore, our mutual respect for each city's right to de-
cide its own destiny must be respected.
Your kind consideration of our request will be appreciated and returned
in kind.
Sincerely,
Edwardunagan '
Mayor
ms
11740 BA RT I. ETT A VC N U E (P.0 BOX 10) A DELANTO. CA LI FORN I A 92301 161% 2466606
' L 2Tlt�111'lllil �� Cl�I3�iIf1ITP "� " "' °"
BILL LEONARD
VICE CHAIRMA4 COMMIREE ON WAVS AND ME s
June 26, 1984 C
1:1ync: Sargent, Editor
'"1, San Bernardino Sun
.. ....th n Street
..c _...,. ^ito, California 92401
❑r I P:r. Sane
Sall P�:_t rnrdino County already has far more than i ts fair
share c.f. .state orisons. Ever since the suggestion was made that
the state construct yet another prison facility in San Bernardino
County, I hacc been vehemently opposed to the Department of
Cerrcct'_ons efforts to locate a prison site anywhere in this
area, whether in Adelanto, Chino, Baker, Glen Helen or anywhere
sa. At - -.,cry opportunity that I have had, either on individual
i.decos c` legislation regarding prison authorizations or during
!;tis.got ne,g ^r.iaticns over the past several months, I have
opposed the construction of another state prisor in
cur Count':.
P'a ny battles have been fought and, until recently, lost over
proposed prison site at Adelanto. With the consistent
`':pport and assistance from a number of county residents, the
0::pcsi.tion to the Adelanto site is finally being heard and taken
.;;ously in Sacramento. However, the Department of Corrections
ly refused to drop Adelanto as a pTOpOSeC'� pfi50❑
:tr. unL -ss another location is suggested in its place.
'.'hurofcre, my intent in offering a budget amendment was to give
'!u' nfficial:; of San Bernardino County a say in a prison site i
`hcy believe that another prison is inevitable. At no time did'I
.:cnmmend Glen Helen as a proposed site.
The Department of Corrections is proceeding to implement a
:982 law which requires a prison in this County. I have
consistently resisted the efforts of Sacramento bureaucrats to
impose upon the residents of San Bernardino County a preselected
p.ison site.
remain convinced that wo must be satisf.i.ed with nothing
. ..; lt.h;'.n r ^peal of this 1982 law. I hate fought against the
'Xi'�rE'•s r:.n 1-f Patton and China. I fought the proposed prison at
and not ready to give up now. I am as determined as
you are tc (L•mand that Sacramento listen and rospond to the
l ^c41 .4mate -: nct:rns of the residents of our County.
To avoid the imposition of new prisons, I call upon all
citizens of San Bernardino County, including yourself, to join me
in Tire upposifion to any new prisons anywhere in our County.
Sincer y,
MOLNAPU
Ill,: Ids