Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983/07/20 - Agenda PacketGAO CtICA.Npy 7 2 7 c i r O O Z U > 1977 QTY OF RAN JO U AMMIA CITY COUNGTL AGENIA Lions Park Community Center 9161 Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga, California July 20, 1983 - 7:30 p.m. All items submitted for the City Council Agenda must be in writing. The deadline for submitting these item is 5:GO p.m. on the Wednesday prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's Office receives all such item. 1. CALL TO ORDER • A. Pledge of Allegiance to Flag. B. Roll Call: Buquet , Dahl_, Frost_, Schlosser_, and Mikels_ C. Approval of Minutes: June 15, 1983 and July 6, 1983 2. ANNOUNCEM MS a. Wednesday, July 27, 1983, - PLANNING COMMISSION, 7:00 p.m., Lions Park Community Center. b. Thursday, July 21, 1983, PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE, 7:00 P.M., 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. a. Approval of Warrants, Register No. 83 -07 -20 and Payroll 1 ending 83 -07 -10 in the amount of $165,209.66. b. Forward Claim against the City by County of San 4 Bernardino to the City Attorney and Carl Warren Co. for handling. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -120 17 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 7847. City Council Agenda -2- July 20, 1983 • c. Forward Claim against the City by Kaiser Steel 6 Corporation to the City Attorney and Carl Warren Co. for handling. d. Alcoholic Beverage License Application for on sale beer 8 and wine eating place license to Marco Chao, China Garden Restaurant, 9770 19th St. e. Request transfer of funds from Reserves to the General 9 Fund for the purpose of meeting cash flow demand. f. Release of bonds. 10 Tract 9306 - located on the west side of Archibald and north of Wilson. Owner: Charter Development. Labor and Material Bond (Road) $57,600 Landscape Bond $ 1,050 Tract 9437 - located at Victoria and Haven Avenues. Owner: Chevron Construction Co., Inc. Labor and Material Bond $124,000 • Maintenance Guarantee Bond $ 6,200 g. Approval of a resolution to allow a lien for sidewalk to 11 be subordinated to a second trust deed for 8406 Orchard submitted by Roland Taylor. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -119 12 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT FROM ROLAND TAYLOR AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN SAME h. Approval of Parcel Map 7847 submitted by Ameron, Inc. 15 and located on the south side of Arrow Route, west of Etiwanda Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -120 17 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 7847. • City Council Agenda -3- July 20, 1983 1. Approval of Improvement Extension Agreement for Tract 18 10045 -1 submitted by Hatt and located west of Haven Avenue and north of Hidden Farm Road. RESOLUTION NO. 63 -121 2C A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT EXTENSION AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 10045 -1. J. Reimbursement Agreement for Foothill Blvd. and Hellman 28 Avenue. Reimbursement to City by Lewis Homes of California and Robert and Karen Packer for fair share portion of Hellman Avenue and Foothill Blvd. reconstruction and widening project. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -56 29 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR STREET AND • DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS AT FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND HELLMAN AVENUE k. Contract for Engineering Services for Map and Plan 38 Checking for 1983 -84. Approval is recommended for contracts this year with three firms for plan check services. All the firms will be working under the same agreement and their charges will be covered by fees collected from developers. 1. Acceptance of Map, Bonds and Agreement for Parcel Map 46 6395 submitted by Rancho Center Associates located on the southwest corner of Base Line and Hellman Avenue, RESOLUTION NO. 83 -122 48 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP 6395, IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, m. Acceptance of Hillside Road Improvements. It is 55 recommended that Council accept as complete the Hillside Road Improvements and pass the resolution authorizing the City F,ng3ncer to file the Notice of Completion and release performance bonds and retention and authorize 31 final payment. • City Council Agenda -4- July 20, 1983 RESOLUTION NO. 83 -123 61 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR HILLSIDE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK n. Approval of Bonds and Agreement for D. R. 82 -15 62 submitted by Michael J's and located at the southeast corner of Foothill Blvd. and Turner Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 63 -124 63 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 82 -15• o. Completion of Contract Emergency Restoration and Repairs, Various Locations, Storm of 1983. It is recommended that City Council accept repairs as complete • and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the Finance Director to pay to Contractor retention and final payment and release performance bond. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -125 64 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR EMERGENCY RESTORATION AND REPAIRS AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A COMPLETION FOR THE WORK p. Approval of a resolution establishing a fee for the engineering and legal work required to re- apportion assessments on property within the Industrial Assessment District whenever subdivision occurs. The fee covers both work done by the consultant and City staff. RESOLUTION NO. R3 -126 66 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A FEE FOR PROCESSING LAND AND ASSESSMENT DIVISION APPLICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE 'IMPROVEMENT BOND ACT OF 1915' BEING DIVISION 10 OF THE STREETS AND ` HIGHWAYS CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. City Council Agenda -5- July 20, 1983 q. Set Public Hearing date of August 3, 1983 for Annual Assessments for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -68 -A 68 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 FOR FISCAL YEAR 1983 -84; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1962; AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO. r. Set Public Hearing for August 3, 1983 to declare intention to vacate a 20 foot alley located between Foothill Boulevard and Red Hill Country Club Drive. RESOLUTION NO. 83-97A 71 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN • BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE A 20 FOOT ALLEY ADJACENT TO LOTS 2 THROUGH 12 OF TRACT NO. 2521 GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONE CHANGE 83 -01 - 73 CHRISTESON. A change of zone from A -1 (Limited Agriculture) to C -2 (General Business Commercial) for 13.1 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue -APN 1077- 401- 01,03• Planning Commission recommends approval of zone change and issuance of a Negative Declaration. ORDINANCE NO. 2p„(first reading) 90 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 1077- 401 -01 & 03, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FROM A -1 TO C -2. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 91 8383 =04. An ordinance amending Section 61.0219(b)(7) , Residential Parking Standards, of the Rancho Cucamonga Interim Zoning Ordinance. Staff report by Rick Gomez. City Council Agenda -6- July 20, 1983 • ORDINANC "c NO. 123 -B (second reading) 96 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 61.0219(b)(7) OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 123, RESIDENTIAL PARKING STANDARDS. C. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 83-03• An amendment to the residential use standards to allow for second dwelling units on single family zoned residential lots. Staff report by Rick Gomez. ORDINANCE NO. 204 -A (second reading) 98 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOR.`IIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 204, REGARDING PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR SECOND DWELLING UNIT5 IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES. D. ORDER TO VACATE AN ALLEY LOCATED BETWEEN RED BILL 99 - COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD REQUESTED BY ON DEVELOPER OF D.R. 63 -08. Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs. Request continuance to August 3, 1983• 5• ORDINANCES FOR CONSIDERATION A. ADMISSIONS TAR ORDINANCE AMENDMENT. An ordinance 101 amending subsection F of Section 3.36.010 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. ORDINANCE NO. 198 -A 102 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SUBSECTION F OF SECTION 3.36.010 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL COD° TO DEFINE THE MEANING OF "OPERATOR" FOR PURPOSES OF THE ADMISSIONS TAX. 6. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS A. REQUEST FROM PAUL POPE TO ADDRESS CITY COUNCIL REGARDING _C_ 103 A ITIZEN COMPLAINT INVOLVING A BUSINESS BRING CONDUCTED WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL AREA AT 7560 CAMINO NORTE. - B. AWARD OF DESIGN CONTRACT FOR ADDITION TO THE RANCHO No staff CUCAMONGA NEIGFFBORHOOD CENTER (CDBG /HUD FUNDED). This report is selection by Council of Design and Engineering submitted service firm to facilitate the Expansion Project for RCNC. This addition will increase program capabilities 0 City Council Agenda -7- July 20, 1983 of the Center with a particular focus given to Senior Citizen activities, Staff report by Bill Holley. C. REVIEW OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 104 AND THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RELATIVE TO RECREATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE CUCAMONGA CREEK AND DEMENS CHANNEL. This is a cost sharing agreement between the Army Corps of Engineers and the City to provide hiking, jogging, bicycling and equestrian paths, along with underpass at 19th, bridges in Heritage Park, and rest areas along the Cucamonga Creek and Demens Channel. Staff report by Bill Holley. Recommendation: Approve agreement and authorize required expenditure from Park Development Fund. D. STATUS REPORT ON DISASTER PLANNING FOR CITT OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. Oral report by Bill Holley, E. INLAND MEDIATION BOARD: CONTRACT FOR SERVICES. Renewal 116 of existing contract for fair housing services. Staff report by Rick Marks, Associate Planner. • Staff recommends that the contract with the Inland Mediation Board be approved by the City Council, RESOLUTION NO. 83 -127 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, AND INLAND MEDIATION BOARD, A NON - PROFIT ORGANIZATION, FOR THE PURPOSES OF ESTABLISHING A CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENT PROVIDING FOR A FAIR HOUSING PROGRAM TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. F. FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM UPDATE. Review of Flood 123 Insurance Program and proposed changes to the flood hazard maps. Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs. G. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND ASSURANCE OF MAINTENANCE FOR 164 FLOOD PROTECTION DEVICES IN CONJUNCTION WITH TRACTS 11934, 12044, 12045. and 12046. The City is requested to execute agreements with The William Lyon Co. and to make assurances to the U. S, Department of Housing and Urban Development that flood protection measures will be adequately maintained. Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs. r , City Council Agenda -8- July 20, 1983 RESOLUTION NO. 83 -128 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, GUARANTEEING MAINTENANCE OF FLOOD PROTECTION MEASURES IN CONJUNCTION WITH TRACTS 11934, 12044, 12045, AND 12046. H. ARTICLE 8 CLAIM TRANSPORTATION FONDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 165 1983 -84. Staff report by Jim Robinson. y. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS No items submitted. No items submitted. B. COUNCIL BUSINESS . 9. ADJOURNMENT 0 June 15, 1983 CITY OF RANCHO CUCP.MONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Regular Meeting 1. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held in the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road on Wednesday, June 15, 1983. The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. by Mayor Jon D. Mikels. Present were councilmembers: Charles J. Ruquet, Phillip D. Schlosser, James C. Frost, and Mayor Jon D. Mikels. Absent: Richard M. Dahl. Also present were: City Manager, Lauren M. Wasserman; City Attorney, Robert Dougherty; Community Development Director, Jack Lam; City Planner, Rick Gomez; City Engineer, Lloyd Hobbs; Finance Director, Harry Empey; Community Services Director, Bill Holley, Senior Planner, Mike Vairin; Senior Planner, Tim Beedle; and Associate Planner, Otto Kroutil. • Approval of Minutes: Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Frost to approve the minutes of May 4, May 18, and Kay 23, 1983• Motion carried unanimously 11 -0 -1. Dahl Absent. 2. ANNOUNCEMENTS a. Thursday, June 16, 7:00 p.m. - PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE- Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road b. Thursday, June 23, 7:00 p.m. - ADVISORY COMMISSION- Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road c. City Manager, Lauren Wasserman, announced three city staff members have completed five years of service with the City of Rancho Cucamonga: Community Development Director, Jack Lam; City Engineer, Lloyd Hobbs, and Senior Planner, Mike Vairin. d. City Manager, Lauren Wasserman, stated at this evening's meeting of the Redevelopment Agency it was not announced to adjourn to the June 30, 1983 meeting to adopt the RDA budget. This announcement will be posted according to law. c. City Manager, Lauren Wasserman, requested item 6B be set for public hearing July 6, 1983. 10 f. City Manager, Lauren Wasserman, requested Resolution 83 -79 and Ordinance 203, Etiwanda Specific Plan be added as item 4E. City Council Minutes -2- June 15, 1983 g. Mayor Mikels announced the Mayors were victorious in the Donkey Basketball • Game over the Board of Realtors 32-20. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR a. Approval of Warrants, Register No. 83 -06 -15 and Payroll ending 05 -29 -83 in the amount of $648,483.23. b. F^_r•ward Claim against the City by Kenneth Coffey to the City Attorney and Carl warren Co. for handling. c. Authorization for staff to accept surplus land (Assessor's Parcel Nos. 207- 251 -012 and 207 - 541 -060) from San Bernardino County located north of Eighth .Street between Grove and Baker Avenues at no cost to the City. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -82 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.'S 207- 251 -012 AND 207 -541 -060 FROM SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY AND THE FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT AS SURPLUS PROPERTY. d. Award the maintenance contracts for: Parkway Landscape and Irrigation to • SCLM Co, Inc. in the amount of A84,106.32/Yr., City -wide Street Tree to Homer's Tree Surgery in the amount of $3,022.30/mo., and Street Sweeping to R. F. Dickson Co. in the amount of $2,250/mo all lowest bidders. e. Acceptance of Final Map for Tract Nos. 12023, 12024, and 12025 - Marlborough Development located east of Archibald Avenue, south of Church Street and west of Ramona Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -83 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE FINAL MAP FOR TRACT NOS. 12023, 12024, AND 12025. f. Approval of Tract Map 11460 for condominium purposes from Lewis Development Company on Sunscape I; approval of Improvement Agreement for completion of certain landscape improvements; and approval of agreement for condominium conversion. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -84 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO OUCAMONOA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 11460. g. Acceptance of Bond and Agreement for D. R. 82 -25 submitted by C 8 C • Construction for Stop IN Go Market located at 6760 Carnelian Street. City Council Minutes -3- June 15, 1983 • RESOLUTION NO. 83 -85 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW 82 -25. h. Acceptance of Agreement and Security for Tract No. 9369 (11173) submitted by M. J. Brock and Sons., Inc., located on the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 19th Street. RESOLUTIOf; NO. 83 -86 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT MAP NO. 9369 (11173)• i, Acceptance of Agreement and Security for Tract No. 11144 submitted by TAC Builders located on the west side of Vineyard and north of Arrow. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -87 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT • AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TACT NO. 11144. j. Acceptance of Agreement and Security for Tract No. 11173 submitted by M. J. Brock and Sons, Inc. located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 19th Street. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -88 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT NO. 11173• k. Acceptance of Agreement, Security, and Final Map of Tract 12184 submitted by Town and County Development located on the east side of Beryl Street, south of Base Line Road. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -89 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, AND FINAL MAP OF TRACT 12184. 1. Approval of Parcel Map 7852 and Real Property Improvnment contract and Lien Agreement submitted oy Beverly Fishback. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -90 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 7852, REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT, AND LIEN AGREEMENT. City Council Minutes -4- June 15, 1983 m. Acceptance of a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement from • Steven and Vera Sensenbach for single family room addition at 7928 Sierra Vista. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -91 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM STEVEN AND VERA SENSENBACH, FOR 7928 SIERRA VISTA, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME. n. Set Public Hearing for July 6, 1983 for formation of Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 far Parcel Map 7349 located on the north side of 4th Street, east of the Route 15 freeway. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, GIVING ITS PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 83-94 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO FORM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972. o. Approval. of Initiating Proceedings for the formation of street lighting assessment districts for newly recorded tracts throughout the City. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -95 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE FORMATION OF STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -96 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO • CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE FORMATION OF STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -93 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE FORMATION OF LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972. RESOLUTION NO. 83-94 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO FORM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972. o. Approval. of Initiating Proceedings for the formation of street lighting assessment districts for newly recorded tracts throughout the City. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -95 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE FORMATION OF STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -96 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO • CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE FORMATION OF STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972. City Council Minutes -5- June 15, 1983 • p. Set Public Hearing for July 20, 1983 for the Intention to Vacate an Alley located between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Foothill Blvd. requested by the developer of D.A. 83 -08, Gerald Edwards. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -97 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE A 20 -FOOT ALLEY ADJACENT TO LOTS 2 THROUGH 12 OF TRACT NO. 2521 GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE. q. Set Public Hearing for July 6, 1983 for Zoning Ordinance Amendment 83-04. An ordinance amending Section 61.0219(b)(7), Residential Parking Standards, of the Rancho Cucamonga Interim Zoning Ordinance. r. Set Public Hearing for July 6, 1983 for Environmental Assessment and Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 83 -01: An amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan regarding development standards for interim uses. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Schlosser to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously 4 -0 -1. • 4. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VACATION OF 7TH STREET. Located on the south side of 7th Street, east side of Center Avenue. (Item originally set for March 16, 1983). Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -34 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SUMMARILY ORDERING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF 7TH STREET. This item continued to July 6, 1983, B. GRANTING OF EASEMENTS ACROSS 8TH STREET. In connection with Parcel Map 6194 (Cadillac- Fairview) for railroad spur purposes. Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing Council was: Vito deVito Francesco, representing the owner of 160 acres running from Cleveland to Milliken on 8th Street. He is not opposed to the vacation of 8th Street, but wanted to make sure the granting of easements for railroad spur purposes does not affect property. There being no further public response, Mayor Mikels closed the public hearing. City Council Minutes -6- June 15, 1983 I City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution 83 -98. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -98 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING EASEMENTS ACROSS 8TH STREET FOR RAILROAD SPUR PURPOSES. Motion: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Schlosser to approve Resolution No. 83- 98 and to waive full reading. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Buquet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels ABSENT: Dahl C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SIGN ORDINANCE REVISIONS. An amendment to the sign regulations contained within Title 14 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. This is a comprehensive amendment intended to improve its administration and to provide for more effective signing. The basic regulations are not being changed. Staff report by Mike Vairin, Senior Planner. Mayor Mikels commented on the excellent interaction between the staff and the Chamber of Commerce. Councilman Buquet asked about the impact regarding non - conforming signs on • hardship cases. Mr. Vairin replied that non - conforming signs were done prior to incorporation and prior to the ordinance. A good example of a hardship case would be Sunrize Center. Most prior non - conforming signs have been removed due to attrition and development. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing Council was: David Kiedrowski, Chamber of Commerce, present on behalf of Bob Glasscock, Chairman of Sign Committee. There being no further response, the public hearing was closed. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 65 -B. ORDINANCE NO. 65 -B (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTERS 14.04, 14.08, 14.12, 14.16, 14.20, AND 14.28 OF TITLE 14 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE WHICH REGULATES SIGNS. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Buquet to waive full reading of Ordinance No. 65 -B and set July 6, 1983 for second reading. D. ORDERING THE VACATION OF EIGHTH STREET. From Haven Avenue to 21500 feet r • east of Milliken Avenue (Cadillac - Fairview and O'Donnell - Brigham). Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing Council was: • City Council Minutes -7- June 15, 1983 Jim Wesley, O'Donnell- Brigham A Partners, expressed approval. There being no further response, the public hearing was closed. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 83 -99. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Buquet to adopt Resolution No. 83 -99 and waive full reading. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Buquet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels ABSENT: Dahl RESOLUTION NO. 83 -99 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ORDERING TO BE VACATED, 8TH STREET FROM HAVEN AVENUE APPROXIMATELY 2,500 FEET EAST OF MILLIKEN AVENUE. E. ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN: ADOPTION Recommended approval of Resolution No. 83 -79 and Ordinance No. 203. Staff report by Otto Kroutil, Associate Planner. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing Council was: • Ronald Smith asked about SW corner of Base Line and Etiwanda. There being no further response, the public hearing was closed. Councilman Frost stated the NW corner of Etiwanda and Base Line is a floating designation and allows for each of the four property owners to come in with individual requests for consideration. Councilman Buquet stated this matter was taken care of at the last City Council meeting. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 203. ORDINANCE NO. 203 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE REGULATORY PROVISIONS SECTION OF THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AND AMENDING THE CITY'S ZONING MAP FOR THE EITWANDA AREA ACCORDING TO THESE PROVISIONS. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Buquet to waive full reading of Ordinance No. 7.03• Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Buquet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels ABSENT: Dahl City Council Minutes -8- June 15, 1983 Councilman Schlosser felt since Councilman Dahl was not present it would not • be appropriate to pass the ordinance at this time. A full City Council was need to pass something of this magnitude. Councilman Frost concurred. Mayor Mikels stated he discussed this with Councilman Dahl and that there was no problem. Councilman Buquet concurred that the vote on the ordinance should be continued until Councilman Dahl was present. Mayor Mikels could see no reason to delay. Councilman Frost felt it appropriate that the record show the vote of each individual. Consenus was to delay for full City Council approval. Continued to July 6, 1983. 5. ORDINANCES FOR CONSIDERATION A. AN ORDINANCE REGULATING CERTAIN ADULT BUSINESSES. An ordinance prohibiting certain nude conduct in establishments which serve alcoholic beverages. Robert Dougherty, City Attorney, stated this is enacted under Penal Code sections 3.18.5 and 3.18.6; it is not a zoning ordinance and does not determine where in the City nude entertainment will be conducted. It is a temporary moratorium on adult business in the City. This ordinance would prohibit nude and /or semi -nude waiters and waitresses or entertainers in establishments serving alcoholic beverages on the premises. Originally 3.18.5 • and 3.18.6 allowed this type of ordinance to extend to establishments serving food and beverages other than alcoholic beverages. With the recent California Supreme Court decision last year decreed that nude and semi -nude dancing is "symbolic speech" and protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution and the California Constitution. The case did leave room for cities to legislate in the area where alcoholic beverages alone are involved. Councilman Buquet asked if there were any potential problems or loopholes. Mr. Dougherty stated a potential problem is that the California Supreme Court when called on to rule on an ordinance affecting establishments serving alcoholic beverages may decide that the distinction they drew should not be applied. As of right now the ordinance would be found constitutional. Mayor Mikels commented on nude juice bars being established to avoid serving alcoholic beverages. Mr. Dougherty stated a recent case involving the City of Lop Angeles, Lee vs Davis, where a similiar ordinance extending to places that did not serve alcoholic beverages was held unconstitutional. Under present law, we cannot go further than regulate places having nude conduct and also serve alcoholic beverages. u City Council Minutes -9- June 15, 1983 Councilman Frost asked if this could be regulated through zoning. Mr. Dougherty stated that could be regulated but the law states cities cannot totally ban nude and semi -nude entertainment, adult bookstores, or adult movie theaters. ` Councilman Frost asked what the timeframe and options were. Mr. Dougherty stated another 9 -10 months to come up with a comprehensive zoning regulation before the moratorium will expire. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public input. There being no response, the public section was closed. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 200 -9. ORDINANCE NO. 200 -B (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 9 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER 9.08 THERETO PROHIBITING CERTAIN NUDE CONDUCT IN ESTABLISHMENTS WHICH SERVE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR ON PREMISES CONSUMPTION, AND DECLARING PENALTIES FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF. . Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Frost to set second reading for July 61 1983, and waive full reading. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Buquet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels ABSENT: Dahl B. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY'S ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE AND APPROVAL OF FEES. Recommend Council adopt Ordinance No. 63 -A and Resolution No. 83-100. Staff report by Lauren Wasserman, City Manager. Mayor Mikels asked what services would be provided by Chaffey Humane Society. Mr. Wasserman replied Chaffey will still handle the humane problems. Dog licenses can be mailed to the County now and in the future all processing would be on computer. Councilman Buquet asked if City Hall have everything that is needed now. Mr. Wasserman stated we have information sheets but not have forms. Licensed dogs picked up will be kept at kennels in Rancho Cucamonga. The County is willing to look at facilities for this. Councilman Buquet commented that he had inquiries from three local vets as to why they were not selected. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public input. There being no response, public section closed. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 63 -A. City Council Minutes -10- June 15, 1983 • ORDINANCE NO. 63 -A (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING CHAPTER 6.G4 OF TITLE 6 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ELIMINATING MUNICIPAL CODE PROVISIONS WHICH CONFLICT WITH PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED PROVISIONS OF THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY CODE RELATING TO ANIMALS. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Frost to waive full reading of Ordinance No. 63-A. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Buquet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels ABSENT: Dahl City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 83 -100. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -100 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING THE ENFORCING OFFICER FOR ANI4AL CONTROL SERVICES AND ESTABLISHING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR THE LICENSING OF DOGS IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. • Councilman Frost requested staff came back with effects of extending delinquent fee. Mayor Mikels stated fees coincide with the County. Mr. Wasserman added the County is making adjustments to handle this situation. Mayor Mikels set second reading for Ordinance No. 63 -A for July 6, 1983, Motion: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Schlosser to approve Resolution No. 83- 100 and waive full reading. Councilman Frost stated he would vote yes to be on the record, but would like staff to come back with a report; consider July 31 as a delinquent date. Mr. Wasserman stated the County will make arrangements for this and it does not need to be done by City Council Motion carried by the following vote AYES: Buquet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels ABSENT: Dahl 6. CITY MANAGE".'S STAFF REPORTS A. CONSIDERATION OF A BEQUEST BY THE COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMISSION. The Advisory Commission has requested the Council consider a policy relating to • residential densities. Staff report by Lauren Waserman, City Manager. Addressing Council was: City Council Minutes -11- June 15, 1983 • Sharon Romero, Chairman, Advisory Commission, stated the vote regarding this issue was unanimous and feels it reflects the feeling of the rest of the community. Mayor Mikels stated that the City Council had taken action at a previous meeting with respect to population projections. He also stated regarding item 2 of the proposed resolution, he would like to look at the percent of different land uses. Councilman Buquet felt density ranges are too wide, and he could not support a resolution such as this. Ralph Lewis, Lewis Homes, voiced opposition to Advisory Commission recommendation. Mrs. Flocker, felt there were more in opposition to Advisory Commission philosophy and is also opposed the Advisory Commission recommendation. Motion: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Schlosser to receive Advisory Commission recommendation and file it. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Buquet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels ABSENT; Dahl • xxxxxxxxxxxx Mayor Mikels called a recess at 9:00 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:16 p.m. will all members of the Council and staff present. xxxxxxx xx xxx B. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMSSION DECISION TO APPROVE A REQUEST TO MODIFY 81 -611 --VINEYARD BANE. A request to expand their existing modular fact- With an additional 936 square feet, related parking, and an extension time. Staff report by Rick Gomez, City Planner. Set public hearing for July 6, 1983• C. ZONE W - uuuNrx. An agreement with San Bernardino County on provisions for the administration of funds received under the successful passage of the proposed Measure "w ". Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer. The agreement is substantially the same as adopted previously except for modification of clause n9 which discusses indemnity. Under the Benefit Assessment Act the Board of Supervisors and County Counsel want to be held harmless for any legal action that may accrue through the process. Basic provision of the program is that 87% of all funds collected will be returned to the City to expend on projects selected by the City. Funds to the City would be deposited into a separate account and the interest would accrue to the City on those funds. The 87% money would be prioritized by the City. The City's flood control priority list is in excess of $8 million and three projects listed for priority are Turner - Hermosa Drain, the lower Hellman Drain running from Foothill Boulevard south to Cucamonga Creek, and the Day Etiwanda City Council Minutes -12- June 75, 1983 Project. The remaining 13% will be prioritized by the Board of Supervisors. • The West Cucamonga Creek project was designated as the number one priority to receive the 13% funds. Zone Ore Committee recommended cost of the election be shared by the cities involved along with the County in unincorporated areas. Our share would be $8 400. This figure is related to the precinct votes and the actual administrative costs. Mr. Wasserman stated that the City would add and additional amount for funds need for allocations from contingency into that account. Mayor Mikels opened meeting for public discussion. There being no response, the public discussion was closed. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Frost to approve agreement with County and expenditure of $8,400. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Buquet, Schlosser, Frost Mikels ABSENT: Dahl D. HERITAGE PARR DESIGN CONTRACT: CONSIDERATION OF CONTRACT MODIFICATION. Staf, report by Bill Holley, Community Services Director. Mr. Holley Presented the site plan for Heritage Park that would be reviewed by the Park Advisory Committee and the Planning Commission. The activity centers at the • park would be equestrian, 4H area, two baseball - softball /soccer fields, large Playground area, basketball area, picnic facilities, equestrian trail, and jagging - walking trail. The main access to the park would be on Beryl. Ron Paige, Recreation Systems Inc., stated the preliminary planning Process is not completed at this time. A detailed Design Development Report will be prepared including more information on the concept of the design, address the environmental impact that the park will have on the community, discuss costs, and recommend phasing. Councilman Buquet asked what the average cost per acre was to develop. Mr. Paige replied around $50,000 an acre. Councilman Buquet stated the projected cost went from $38,857 to $57,142 per acre. Mr. Paige replied costs on this park are higher because of the substantial amount of grading, heavy use areas, specialized facilities, for example, the inclusion of bridges. Costs are higher because of the site itself, limited access, need for grading, and high impact, use that is projected. Councilman Schlosser asked about the cost of the bridges. Mr. Paige stated the price would vary, but the main bridge would probably be $40- 60,000, without amenities. The pedestrian bridge would be in the neighborhood of $20- 30,000. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public discussion. There being no response, the public discussion was closed. • Mayor Mikels asked about setting of $1.3 million as the budget cap. Mr. Holley stated the $1.3 million was figured on the remaining land using the standard of $40,000 per acre. As more specifics were looked at, the feeling City Council Minutes -13- June 15, 1983 • was that because of grading and amenities suggested by the design group, the figure would be in excess of $1.3 million, possibly to $2 million. Councilman Schlosser asked for an explanation of item 2. Mr. Holley replied stated the contract is eliminating the preparation of construction drawings and everything as a direction at this time to the consultant. The Design Development Report portion of the contract will be completed. On phase by phase plan and our ability to pay, the construction drawings would be prepared in detail. Councilman Schlosser felt there should be some monetary limit. Councilman Buquet does not feel the cost was run up by the consultant, but by those who want more amenities. Mayor Mikels stated that phase by phase would probably be the best way to ge. Councilman Schlosser had no problem with the phase by phase. Councilman Buquet thought it would be helpful to get a community facilities act for park development. Mayor Mikels stated that if the community voted on a facilities act to spend additional money for the park they would have to evaluate what they would be getting for their money and make their decision on the ballot. Councilman Frost stated City Council might want to defer a decision on this item. Councilman Dahl and he are actively evaluating specifics of Mello Roos • Act and after their next meeting may be able to provide more input for council to act on. Mayor Mikels asked if that would impact the decision with respect to the contract modifications. Councilman Frost stated there may be additional information that would have an affect on Council's decision. Councilman Duquet felt this item should not be deferred since any decision regarding the Mello Roos Act would not affect this issue of paying the consultants bill. Councilman Frost stated the ability to fund improvements in the park may have an affect on future work. Mr. Holley stated a DDR would have to be prepared in any case. Ron Paige stated they could proceed with working drawings based on $1.3 million without some amenities, but where could the City go from there. It could not go out to bid; if there is flexibility in the contract, they could help. Until a DDR is completed, the actual cost is not known. Motion: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Schlosser to direct staff to modify contract, option 02. Motion carried by the following vote: Councilman Schlosser asked what the modification was. Mayor Mikels stated the City Council is authorizing payment for the DDR, then proceed in phases as we wanted to do the work or had funds to do it. AYES; Buquet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels ABSENT: Dahl City Council Minutes -14- June 15, 1983 E. AGREEMENT RETYP.P.N TAP. nN"Pul aTAWV nP ft v TrA wn mvc rTmv nn o...1— • 11— ,'C HIV L'4 oy .ui ..illy, uommunluy Jervlces Director. This is a 50 -50 cost share with the Corps to provide amenities such as the work along the rights of way through Heritage Park up the flood control channel. Additionally, there would be refinement of the undercrossing at Base Line. Would entail $285,000 City commitment, which funds are available. Mr. Holley stated the contract needs refinement and recommends referring contract back to City Attorney. Also, there are positive negotiations with CCWD use of the neighborhood park on the south side of Base Line. Councilman Buquet asked what the time element was. Mr. Holley replied it is best to move as soon as possible since the Corps plans to accelerate it up one year, which would mean putting bids out in September. All agreements would have to be reached as soon as possible. Councilman Schlosser stated this is money well spent for betterment of community and Council should proceed with it. City Council referred contract to City Attorney and return finalized agreement to July 6, 1983 City Council meeting. F. REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CONDITIONS FOR PARCEL MAP 4773• Located on 23rd Street, 850 feet east of Etiwanda Avenue and 950 feet north of Summit Avenue. Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer. If the current policy in was altered it would back to the Planning Commission and public hearing process to modify that condition. Mr. Charles, prospective owner of the property, felt the the burden should not be placed on one person to build a road that would benefit everyone on the lot. City Attorney stated a public hearing is required before any action taken to alter the policy. Mayor Mikels asked if we could enter into a reimbursement agreement in the future after improvements were made. Mr. Hubbs stated that we could enter into a reimbursement agreement. Councilman Buquet asked if there was any way to speed up reimbursements. City Attorney stated that once a parcel has developed without having a condition imposed upon it you will not get it voluntarily without getting paying compensation for it. The only way to obtain easements, except by dedication, as a condition of development or further land division, would be by eminent domain. Mr. Charles asked if CCWD having a 20 ft easement could pave that area. He asked if he could put up a bond and develop later. • City Council Minutes -15- June 15, 1983 Mr. Hubbs replied that all bonding agreements are fixed time agreements. It would not relieve any financial burden. Mr. Hubbs stated the City would work with Mr. Charles to pave portions of road outside of the water department's easement. Consensus of City Council was to uphold the existing standards and work within the current policy to assist Mr. Charles. G. PROPOSED SOUTHERN PACIFIC AND SANTA PE TRACK CONSOLIDATION. Recommend participation with the City of Montclair in a study to pursue the abandonment and track consolidation of the most northerly Southern Pacific Rail line. Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer. Mayor Mikels stated he would consider option 2 rather than option 1 Councilman Buquet asked if the $15,000 cost was spread over the participating cities or if it was $15,000 per city. Mr. Hubbs stated it was spread over the participating cities. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Buquet to approve consideration of option 2 as outlined in the May 20,1983, letter of L.D. King to the Southern Pacific Transportation Company not to exceed $2,000 from Systems Development to pursue the abandonment and track consolidation of northerly Southern • Pacific Rail line. Councilman Frost asked if this was a total project or would there be add ons later. Mr. Hubbs state that there would be add ons later if the proposal was met favorably. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Buquet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels ABSENT: Dahl H. CONSIDERATION OF EATBNDING CITY OFFICES LEASE AGREEMENT. Request to extend existing Agreement though June 30, 1985. Staff report by Robert Rizzo, Administrative Analyst. Councilman Buquet stated he would like to see further budget implications before considering this item. Mr. Wasserman stated he would discuss this with councilmembers individually. Item deferred until after budget approval. No iLo,na submitted. C_I 7. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS City Council Minutes -16- June 15, 1983 No items submitted. 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS 9. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Frost to adjourn to June 30, 1983 at 6:00 p.m. for the Budget meeting. Motion carried unanimously 4 -0 -1. The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Mary Kuhn Acting Deputy City Clerk • • • 0 July 6, 1983 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Regular Meeting 1. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held in the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road on Wednesday, July 6, 1983. The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M. by Mayor Jon D. Mikels. Present were: Councilmembers Richard M. Dahl, Charles J. Buquet II, Phillip D. Schlosser, James C. Frost, and Mayor Jon D. Mikels. Also present were: City Manager, Lauren M. Wasserman; City Attorney, Ted Hopson; City Planner, Rick Gomez; City Engineer, Lloyd Hubbs; Finance Director, Harry Empey; Community Services Director, Bill Holley; Senior Civil Engineer, Paul Rougeau; and Associate Planner, Otto Kroutil. Approval of Minutes: Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Schlosser to approve • the minutes of June 1, 1983• Motion carried unanimousiv 5 -0. 2. ANNOONCENENTS a. Thursday, July 7, 1983, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION, 7:00 p.m. Lions Park Community Center. b. Wednesday, July 13, 1983, PLANNING COMMISSION, 7:00 p.m., Lions Park Community Center. c. Monday, July 18, 1983, City Council Revenue Sharing Hearing, 7:00 p.m., Lions Park Community Center. d. Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency executive session, Monday, July 18, 1983, 7:15 p.m., Lions Park Community Center. e. Thursday, July 7, 1983, Foothill Community Planning meeting, 7:00 p.m., Library meeting room. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR a. Approval of Warrants, Assessment District 82 -1, May, 1983 in the amount of $440,7.28.24, and approval of warrant, Assessment District 82 -2, May, 1983 in the amount of $630.00. ID b. Forward Claim against the City by Kelly M. Glover to the City Attorney and Carl Warren Co. for handling. c. Forward Claim against the City by Sharon Lee Surber to the City Attorney City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 Page 2 • and Carl 'Warren Co. for handling. d. Alcoholic Beverage License Application for on -sale general eating place license to Anthony and. Mary Ann Vernola, Magic Lamp Inn, Inc., 8189 Foothill Blvd. e. Agreement for Amethyst Avenue Street Improvements. Recommend approval of cooperative agreement between the City, Cucamonga County Water District and Harley Lovitt to jointly construct a portion of Amethyst Avenue between Lemon and Banyan. f. Hellman Avenue Improvement Agreement for Water and Sewer Improvement. Recommend approval of agreement with the Cucamonga County Water District to include certain water and sewer works in the construction of Hellman and Foothill intersection improvements. g. Alta Loma Park Jogging Tract. It is recommended that Council authorize the Finance Department to exceed Purchase Order #2430 by $1,600.00 for the purchase of decomposed granite (D.G.) for the jogging tract. h. Acceptance of Parcel Map 6726 submitted by Quong - Watkins Properties and located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Foothill Blvd. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -101 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 6726. i. Acceptance of Bonds and Agreement submitted by Lightner Development Company for Tract 10491 and release of Bonds and Agreement previously submitted for said Tract by Eastwood Homes, Ltd. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -102 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 10491 SUBMITTED BY LIGHTNER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AND RELEASING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY SUBMITTED BY EASTWOOD HOMES, LTD. j. Approval of Parcel Map 7963 and Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement submitted by Barton Development Co. and located at the southeast, corner of Foothill Blvd. and Haven Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 83-103 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP 7963 RESOLUTION 83-115 NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 • Page 3 REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FOR PARCEL MAP 7963 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME. k. Release of Bonds: Tracts 9267, 9268, 6 9269 - Located generally West of Archibald and North of Banyan Release of Cash Staking Deposit L.D. King, Inc. $1,335.14 Steven Sanberg $5,964.86 Tracts 9267 and 9268 - Located generally West of Archibald and North of Banyan Faithful Performance Bonds (Road) Tract No. 9267 $88,000 Tract No. 9268 $136,000 Tract No. 9436 - Located generally South of Victoria and East of Haven. Owner: Crismar Homes Maintenance Guarantee Bond $5,300.00 Tract 9637 - Located generally East of Amethyst and North of Lemon. Owner: Crismar Homes Acceptance of: Maintenance Guarantee Bond $10,000 Release of: Faithful Performance Bond $200,000 Parcel Map 5922 - located generally South of 19th Street and East of Jasper. Owner: Robert Bowdoin. Release of: Faithful Performance Bond $48,513.02 RESOLUTION NO. 83 -104 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 'TRACTS 9267 AND 9268, AND TRACT 9637 AND PARCEL MAP 5922, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION. 1. Tentative Tracts 12316 -1 and 12317 -1 - Lewis. Approval of Agreement for construction of model homes prior to final subdivision map recordation. City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 Page 4 • m. Set Public Hearing - July 20, 1983 - Environmental Assessment and Zone Change 83 -01 - Christeson. A change of zone from A -1 (Limited Agriculture) to C -2 (General Business Commercial) for 13.1 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - AFN 1077 - 401 - 01,03• n. Service Recognition Awards- Eligibility Requirements. o. Approval of Parcel Map 7891, Bonds and Agreement and Lien Agreement submitted by Herbert Hawkins, Inc. and located on the south side of Foothill Blvd. approximately 250 feet east of Turner Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -106 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 8791, IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY RESOLUTION NO. 83 -107 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM HERBERT HAWKINS, INC. FOR PARCEL MAP 7891 AND AUTHORIZING THE • MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME p. Approval of Tract. Maps 11173 and 11173-1 submitted by M. J. Brook and Sons, Inc. and located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 19th Street. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -108 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL MAP OF TRACTS 11173 AND 11173 -1. q. Approval of resolution indicating the City's desire for and willingness to participate in modification of the Foothill Blvd. /Interstate 15 interchange and requesting that CalTrans proceed with the project development process. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -109 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, INDICATING THE CITY'S DESIRE FOR AND WILLINGNESS TO PARTICIPATE IN MODIFICATIONS OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD- INTERESTATE 15 INTERCHANGE AND REQUESTING THAT CALTRANS PROCEED WITH COORDINATION OF THE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS FOR THESE MODIFICATIONS. • r. Authorization to advertize for bid on the Hellman .Avenue Improvement Project from south of Foothill Blvd. to the Pacific Electric tracks. Budget $650,000. City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 • Page 5 s. Request to set public hearing date for Revenue Sharing Budget for August 3, 1983• Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Dahl to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. 4. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VACATION OF A PORTION OF 7TH STREET LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE FROM CENTER AVENUE EAST APPROXIMATELY 520 FEET ADJACENT TO CALIFORNIA FINISHED METALS. Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 83 -34. RESOLUTION N0. 83 -34 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, • SUMMARILY ORDERING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF 7TH STREET, Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Dahl to approve the vacation of 7th Street and to waive further reading of Resolution No. 83-34. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SIGN ORDINANCE REVISIONS. An amendment to the sign regulations contained within Title 14 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. This is a comprehensive amendment intended to improve its administration and to provide for more effective signing. The basic regulations are not being changed. Staff report by Rick Gomez. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 65 -B. ORDINANCE NO. 65 -B (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDI14G CHAPTERS 14.04, 14.08, 14.12, 14.16, 14.20, AND 14.08 OF TITLE 14 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE WHICH REGULATES SIGNS. 49 Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Buquet to waive full reading of Ordinance No. 65 -8. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Schlosser to adopt Ordinance No. 65 -5. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 Page 6 • C. ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN. Item contined from June 15, 1983 meeting. Staff report by Rick Gomez. Otto Kroutil was present to answer any questions. Mayor Mikels commended Mr. Kroutil for his work on the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing council was: Roland Smith, Rolling Hills, asked about the SW corner of Base Line being low residential and would like a commercial designation. There being no further response, Mayor Mikels closed the public hearing. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 83 -79. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -79 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN. Councilman Frost acknowledged staff's contributions to the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Mayor Mikels stated that Councilman Frost had also contributed considerable effort toward this plan. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Dahl to waive full reading and • approve Resolution 83 -79. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. City C`.erk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 203, ORDINANCE NO. 203 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE REGULATORY PROVISIONS SECTION OF THE ETIWANDA SPECTFIC PLAN AND AMENDING THE CITY'S ZONING MAP FOR THE ETIWANDA AREA ACCORDING TO THESE PROVISIONS. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Buquet to waive full reading of Ordinance No. 203. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Schlosser to adopt Ordinance No. 203. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Dahl, Buquet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels NOES: None ABSENT: None D. ENVIkONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 83 -04. An ordinance amending Section 61.0219(b)(7), Residential Parking Standards, of the Rancho Cucamonga Interim Zoning Ordinance. Staff report by Rick Gomez. • Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 • Page 7 City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 123 -B. ORDINANCE NO. 123 -B (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 61.0219(b)(7) OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE N0. 123, RESIDENTIAL PARKING STANDARDS. Councilman Frost stated this seems as though this is the beginning of the elimination of flexibility. Councilman Dahl agreed that it would loose some of the flexibility used in the past. fie also stated (tem III, 7 -B) he was not comfortable with designation in 7 -B -III of 1.8 off - street parking spaces per unit and would prefer 2 parking spaces. Mr. Gomez stated the data used was industry -wide data from the Urban Land Institute and a major study conducted by the City of Irvine. The City of Rancho Cucamonga did provide more guest parking than shown in the studies. Councilman Dahl stated the DMV records per family in terms of automobile units is 2.3. He also felt it would be better to be under - parked rather than over - parked. Mayor Mikels also had a problem with going with the low number per unit. Councilman Buquet commented that the Calmark project he though was less than 1.7. Mr. Gomez verified that it was .7. Mr. Gomez stated this item could be continued and staff could summarize data used and provide that information to the City Council at their next meeting. Consensus of Council was to look at further data. Councilman Frost felt Council could look at further data, but also set a date for second reading of the ordinance. Mayor Mikels stated there were two options to consider: (1) hold off consideration of giving first reading of the ordinance at this time until other data is providt,l; (2) give first reading now and receive data later; if changes were appropriate at second reading, the ordinance would have to be given a first reading. Councilman Dahl stated he would like to change 7 -B -III from 1.8 to 2 and also increase C -III to 1.8. Motion: Moved by Dahl to change 7 -B -III to 2 and C -III to 1.8. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilman Buquet stated he would like to review additional data before changing anthing in the ordinance. Mayor Mikels reiterated the two options. City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 Page 8 • Councilman Frost and Councilman Buquet concurred with the first reading and reviewing additional data. Mavor Mikels stated first reading would be given, Council would study additional data, and if changes were made a new first reading would be given. Councilman Buquet stated he was not happy with the provision for carports in single family dwellings, was not comfortable with leaving the open to a Design Review Board, and felt carports detract from homes in addition to becoming eyesores and security problems. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Schlosser to waive full reading of Ordinance No. 123 -B. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. Second reading for Ordinance No. 123 -B set for July 20, 1983. E. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE A REQUEST TO MODIFY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81 -04 - VINEYARD BANE. A request to expand their existing modular facilities with an additional 926 square feet, related parking, and an extension of time. Recommend approval of modification of Conditional Use Permit 81 -04, based on the findings within their Resolution and the information provided to them at their public hearing on May 25, 1983. Staff report by Rick Gomez. At this time Councilman Schlosser excused himself due to possible conflict. • Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing Council were: Justin MaCarthy, representing Bill Rodriguez, stated Mr. Rodriguez opposed this modification since he did not apply for it, nor authorize it. John Chakmak, representing Vineyard Bank, stated the Board of Directors of Vineyard Bank approved the modification and Mr. Rodriguez is a member of the Board of Directors. There being no further response, the public hearing was closed. Councilman Frost stated the problem is between Mr. Rodriguez and Vineyard Bank and would have to be dissolved by them. City Attorney Hopson stated there is no provision in the ordinance as to who may apply for an extension or a modification to a Conditional Use Permit and that the Planning Commission made the appropriate decision. Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Frost to uphold the Planning Commission decision and deny appeal. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Dahl, Buquet, Frost, Mikels NOES: None ABSENT: Schlosser • Mayor Mikels called a recess at 8:58 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:25 p.m. with all members of the Council present. City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 • Page 9 F. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 83 -03. An amendment to the residential use standards to allow for second dwelling units on single family zoned residential lots. Staff report by Rick Gomez. Recommendation: Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance 204 -A amending Ordinance 204 to reduce park- ing requirements for temporary /removable second dwelling units. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 204 -A. ORDINANCE NO. 204 -A (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE 204, REGARDING PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR SECOND DWELLING UNITS IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Schlosser to waive full reading of Ordinance No. 204 -A. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Buquet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels NOES: Dahl • ABSENT: None Second reading for Ordinance No. 204 -A set for July 20, 1983. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 83 01. An amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan regarding development standards for interim uses. Staff report by Rick Gomez. Recommendation: Planning, Commission recommends approval of amendment and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 83 -110. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -110 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AMENDING THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN 13EPARDIIIG DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR INTERIM USES. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Frost to waive full reading and approve Resolution 83 -110. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. H. VACATION OF THE SERVTCP. Rnen tnremvn nu mom ennmu ,.., o..,,..,.._.. _.._ ., ...... .....na "a[i report by Lloyd Road to August 3, , 1983. Aeq uest For Continuance of the Vacation It the Service 983 City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 Page 10 RESOLUTION NO. 83 -80 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING TO BE VACATED, A PORTION OF THE FRONTAGE ROAD ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, WEST OF RAMONA AVENUE (PARCEL MAP 6114). Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Schlosser to continue item to August 3, 1983• Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. I. ORDERING THE WORK IN ruff FAHUM, MAP T3g9. It is recommended that City Council approve the resolution ordering the work in connection with Parcel Map 7349 located on the north side of 4th Street, east of the Route 15 Freeway. Request continuance to AuGUSt 3, 1983 City Council meeting. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -112 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH THE FORMATION OF LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 • Motion: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Schlosser to continue item to August 3, 1983. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. • 5. ORDINANCES FOR CONSIDERATION A. AN ORDINANCE REGULATING CERTAIN ADULT BUSINESSES. An ordinance prohibiting certain nude conduct in establishments which serve alcoholic beverages. Report by City Attorney Hopson. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting to public discussion. There being no response the public section was closed. City Clerk 'Wasserman read the title of Ordinance 200 -B. ORDINANCE NO. 200 -B (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 9 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER .9.08 THERETO PROHIBITING CERTAIN NUDE CONDUCT IN ESTABLISHMENTS WHICH SERVE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR ON PREMISES CONSUMPTION, AND DECLARING PENALTIES FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Buquet to waive full reading of Ordinance No. 200 -B. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Buquet to adopt Ordinance do. 200- • B. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Dahl, Buquet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels NOES: None ABSENT: None City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 • Page 11 B. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY'S ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE AND APPROVAL OF FEES. Staff report by Lauren Wasserman, City Manager. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting to public discussion. There being no response, the public section was closed. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 63 -A. ORDINANCE NO. 63 -A (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING CHAPTER 6.04 OF TITLE 6 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ELIMINATING MUNICIPAL CODE PROVISIONS WHICH CONFLICT WITH PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED PROVISIONS OF THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY CODE RELATING TO ANIMALS. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Dahl to waive full reading of Ordinance No. 63 -A. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Buquet to adopt Ordinance No. 63 -A. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. • 6. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS A. REQUEST TO CONSIDER REGULATING ICE CREAM VENDORS The City has received a request from Walter Rickel and other concerned citizens to consider regulating ice cream vendors in residential tracts. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing Council was: Walter Hicks' opposed to noise and danger to children emanating from ice cream vendor trucks. There being no further response, the public hearing was closed. Councilman Frost stated he does not feel there is enough data to support restriction of private enterpise in this case. Mayor Mikels felt there is a potential problem in this regard and commented on one possibility which would be registration to show who is operating the truck,. Councilman Schlosser stated the trucks are sometimes in and out of the city before anyone knows they are here. Mr. Wasserman stated the City licenses the companies but not the vendors. Licensing individual vendors would prove ineffective because the trucks may change drivers frequently. Mayor Mikels stated it would be difficult to enforce the noise level. City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 Page 12 Mr. Wasserman stated that most noise ordinances are written to protect the • people after 8 or 9 p.m. rather than in the daylight hours, and it would be difficult to enforce the existing ordinance on noise. Councilman Buquet was concerned about enacting something that would be unenforceable and asked Mr. Rickel if he had checked with surrounding cities. Mr. Rickel replied he has only checked with Beverly Hills. Councilman Dahl felt everything should be left as it is now and allow the vendors to operate rather than re,trict them. Mr. Wasserman stated staff could be instructed to send a letter to the companies requesting they voluntarily turn the volume down. Councilman Buquet also expressed concern with the loitering around schools and that we should find out what neighboring cities have done. Consensus of Council was to direct staff to write a letter to the ice cream companies and gather more data to return to City Council at a later date. B. REQUEST FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF CO9ERNl�NTS (SCAG) TO 1pDIPY THE REGIONAL HOUSING ALLOCATION MODBL (PRAM) The housing forecast from the RHAM provided for a disproportionate allocation of housing goals for Rancho Cucamonga and other areas in San Bernardino County. The Council will • consider a resolution recommending changes to the RHAM process. Staff report by Rick Gomez. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public discussion. There being no response, the public section was closed. Acting Deputy City Clerk Mary Kuhn read the title of Resolution No. 83-113 RESOLUTION NO. 83 -113 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMTiGA REQUESTING MODIFICATIONS TO THE REGIONAL HOUSING ALLOCATION MODEL AND ITS RESULTS. Mayor Mikels stated this resolution is what will be needed to represent San Bernardino County's position that RHAM should reflect equitable distribution of housing throughout the region. Councilman Buquet asked about the status of the 90 day period. Mayor Mikels replied the 90 day provision expires on July 27, and after the 27th, there is a 60 day period in which SCAG will develop responses to all repeals presented. Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by 3ehlosser to waive full reading and approve Resolution No. 93 -113. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. Mayor Mikels stated he would carry this position to the Executive Committee • meeting on July 7, 1983. C. EQUESTRIAN TRAIL GUIDELINES. Amending Resolution 81 -93 establishing trail City Council Minutes • July 1983 1 Page 13 design standards. Staff report by Rick Gomez. Recommendation: Planning Cormission recommends adoption of Resolution. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting to public discussion. There being no response, the public discussion section was closed. Councilman Dahl stated this would make the trail systems less costly to develop and that the changes are needed. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 81 -93A. RESOLUTION NO. 81 -93A A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AMENDING RESOLUTION 81 -93, ESTABLISHING STANDARDS FOR THE DESIGN OF REGIONAL MULTI- PURPOSE, COMMUNITY, AND LOCAL FEEDER TRAILS WITHIN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Frost to waive full reading and approve Resolutlon No. 81 -93A. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. D. ALTA LOMA CRAENEL DESIGN CONTRACT ADDENDUM NO. 2 Approval recommended for • addendum to change design contract to reflect changes in the scope of work on the Alta Loma Channel design net cost increase $3,800.00. Staff report by Lloyd Huhbs. Councilman Schlosser stated since the area is the same, why are they coming back to City Council and requesting more money to complete the project. Mr. llubbs replied that items such as storm drains and street design were not included in the original scope of work. Different plans and area surveys will have to be done. Councilman Dahl asked how far along is the planning of the Assessment District. Mr. Huhbs stated there is a property owner's meeting July 12, 1983; it will proceed with a public hearing within the next two months. Mayor Mikels stated the scope of work had to be modified to allow the property to bear the costs. Councilman Dahl was concerned about spending money as to what results will be. Mayor Mik is stated that originally we did not know what the costing would be. We knew now it will cost more than the land will bear. Councilman Buquet stated the channel needs to be completed. Delay in the project approval is portially at fault in rising costs. Councilman Dahl did not like to see requests for increases. ID Councilman Frost stated he understood that all changes were iniated by staff. Councilman Dahl would like to be informed of changes that will cost money. Mr. Wasserman stated there are so many unknowns, therefore, we cannot predict City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 Page 111 • without going through extensive amount of work what the cost would be to the city. Motion: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Dahl to approve Addendum No. 2 to the Agreement for Engineering Services on Alta Loma Channel and authorize from Storm Drain Funds an additional $3,800. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Dahl, Buquet, Frost, Mikels NOES: Schlosser ABSENT: None E. A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF ACA35 Report by Lauren Wasserman, City Manager. The purpose of ACA 35 is to provide that if a program is mandated by the State then the State must pay the costs incurred in forcing a city to perform that function. If the State does not want to provide funding to the City there is an option which goes back to the city that turns the mandate into a voluntary situation. City Clerk 'Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 83 -114. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -114 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING ASSEMBLY CONSTITUTIONAL • AMENDMENT NUMBER THIRTY -FIVE (ACA 35). Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Schlosser to waive full reading and adopt Resolution No. 83 -114. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. .. SET JULY 20, 1983. AS THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FORMATION OF Hubbs, City Engineer. Recommendation to approve Engineer's Report and the two resolutions and set date of July 20, 1983 for a public hearing to form districts. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolutions No. 83 -115. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -115 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE' FORMATION OF STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OFFERING A TIME. AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Schlosser to waive full reading and adopt Resolution No. 83 -115. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 83 -116. • RESOLUTION N0, a3 -116 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, GIVING ITS PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 • Page 15 ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Dahl to waive full reading and adopt Resolution No. 83 -116. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. City Clerk Wasserman read the title o£ Resolution No. 83 -117. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -117 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO FORM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OFFERING A TIKE. AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO Motion: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Schlosser to waive full reading and adopt Resolution No. 83 -117. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 83 -118. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Dahl to waive full reading and adopt Resolution No. 83 -118. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. No items submitted 7. CITY ATTORNEY'3 REPORTS 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF HISTORIC COMMISSION VACANCY. Vacancy in Historic Prnsa rva tion Commission due to resignation of Robert L. Hickox. Councilman Frost felt filling the vacancy should be deferred until the Historic Preservation Commission can discuss the vacancy. Motion: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Dahl to set August 172 1983 for consideration of commission appointment with the deadline for submission of applications at 5:00 p.m., Friday, August 12, 1983. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Dahl, Buquet, Schlosser, Mikels NOES: Frost ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 83 -118 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, GIVING ITS PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0, 2. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Dahl to waive full reading and adopt Resolution No. 83 -118. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. No items submitted 7. CITY ATTORNEY'3 REPORTS 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF HISTORIC COMMISSION VACANCY. Vacancy in Historic Prnsa rva tion Commission due to resignation of Robert L. Hickox. Councilman Frost felt filling the vacancy should be deferred until the Historic Preservation Commission can discuss the vacancy. Motion: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Dahl to set August 172 1983 for consideration of commission appointment with the deadline for submission of applications at 5:00 p.m., Friday, August 12, 1983. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Dahl, Buquet, Schlosser, Mikels NOES: Frost ABSENT: None City Council Minutes July 6, 1983 Page 16 • B. REPRESENTATIVE TO OMNITRANS Mayor Mikels stated Councilman Frost will be stepping down from his Omnitrans position and this vacancy will need to be filled. Councilman Dahl selected to be Omnitrans representative. ADDED ITEM: Mr. Paul Pope expressed his original concern regarding an illegal business being conducted from his neighborhood and that Mr. Wasserman was in the process of investigating this matter. 9. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Schlosser, to adjourn to the Revenue Sharing meeting scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on July 18, 1983, at Lions Park Community Center. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. The meeting adjourned at 10:48 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Mary Kuhn Acting Deputy City Clerk • 17J 1 • L t l I 7/20/83 ,,,; PAST Clfto RANCHO CUCAMONGA WARRANT RF�CrONC &(ION WARR F YEN I V E N O C R N A M E WD TTF pppt'A EICf C DISCOUNT NET . 111743 19144 f0'45 2399 1314 4018 CO6P FIR MCYT CO YI IIF SUAROV HA40f:' An4LNISTRATCRS 6/27/93 6/18/93 612E1N3 515.00- 50_00 7,046.87 10146 6. ?6 lF6:LF CF CA IF FIT IFS 6Ri /93 33.75 • 0 I^ -747 IOC49 V (0 749 159 10:51 1.152 10753 10154 I07S5 q9>0 410 7915 1275 7313 1114 4660 0145 1164 CA - T f'0 OF QUiF RATIO SAN�PCNn CC 'MV (0 11 POP EMPL PETI1FAENT SYS 8Al2 DF A4FRICA MITI f. SHARON ILNC, SHAPOY GIL`SAl CCMPIITFR SUPPLIF A9VINCEH CY4PVCTR SYSIF. 947,Y4 DFSM MY Of" /" 6J ?9193 6/ 9193 6/29/83 6129/83 6179181 6/30/93 6/31/83 6130183 27•1.44 4.5'0.50 9.3111.70 9.092.11 56.00 21I1.BR 9111.5a 016.74 79R.11 10756 19757 1.759 7803 925D 2020 PR1:E CLUB WFL.IS FIRr..O TRtCTFF CAI. IF P.FNTA1 SIRVICF 6/30/83 7 1O6 /P3 7 /0"U'l 45.00 3.577 -.0 11721.92 e .E 11759 10760 19563 10616 19617 8095 4990 8745 V.10 VOID PFITFR OFVFLOPM NT, A H HCALEY WIIIIAM L SIIII IV%N1 PILL FINMS A`18N°FHF FCR NS ALIGNMF5? T /Dl /Nf 7/08/83 6/30/83 7/20/93 7/2O/A3 61334.00 '00.0. 960.00- 18619 18619 VP10 V110 FORMS AtiC.N4c FORMS At NC IG4MFNF 7/20/93 _ 7/20I93 19620 CCO1 A 4 QUIPMENT RENTALS 7120/93 10.49 19621 0904 A -1 ItNFN 7/20/83 152.00 0 1962- 19673 0006 0011 A -I TIIRF IRRIGATION SAL AV TNT!- RRUNV:C. DIV 712D /91 7/20/93 118.0D 134.74 10624 IR625 0105 D16S ACTION 9USINFSS .MACHINE ASPICULTORAI CfYIM 7/20/83 7/10/93 423.95 69S.34 10626 1 °627 0265 0329 ALTA RNCHO CLASS C MIRK AM PROTFCTICN 140 7/20/83 .7/20/113 63.65 346.50 19628 0525 AS9 CIATFD ENGINEERS 7/201B3 71882.60 0 • 18629 19630 19631 14531 19613 1740 1100 1350 1 "5 1430 8 L A CONSTRUCTION SASFtTNF HARDWARE PFFOLF T14 YI'::SI fY NFF7119 BFSE: OFFICE PRO91-CIS 1/20183 7/20193 7/20193 7/11/91 7/20/A3 "" 11M 0.00 297.84 22.50 Rl.17 91.72 ®1 1A635 1540 504ROPOOYM POOKS 7/20/83 829.95 ,19636 1962 RQNSFDIMAN - MC CAIN 7120193 994.00 18637 17DO PRIINESI DEBBIE 7/20/93 103.95 B IP-39 19639 19640 1774 17,40 1900 RURY1 FLOYD BURK RCSFAN77 C C �NGINFFRING 7/20/03 7/20/93 7/20/63 11054.35 11577.D7 179.25 19641 2191 CARELLI, ISORIO 7/20/83 89.10 19642 19641 ?G" 2119 CARTED) CA9RILL C"N".1 CITIES SIGN EFTA 7120/81 7/20103 96..00 1S9.45 IA644 2256 CHAFFFY UNION H S DIST 7/20/83 699.56 18645 2294 CHRISTOPHER CHFV. MARK 7/2O/P3 35.00 'I1� ` _ • - • 11646 19647 1864. 19649 19650 18651 IR652 1A654 t %55 I06S6 18657 18654 18659 18660 IR661 19667 18663 1.664 18665 239[5 139. 2187 2519 2575 2670 2699 2opR 3003 4040 4121 4489 4600 4660 4699 4775 40.0 4813 4840 CITJ RFNTAI CO MI SFR IN T�R Pt IS FS COMPUTFRS L ALFCTRONICS CREATIVE COMPUTING CIIQMONGA CO WATER DIST OAVIOSON SUSIF DEPT OF TRANSPCATATION OYN AKF UTANFTF 1411 HARRY FF6 PAL F %PRESS CORP FONTANA MCICO PRESERVING GAGNE LINDA GENFPAt TFLFPHCNE CO GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE ____ GOMEZI RICK CPAs T JFR BY R "AAREI< EQUTPMCNT CO HANCOCK, GEORGE HER Y P.RYAN 7/20191 7/20/93 7/20/93 7/20/R3 7/20141 7120183 7120/83 7/2./83 7/20/83 7/20/93 7/20/83 7/20/83 7/20/93 - 7/20/83 _ 7120/93 7/20193 IR0/83 7/20183 7/20/83 122.70 120.A9 12.97 23.97 1.030.33 35.64 1.301.04 64..45 20O.OD 23.50 SOR.RO 150.00 116.82 110.28 20.1.00 175.00 148.77 118.80 232.65 0 18666 IP667 18668 4900 4915 4975 HOL. [ WILLIAM /. MILL 10 Y' ROCK CO INC S M NOYT LUMBFR CO 7/20/093 7/70/93 7/20/133 200.00 11245.95 20.51 IM669 SIIO IBM 7/20183 1.643.06 . 7/8670 5112 IMBIDEN. JOSTE 7120 /03 133.65 1 • L t l I R957 CITY OF PA.NCHO CUCAMPNGA YARD A VIN A V E N D f. R N A M F 19671 514. INLINO TRUCK FLFCTRIC I,I t? 514S T "S SFPVICfS TIC I PI 73 5 ?11 1`.T I f1 \! ln: NfFTC1A1 181 TS 6175 J ^1% AVAII A,, �. TICN.IL fk .e 12116 6185 J1, lV, /,, T"NU I 19677 656, KIIF N L "'Tt"'D co, 1 -61? 660.0 KILL FNGINE.RS, L 0 18679 6604 KLf -H LT .NF C ^.d PJRATI.N C 1.690 6-13 KN.A IT, GI•�l• X681 6619 KU1 -CVIFN IfMPIF 19592 6649 1A1F0 CC'.4 T IF TI G4 C. 196P3 6645 LAq JACK 1`,684 6670 LAX9PN PPr DUI!TS INC YO 1 -685 6716 LIBRARZY OF URU.AN AFFAIR I86,,A 6930 LOGUF, SAI LY IP687 tPlt LOS A'lnELFS TIMES p 1-6AI 6950 -C CAt L, JFFF 1P599 7154 M411Y JAMS IP690 7"0 PATCH - I1R1N C 1`,691 7 ?30 AIRY R1CRCXAVf.- lAA9J 7 140 RFARFS SR ti 1P193 745S Nil IHt IP194 7`,43 US)G I FUCFING Cn 1.101 765? PACIFIC (OAST 9n UM 186, 7165 PACIttl 1H096CTS y J-t9T 7670 PACIFIC ROfK 6 gRAVEL C Id699 7695 PAIMFn 111, 19699 7719 RAPT ILI IB TI'D 7745 P 4 ] GP AP HICS IP IC1 7770 PAr 'i SALE t CURP ��.1 -70.707 7784 PlEFP f0!SUITAllRS 1V 703 779S pfW OTSTPI9uTING CO 4 I9104 7Plfi R PFTHT O(FrC 1EC95 8n 77 PAIL S -T78E O, AIR 197.6 9.1P1 -.'DI Y.Sf v, JAYFS H 1-708 a44n SANK UIN07t0 [PI ID WASTE a IF714 P445 SAN POND CO SUPVFYOP 1 -110 X440 SAN DIEGO PCTARY P20CM 18711 6495 StiL 4F7, "It InOORO W IPM 550 SFMPLEI JUDY ;8713 ,560 SCVT,I pAY AUTO PARTS 18114 d595 SXAIL, JACK 19715 VOID V'FI.00R •10. U.I9 0 19716 P.610 S^ CALIF Fnl5M•1 CO 10.717 -615 SO CALIF GAS CO 18718 87.39 SO ; AI IF IANISCAPF MGMT 18719 PA45 SPA:N111 A, SAY 18710 P681 STATPKFPS CI?P 18771 876C TORT PACIFIC OISTRIR IXT-? P790 TRANS -XFST F ^.PO TRACK 18773 9-'&0 U-INA, GFOP;E 0 187:4 9175 w G P A IR72S 9390 wFSTFRN HIGHWAY PAfDnUCT IP726 5489 wH1TNFY MARY I -727 9575 wILIIA4 PRINTING 0 I I-12C 9`S9 V ^,LFF L S @.S SAI F{ CN 1 1X729 4M1 5M YUrIN nISPCSAI SFRVICF 1P730 9741 8AtT)nMAPnp .NIKI RRAVA 16737 9743 SINCST Fla CHRIS 1,733 9744 CH -f FS�, DEANNE I0. 734 9745 GU ItLEN SUE 13715 974F 18736 9747 P1!1PP� dTERESA IF117 5749 FRFSCU �S PAY 1-739 9749 HtYG K, JIP f.YY ]PT39 975:1 9PPIN, RYAN 18040 9751 PATE EL LTRDA 18741 97S2 Asti, MISSY 1-742 9753 SM IT H, VAR FN 18743 9754 MFACH PATRICIA 18744 If GARCIA, REGINA 0 M PRANT RECONCILIATION 7 /2O /R3 PAGE 2 1 '1C` 917[ R(I FNfE MISCOUNT NET • 1.651. 519 In 9. . 16, 9S A. 4, I 599.08 9,343.39 156.00 IS 9. 2^4.04 4 4.04 43.55 2.00 51.91 45.00 14.94 91 LA.nn 8.00 .DO 15.00 1 S. 00 15.00 15.00 IS. 1 S, 10 9n 9.00 ,.Dn 18.DO 2>.5n 19. n0 19.00 18.00 • .,1 .... .... ........ .. .. ...... .. nnnRi.r R. lJ.unUUauun ✓m1u3 r4 �1 e R YIRR I Y E N D G R N W A M E y{� GATE RE WRP� O73COOM NET . 1H745 6 THOR Pf RTCHARO 7/20183 - I8.00 18746 • 97ST 9758 El1TOTT, AN41F MRS 7120/83 70. n0 t 18747 18749 9759 SHFARFR SAPPY. CATRFRINE 7/?0183 7/20/fl3 36_00 19.no 18749 9T60 JSRFCKI. CMIN 71201,13 3.00 • 18750 IA 751 9761 9762 Rn Bi NSON RAY CF R, R. SENORA 7/ ?0/03 7/20183 ll.n0 R.00 t 18752 9763 6f"OF, RAY 7/20/83 _. 15.00 18753 9764 011OR A ' Nut t 7/70/83 18.00 • 18754 Yftn FMAL TOTALS 7/2D783 t FINAL TOTALS 110.271.43 1.11 0 t • t • t • t • C • it • C C O W 0 C • f • C •l,7 ili O C �t • r Y RACE I RISE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIFOR4 YARRW REGISTER - O0E; —.x`� ^.,,.. +,- V7/20/1113 . „< III I JUL G. 1983 AM py 2510 -R CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Post Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 ATTENTION: City Clerk Gentlemen: On behalf of COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO the following claim is hereby presented pursuant to California Government Code 5900 et seq., in accordance with the laws of the State of California: • 1. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CLAIMANT: COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 175 West Fifth Street San Bernardino, CA 92415 2. NOTICE OF CLAIM SHOULD BE SENT TO: MacLachlan, Burford & Arias A Law Corporation 150 West Fifth Street, Suite 103 San Bernardino, CA 92401 3. DATE, PLACE AND OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OCCURRENCE OR TRANSACTION WHICH GIVES RISE TO THE CLAIM: A lawsuit was filed by plaintiffs Joan M. Mason, William F. Von Huben and Carol Jean Von Huben against this claimant and others under. San Bernardino Superior Court, Ontario Branch, case. number OCV 30621, requesting damages and naming the claimant herein as a defendant. The lawsuit was served on this defendant on June 8, 1983. Said lawsuit arises out of accident occurring on July 11, 1982 wherein plaintiffs' decedents were killed at the inter - section of Etiwanda and San Bernardino Road when the vehicle driven by Beatrice Emily Von Huben with the passenger of William i1 1AC LACHLAN, BURFORD & ARIAS A EAW EoR >ORA,ION _ 150 WEST FIFTH STREET SUITE 103 P.O. BO% I.S. SAN NERNAROINO, CALIFORNL's Ih TELERnOnE h11) SGUrY.OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADMINISTR.,TION 1N NEIE. PEASE REFS= To 111E NO JUL G. 1983 AM py 2510 -R CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Post Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 ATTENTION: City Clerk Gentlemen: On behalf of COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO the following claim is hereby presented pursuant to California Government Code 5900 et seq., in accordance with the laws of the State of California: • 1. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CLAIMANT: COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 175 West Fifth Street San Bernardino, CA 92415 2. NOTICE OF CLAIM SHOULD BE SENT TO: MacLachlan, Burford & Arias A Law Corporation 150 West Fifth Street, Suite 103 San Bernardino, CA 92401 3. DATE, PLACE AND OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OCCURRENCE OR TRANSACTION WHICH GIVES RISE TO THE CLAIM: A lawsuit was filed by plaintiffs Joan M. Mason, William F. Von Huben and Carol Jean Von Huben against this claimant and others under. San Bernardino Superior Court, Ontario Branch, case. number OCV 30621, requesting damages and naming the claimant herein as a defendant. The lawsuit was served on this defendant on June 8, 1983. Said lawsuit arises out of accident occurring on July 11, 1982 wherein plaintiffs' decedents were killed at the inter - section of Etiwanda and San Bernardino Road when the vehicle driven by Beatrice Emily Von Huben with the passenger of William i1 MAC LAC11LA\, BURFORD & ARIAS Page Two July 1, 1953 Andrew von Ruben collided with a truck driven by Frederick Karl Docks and owned by Shaeffer Trucking Company, Inc., as the traffic control signals, signs, and devices were nonoperational, which signals had been manufactured, designed, etc., by Econolibe Corporation and Signal Maintainance, Inc. 4. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INDEBTEDNESS, OBLIGATION, INJURY, DAMAGE OR LOSS INCURRED SO FAR AS IT IS KNOWN AT THE TIME OF THE PRESENTATION OF THIS CLAIM: Claimant has been required to retain the services of attorneys and has incurred expenses in connection with this matter; claimant has also incurred potential liability to the plaintiffs which cannot be determined until such time as the matter is resolved by settlement, judgment or verdict. 5. NAME OR NAMES OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEE OR EMPLOYEES CAUSING THE INJURY, DAMAGE OR LOSS, IF KNOWN: • Specific identities are unknown at present but are believed to be the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, its agents and • employees. 6. AMOUNT CLAIMED AS OF THE DATE OF PRESENTATION OF THIS CLAIM• (a) Attorneys fees and costs in an undetermined amount. (b) The 'estimated amount of prospective injury and damages is not ascertainable at this time but would include con- tinuing legal fees and costs incurred in defending the litigation filed by the plaintiffs and any liability incurred by the claimant as a result of the resolution of the litigation filed by the plaintiffs. DATED: July 1, 1903 MAC LACHLAN, BURFORD & ARIAS KTK:rr By: Kenneth T. Kreeble • •lei 2 3� 4I 5! 611 71 8 9 10 11 12 • 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ROBERTS 6 MORGAN AIi On Nf VS AT LAW 5015 C.NrOx CxFS1 DPrv[ Sc "IGFCOU C"'o CFFP BwmmG P.s' 011 -11 "' 6900 7ELF m Uoiwxu 91511 FiM0 x( III <1882 xe §t M'. -'" 1Oa7 q� ' c�Ct (SPACE BELOW FOR FILING STAMP ONLY) CITY OF RANCHO UCAh ONq ADMINISTR -TION AN JUL 23 *63 .. 718191�Ill1121112�g14�516 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA KAISER STEEL COMPANY, ) CLAIM F0.^ INDEMNITY Claimant, ) VS. ) CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ) TO CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA: a) The name and Post Office address of the claimant is as follows: KAISER STEEL CORPORATION 9400 Cherry Avenue Fontana, CA 92335 b) The Post Office address to which the person presenting the claim desires notices to be sent is as follows: ROBERTS 5 MORGAN 5015 Canyon Crest Drive Riverside, CA 92507 c) The date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gives rise to the claim asserted are as follows: On July 11, 1982 a serious accident occurred at the 6 —1 I intersection of 4th Street and Etiwanda as a result, two people 2 were killed, giving rise to a claim for wrongful death by their 3 heirs. Witnesses to the accident stated that the signal at the 4 above intersection. malfunctioned which caused the accident. 5 Attached is a copy of the police report documenting these 6 statements. The malfunctioning of this signal caused a dangerous 7 and defective condition of public property which created a 8 substantial risk of injury when such property was being used with 9 due care in the manner in which it was reasonably foreseeable it 10 would be used. 11 d) A general description of the indebtedness, 12 obligation, injury, damages or loss incurred so far as it may be 13 known at the time of presentation of the claim: 14 Claimant, KAISER STEEL COMPANY has been sued as a 15 result of the above accident, subjecting it to costs and potent a 26 judgments. Therefore, KAISER STEEL COMPANY is entitled to be 17 indemnified for any damages from the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. 18 e) Name or names of the public employe or employees 19 causing the injury, damage, or loss, if know: 20 Unknown. 21 f) The amount claimed as of the date of presentation 22 of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective 23 injury, damage or loss, insofar as it may be known at the time of 24 the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of 25 computation of the amount claimed: 26 The amount claimed is for indemnity in an amount whicl 27 has yet to be determined. • 28 DATED: July 11, 1983 ROBERTS 6 MORGAN/� C�zrol . 7 AM ES G PACKER Attorneys for Claimant: v r • • E COPY.- APPLICATION EGA ALCOHOLIC MIRAGE LICENSE(S) 1, IYVE151 01 IICENSE(S) FILE NO. I,: Ceporlmenl or Alee6di( ee,e Ref Control RECEIII NO good I.T N-d, C= 3ey^_ardino GI S.tLu YT2 4 WDIE "4 GEOOP0177 Al. 5w1 C01 Cold. 95818 ...r........,. ,,,.•..,. =113 PLACE CODE 61 Th. unden:yned N-6Y."he, let Ovy Lonm do ,,Tilt 0I Appiel under Sw. 2104 O I ]. NAME(S) Of RRICANI(5) T.--p rv,m e CHAO. E:aeO EIIII Dotn jp u=,e IN ea... DI 5. TYPE(S) OF TRANSACTION($) FEE CC 7Y•E S rER. ^.Sa. ,00 41 c^ 20 CA<nD G -+e!rn ?rFSr r * -.+t CITY Of RANCHO CUCAFIONGA 5, lo<obon el emm<r_NUmb<r and $oW " 9770 - 19th St. UCi9 Pr 0'..d LIP Cede Cw1h R18191g111 I I I 1 I I R,aahtECT - 0'70 _ , TOTAL - `S _ 150' e If Ranh. Ucem d, }, Are P < ,., npd. sAe. *rp<pr cp<m. 41 -55114 rlr L.mmt YE'S I. M9dm9 Address 01 different from 51— Num4er eod Sitter IN." taro P. nit.. ... .•er teen eon•Ia<d of 0 1.1.117 lo, xo.e Tuv e. dvlmed vnr cr roe Preauvm of ae All.W I be Coo,0 Art or ..yule..... el the Cepanme 1 per It. FIplmn. 'YES " en 1. ium, 9 or 10 on vn ... Ib em .6u6 0,,11 be d .... d cen 0lN. aoefemlen. 12 Apol,<o1r oqm<, (m T nny m 1oP<r <mvroree In ,al. 6.<m<e w<nne, ,r.n ay.e ml rn< vvvl.e.nr.m of c 12en,<e. e.e Ibl 11.1 be ..II nal'bNn'. ar mu <pr perm, I. be -L,w .., .1 'he prp•h.em el de AI<v6eH. L <mp9< Cpm ,l Ae. IS STATE Or CALIFORNIA Cnunh of.__- SUC_ -'L_= rdinO__ ______- OOre_V:1 L%: ... u.... r»n. w •.xM .�. .4 .. N ✓. x, A e........ r n....e.. . ....,..., w .......• .n n...na............w.._. b ..+»..a ....v..... n. u...w _.n .. n.w., i.0 w . . II AFRICAN! ' SIGN NfaF .:G...._.:!IL �7,l - - -- (_ ---R C... rRC'1"IO - " " -- -- -"- '------- --- -'----------- ---- ------- ----- ------- ------ - - - - - - --- APPLICATION BY TRANSTEROR IS STATC OF CALIFORNIA Cpunly.1..- ..]EL.�"mn..linr. __,_____, -, OoN __.__ 7�1'O'/83 -:=')-- 1nA) I-: e;.+- : _ On A'nr H'nN Orb. The Linr, For Dginnmrm 1 , Only AtbaMd r Rnerded l ,ce T.doNoO'mpere. . - . - - --- _---- .- ,.>::- ...__._COPIES MAILED ........ . .. .. ............... Rme.el rte nl...... -- Fv1d N....... :1 , r- C1 _. .:_._:.._...r::.. 0 01 I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: JULY 12, 1983 224"" TO: CITY COUNCIL _a Q FROM: HARRY EMPEY, FINANCE DIRECTOR. -1877 SUBJECT: TRANSFER OF FUNDS With the impasse on the State Budget, it will be % essary for Council to authorize the transfer of funds from Reserves to the General Fund for the purpose of meeting cash flow demand. Current Reserve Status: Available $ 2,726,509 Current Appropriations: RDA Loans $ 720,000 City Facilities 500,000 Lions Bldg. Repairs 4,000 1,224,000 $ 1,502,509 Proposed Further Uses: Additional RDA Loans $ 800,000 Cover 1982 -83 Deficit 450,000 Available for further use $ 252,509 Obviously $252,509 is not enough to meet cash demand. Therefore, it is recommended that a hold be put on the additional R.D.A. Loan, (if and when it becomes a reality) and freeze the use of City Facilities Funding. This will provide $1,552,509 for cash flow demand, which can easily be consumed in 90 days. Once Sacramento adapts a budget, then pressure on cash flow should ease and restoration of Reserves will he possible. • • I n.mv nc n A w.nvn OT Tn n Unwtr n STAFF REPORT DATE: July 20, 1983 TO: City Council and-City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineep /ti�'i SUBJECT: Release of Bonds (//�{�� ], F Ur, $ > tnr t Tract 9306 - located on the West side of Archibald and North of Wilson OWNER: Charter Development 12821 Newport Avenue Tustin, California 92680 Labor and Material Bond (Road) $57,600 Landscape Bond $1,050 Six months have passed since the release of the Faithful Performance Bond, Landscaping and Irrigation system have been constructed in accordance with approved plans and it is recommended that City Council release the Labor and Material Bond and the Landscape Bond. Tract 9437 - located at Victoria and Haven Avenues OWNER: Chevron Construction Co., Inc. P.O. Box 2131 Santa Monica. California 90406 Labor and Material Bond $124,000 Maintenance Guarantee Bond $6,200 Tract 9437 has been maintained for one year and all cleanup items have been completed. It is recommended that the Labor and Material Bond and the Maintenance Guarantee Bond be released. LBH:bc /0 �J CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 20, 1983 GAO C9n 2 , C, p z 1917 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: John Martin, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Approval of a resolution to allow a lien for a sidewalk to be subordinated to a second trust deed for 8406 Orchard submitted by Roland Taylor The attached subordination agreement is submitted for Council consideration by Roland Taylor, 8406 Orchard. The City presently has a lien on Mr. Taylor's property for the installation of sidewalk. Mr. Taylor has asked for a second trust deed loan on his property and the lender desires the City's lien be subordinated to their loan. RECOMMENDATION It is recomended that Council approve the attached resolution and agreement placing the City's lien subordinate to a second trust deed loan. Respectfully sub itt�eeddd,, LW. JM: jaa Attachments �I • RESOLUTION NO. * A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, APPROVING A SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT FROM ROLAND TAYLOR AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN SAME WHEREAS, a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for the installation of a sidewalk along 8406 Orchard was approved by City Council on May 12, 1981 and recorded in San Bernardino County on May 12, 1983, Instrument No. 81- 104021; and WHEREAS, for the developer to secure financing for the project, the lender requires that the above- mentioned lien be subordinate to the lien in favor of the lender; and WHEREAS, the developer has submitted a Subordinate Agreement to that effect for the City's approval and execution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Subordinate Agreement be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Subordination Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk attest thereto. • PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 20th day of July, 1983. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk 19 Jon D. Mike s, Mayor SubordAgmt SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT NOTICE: THIS SUBORDINATIOR AGREEMENT RESULTS M YOUR SECURITY INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY BECOMING SUBJECT-TO F LO'dER PRIORITY THAN THE LIEN OF SOME OTHER OR LATER SECURITY It UMENT. THIS AGREEMENT, made this 2Jr_' day Of 'nc 1g 63 by tha ulerai,:nad o.4, p the and hereinafter descnbed and hereinafter referred to at "Owner" and the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereinafter referred 'o as "City ", owner and holder of the certain Real Property and Lien Agreement hereinafter referred to as "Lien Agreement ". WITNESSETH THAT WHEREAS, "traet c lien coreener.o dated covering; tat 19, RSnet No. 9170, in the County of Sun BernarAinoq S"ata of Ca tf is rnic, an yet, map recorded in c ✓i of of rma, pa9ee 95 and 95, in tie offtics of the nornty recorder of acid d,u itu. to secure which was recorded in Lhe t7f icl ai Records of said Lount, an WHEREAS, owner has executed a deed of trust and note in the sum of FifY -aix Y•rauecrd Four Nw.dwc and no/ 100tha ___________________________ date .:.re L In avor of AZh;merr °ee r'ederxt Srsw.no� rmcT Leer. T.aocatnr, hereinafter re err e� d to as "Lender ", Daya a wi-5-i ith Interest and upon the terns and conditions described therein, which deed of trust is to be recorded concurrently herewith; and WHEREAS, it is a condition precedent to modifying said loan that said deed of trust last above mentioned shall unconditonally be and remain at all times a lien or charge upon the lane hereinbefore described, prior and superior to the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement; and WHEREAS, Lender is willing to modify said loan provided the deed Of trust securing the same is a lien or charge upon the above described property prior to superior to the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement and provided that City will specifically and unconditionally subordinate the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement to the lien or charge of the deed of trust in favor of Lender; and WHEREAS, it is the mutual benefit of the parties hereto that Lender modify said loan to Owner; and City is willing that the deed of trust securing the same shall constitute a lien or charge upon said land which Is unconditionally prior to superior to the lien Or charge on the Lien Agreement, ?low, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits accuring to the parties hereto and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which consideration is hereby acknowledged, and in order to induce Lender to modify the loan above referred to, it is herehy declared, understood and agreed as follows: (1) That said deed of trust securing said note in favor of Lender and any renewals or extensions thereof, shall unconditionally be and remain at all times a lien or charge 09 the property therein Is described prior and superior to the lien or charge Of the Lien Agreement. F7-1-14 Pow ) (2) That Lender would not modify its loan above • described ai thout this subordination agreement. (3) That this agreement shall be the wh , and only agreement with regard to the seb,ldn Iin o` the ` lien or charge of the Lien Agreement the lien or charge of the deed of trust in fay. if Lender above referred to and shall supersede ' cancel, but only insofar as would rfect th.. priority be weer, the deed of trust . ✓e Lien Agreement any prior agreements as to ,uch subdrdi nation including, but not limited t9, those prove s ons, if any, contained in the L in Agreement which provide for the subordination of the lien or charge thereof to another deed or deeds of trust or to another mortgage or mortgages. The City declares, agrees and acknowledges that (a) He consents to and approves all provisions of the note and deed of trust in favor of Lender above referred to by that certain modification agreement by and between Owner and Lender, dated (b) He intentionally and unconditionally waives, relinquishes and subordinates the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement in favor of the lien or charge upon said land of the deed of trust in favor of Lender above referred to and understands that in reliance upon, and in consideration of this waiver, relinquishment and subordination specific loans and advances are being and will be rc • made and as a part and parcel thereof, specific monetary and other obligations are being and will be entered into which would not be made or entered into but for said reliance Odor, this waiver, relinquishment and subordination; and (c) An endorsement has been placed upon the Lien Agreement that said Lien Agreement has by this instrument been subordinated to the lien or charge of the deed of trust in favor of Lender above referred to. NOTICE: THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT CONTAINS A PROVISION 'WHICH ALLOWS THE PERSON OBLIGATED ON YOUR REAL PROP[RTY SECURITY TO OBTAIN A LOAN, A PORTION OF WHICH MAY -DOE 'M5 PeE�gOED FDA PURPOSES OTHER THAN IM, OVE PORTION OF THE LANG. / 4oP OED Aim 1 OWNER -------- I'YCLIRK — ALL SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED • r"w ,wa I )q 0 • Is OTT V n V D a ATrvn OT TO a 111nTTn A Parcel Map 7847 submitted by Ameron, Inc. for the division of 6.2 acres of land into 3 parcels within Subarea 15 of the Industrial Specific Plan located on the south side of Arrow Route, west of Etiwanda Avenue was approved by Planning Commission on March 9, 1983. Construction of off -site improvements for Parcel I will be completed at time of building permit issuance. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Parcel Map 7847 and authorizing the City Clerk and City Engineer to sign same and forward to County Recorder. Respectfully�d, L Ma Attachments I� STAFF REPORT cil; m i DATE: July 20, 1983 U, ; 1977 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Approval of Parcel Map 7847 submitted by Ameron, Inc. and located on the south side of Arrow Route, west of Etiwanda Avenue Parcel Map 7847 submitted by Ameron, Inc. for the division of 6.2 acres of land into 3 parcels within Subarea 15 of the Industrial Specific Plan located on the south side of Arrow Route, west of Etiwanda Avenue was approved by Planning Commission on March 9, 1983. Construction of off -site improvements for Parcel I will be completed at time of building permit issuance. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Parcel Map 7847 and authorizing the City Clerk and City Engineer to sign same and forward to County Recorder. Respectfully�d, L Ma Attachments I� Rw4e.L 11-C LJ t itie.; CITY OF RANCI 10 CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINrry NIAP - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7. t itie.; CITY OF RANCI 10 CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINrry NIAP 0 RESOLUTION NO. * A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO C'UCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 7847 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP No. 7847) WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 7847, submitted by - -moron, Inc. and consisting of 3 parcels, located on the south side o' 'rrow Rou.a, west of Etiwanda Avenue, being a division of a portion of Lot 1. 'Tact 5377, Map Book 62, page 90 and parcel 1 of Parcel Map 2421, Parcel Map Biok 22, Page 20 was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and WHEREAS, Parcel Map Number 7847 is the final map of the division of land approved as shown on said Tentative Parcel Map; and WHEREAS, all of the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the final map by the City Council of said City have now been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Parcel Map Number 7847 be and the same is hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present to the County Recorder to be filed for record. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 20th day of July, 1983. • AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk S Jon D. Mikels, Mayor 7 *' • 13 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 20, 1983 FI' T0: City Council and City Manager , 7 IF, FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Approval of Improvement Extension Agreement for Tract 10045 -1 submitted by Watt and located west of Haven Avenue and north of Hidden Farm Road Mr. Hing Watt, developer of Tract 10045 -1 has submitted Improvement Extension Agreement to request a one -year extension for the construction of off -site improvements. Bonds in the following amounts are on file in the City Clerk's Office: Faithful Performance: $96,800.00 Labor and Material: $43,400.00 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving said Improvement Extension Agreement and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign same. Respectfully submitted, *LBK-. aa Attachments TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 10045 COU47Y 09 /N THE C/TY 0� .Q.•" S IARVI 0 91<lE OC COL /fOPN /A 11 IA- lT ( j s— _ a i� r �' � ._ `` f _., ,,: • _ yr. I , � r ,.. r �T p ° my -uix eu� •r it .. pp, H A S E Qr, ` .[now ¢.•vov ,rF � - _ -- ••• i _ -- _ Pi' J ii-M.1 • • • • RESOLUTION NO. * A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT EXTENSION AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 10045 -1 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho :ucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement :xtension Agreement executed on July 20, 1983 by Hing Y. Watt as Developer, fo: the improvement of public right -of -way adjacent to real property specifically described therein, and generally located west of Haven Avenue and north of Hicden Farm Road; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Extension Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said real property referred to as Tract 10045 -1; and WHEREAS, said Improvement Extension Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Extension Agreement and • said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 20th day of July, 1983. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk E Jon 0. Mi a s, Mayor NL O • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IMPROVEMENT EXTENSION AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 10045 -1 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is made and entered into, in conformance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, a municipal corporation, by and between the said City, hereinafter referred to as the City, and H. Y. Watt referred_ to as the Developer. CASH DEPOSIT RONUMENTING BOND Additional Cash Deposit: MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BONO Principal Amount: None Required To be posted prior to acceptance of the project by the City. ...... ....................... u........ w..... ........ w.. u.......... u. u CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DEVELOPER CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation on �Nr 4ei5 Ala YOr n � Attest: J.�1 _ W, multi ? 7 /cur. a I'aG �J APPfl A H3 FORM aureL -" Frirsserman` r yC'f -Clerk D11f { NOTE: DEVELOPER'S SIGNATURE MAST BE NOTARIZED ^� � gun xrm —iurra '— I ' r aAaorotwwnau wnant WITNESSETH: THAT, WHEREAS said Developer entered into an improvement agreement with the City as a requisite to issuance of buildings permits, and WHEREAS, said Developer desires an extension of time to complete the terms of the said improvement agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by the City and by said Developer as follows: 1. The completion date of the terms of the said improvement agreement is hereby extended by a period of twelve (12) months from the date of expiration of the said agreement. 2. Increase in improvement securities to reflect current improvement casts shall be furnished by the developer with this agreement and shall be approved by the City Attorney. 3. The required bond and the additional principal amounts thereof are set forth on the attached sheet. • 4. All other terms and conditions of the said improvement agreement shall remain the same. As evidence of understanding the provisions contained herein, and of intent to comply with same, the Developer has submitted the below described improvement security, and has affixed his signature hereto: FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND Description: Bond Additional Principal Mount: No Additional Surety: Indemnity Co. of California Address: 620 North Parton Street Santa Ana, CA 92701 MATERIAL AND LABDR BOND Description: Band Additional Principal Amount: No Additional Surety: same as above Address: CASH DEPOSIT RONUMENTING BOND Additional Cash Deposit: MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BONO Principal Amount: None Required To be posted prior to acceptance of the project by the City. ...... ....................... u........ w..... ........ w.. u.......... u. u CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DEVELOPER CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation on �Nr 4ei5 Ala YOr n � Attest: J.�1 _ W, multi ? 7 /cur. a I'aG �J APPfl A H3 FORM aureL -" Frirsserman` r yC'f -Clerk D11f { NOTE: DEVELOPER'S SIGNATURE MAST BE NOTARIZED ^� � gun xrm —iurra '— I ' r aAaorotwwnau wnant CONSTF=,10N COST ESTIY•TE I F4 OI• :. ::TIP.' CITY OF FI;CIIO C=40NLA I S :. ' ^:T I,- 5 COYST4acn ON N:a BOND EsII:aTE A r.C. r•.n pt••r p rc Ta 1.F r fn lil 11 ESCROAPLYENS P6 NlT FEE SCII:p:nt ii S S 1 itZ c A C. ner, (S11D n,n) (ntrnen to "Inspector's Cop.,") 1 '.. 4,50 DATE: ANr,,,st loo; OMIT Ila. COPrmn Fy :• +� +le • F:le R,f—rcro S.F. City Ilr av ;ng No 427 F" P. CVn Grr an Ontcc: 2191 NOTE: Pons not i crude cucrme fer for .,tir ng perm, or replace - 50G C.Y. '.." deposits. occe' + t nt C. :. CONSTF=,10N COST ESTIY•TE I F4 OI• :. ::TIP.' IIN i- `n I S :. ' ^:T I,- 5 A r.C. r•.n pt••r p rc Ta 1.F r fn lil 11 e.G C. C.1N roil F" Li. ii S S 1 itZ c A C. ner, (S11D n,n) ii7 1 '.. 4,50 1 47, cl e nopr onm I S.F. F" P. CVn Grr an Ontcc: 2191 I s,F. 2. Sn 5 t.•' cr, -N a:4on 50G C.Y. 3.63 2 %' occe' + t nt C. :. af o ea v.r. ion rode Ir-F +.c wll9 S.Z. U.lp ,v32.8 A.C. (900 m 1100 too•) - CN a c. n� -der tnO vro� ac: : ^N - r.nn :cn A.E. trer,rn S.P. I- 71i11 A.C. Ovrrlry S.F. n 'r f n ^r ,tdwst Sel, C.O. t0 Glzdc NA. I ?Rolc •, r \'dllre to Groan 2 1 F.A. $0.00 tJO.J3 5 1 FA, 1.5J1). Ja 13. s:iJ.Ca r S..c -. ltV-1 17-1 - nrincta ^s t, nasu 7 eA 35.C) I 12 5.L3 a.1 ^.t str,; C brre W =2' 2 EA 1 500.CJ 3.JJO.00 OOard pan01 (t.oOO) I 60 L! 25.CJ 15 N0.6:1 ','Ct 4p W YJ.eJ 3" AC r, C•rP —H Pin — 2 a Lp l.G I 1.259.67 S :oo 51 ns 2 EA 10J.OJ 2J0.CJ CONSTRUCTION COST 89.001.60 CWTINOC:CY COSTS P pO0 -15 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS T s, —nl )e FAITIIFIlL PETF='!ANCE FAIR 000]) 96,909.00 IAFOR APT I'ATIRIAL WS) (50:) 48.100.00 INSPECTION FEE 4,F31.00 (FEE SCl1Ii ULE) XM.'O:1'IIL :TION FONU ICASM 2.000.00 i • • rel A •. •Trii gin - i2 - 96 I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT TRACT NO. 1,0,45 -1 6120 6129 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement made and entered into, in conformance with the provisions of the Sub�'14Sipo Map : of the State of Californi and of the applicable ordinances of the City : ancho Cucamonga, California, a municipal corporation, by and between said Ci•y, hereinafter referred to as the City, and her, nafter referred to as the Subdivider. NITNESSETH: THAT, NHEREAS, said Subdivider desires to subdivide certain real property in said City as shown on the previously approved Tentative Map of Tract no. 10045 -1 ; and, WICREAS, said City has established certain requirements to be met by said Subdivider as prerequisite to approval of he F;nal Map of said Tract by said City; NON, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by said City and by said Subdivider as follows: 1. The Subdivider hereby agrees to construct at Subdivider's expense all improvements described on Page 5 hereof within twenty -four months from the date hereof. 2. This agreement shall run for a period of one vear from the date of the resolution of the Council of said City approving said Final Map and this agreement. This agreement shall be in default on the day following the second anniversary date of said approval unless an extension of time has been granted by said City as hereinafter provided. 3. The Subdivider may request an extension of time to complete the terms heree, Such request shall be suonitted to the City in writing not less than _ ±o,r weeks before the expiration date hereof, and shall contain a statement of circumstances necessitating the extension of time, The City shall have the right to review the provisions of this agreement, including the construction standards, cost estimate, and improvement security, and to require adjustments therein if any substantial change has occurred during the term hereof. 4. If the Subdivider fails or neglects to comply with the provisions of this agreement, the City shall have the right at any time to cause said provisions to be met by any lawful means, and thereupon recover from the Subdivider and /or his surety the full cost and expense incurred. S. The Subdivider shall provide metered water service to each lot on said Tract in accordance with the regulations, schedules, and fees of the Cucamonga County Water District. 6. Utility- Deposit - Statement. Subdivider shall file with the City Engineer, prior to the commencement of any work to be performed within the areas described by said map, a written statement signed by Subdivider, and each public utility corporation involved, to the effect that Subdivider has made the deposit 1e9111y required by such puhlic utility corporation for the connection of any and all pabl is utilities to be supplied by such Corporation within such Subdivision. 7, The Subdivider shall be responsible for replacement, relocation, or r, -oval of any Component of any irrigation water system in conflict with construction of required improvements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the owner of such water system, �r • INPRUMDT AGREE-MT TR4i. FO.10045 -1 PAGE 2 B, improvements required to be constructed shall conform to the Standard Drawin e and Standard Specifications of the City, and to the Improve ^ents Plan approved by and on file in the office of •he City Engineer. Said improvements are tabulated on the Construction and Bond Estimate, hereby incorporated on page 5 hereof, as taken from the improvement plans listed thereon by number. The Subdivider shall also be responsible for construction r any transitions or other incidental work beyond the tract boundaries as n 4 -d for safety and proper surface drainage. 9. Construction permits shall be obtained by t e Subdivider ton the office of the City Engineer prior to start of work; all 'c r,jatioas listed thereon shall be observed, with attention given to safety pine.dures, control of dust, noise, or other nuisance to the area, and to proper not fication of public utilities and City Departments. Failure to comply with thl-. section shall be subject to the penalties provided therefor. 1D, The Subdivider shall be responsible for removal of all loose rocks and other debris from public rights -of -way within or adjoining said Tract resulting from development work relative to said Tract. 11. Work done within existing streets shall be diligently pursued to completion. 12. Parkway trees required to be planted shall be planted by the Subdivider after other improvement work, grading, and cleanup has been completed. Planting shall be done as provided by ordinance in accordance with the planting diagram approved by the City Community Development Director in all locations where the adjoining lot has been completely developed and built upon. the Subdivider shall be re- sponsr —�pTor ma mtarm ng a trop, p anted m good health until the end of the guaranteed maintenance period, or for one year after planting, whichever is later. 13. The Subdivider is responsible for meeting all conditions established by the 1W City pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, City ordinances, and this agreeen for the Tract, and for the maintenance of all improvements cons m tructed there- under until the Tract is accepted for maintenance by the City, and no in- praverent security provided herewith shall be released before such acceptance unless otherwise provided and authorized by the City Council of the City. 14. This agreemont shall not terminate until the maintenance guarantee bond here- inafter described has been released by the City, or until a new agreement together with the required improvement security has been submitted to the City by a successor to the Subdivider herein named, and by resolution of the City Council same has been accepted, and this agreement and the improvement security therefor has been released. 15. The improvements security to be furnished by the Subdivider with this agreement shall consist of the following, and shall be approved by the City Attorney: A. A faithful performance guarantee bond assuring completion by the Sub- divider of all conditions prerequisite to acceptance of the Tract by the City. B. A material and labor payment guarantee bond assuring payment in full by the Subdivider for all materials, services, equipment rentals, and labor furnished to the Subdivider in the course of meeting the conditions of this agreement. C. A cash deposit with the City to guarantee payment by the Subdivider to the tract engineer or surveyor whose certificate appears upon the Final Tract Nap for the settiaq of all tract bocmeary, lot carne,, and street center. line nonumcnts and for furnishing centerline tie notes to the City. The amount of the deposit may be any amount certified by the tract engineer or surveyor as acceptable payment in toll; or, if no value is submitted, the cash bond shall be as shown an the Construction and Bond estimate contained herein. • t,- �, ell • IMPROVEMENT AGREEItENT TRACT 110.10045 -1 PAGE 3 Said cash deposit may be refunded as soon as procedure permits after receipt by the City of the centerline tie notes and written assurance of payment in full from the tract engineer or surveyor. 0. The required bands and the principal prompts thereof are set forth on page 4 of this agreement. 16. The Subdivider warrants that the improvements described in this agreement shall be free from defects in materials and workmanship. My and all portions of the improvements found to be defective within one (1) year following the date on which the improvements are accepted by the City shall be repaired or replaced by subdivider free of all Charges to the City. The Subdivider shall furnish a maintenance guarantee bond in a sum equal to five percent (5.) of the con- struction estimate of 5200.00, whichever is greater, to secure the faithful performance of Subdivider's obligations as described in this paragraph. The maintenance guarantee bonds shall also secure the faithful performance by the Subdivider of any obligation of the Subdivider to do specified work with respect to any parkway maintenance assessment district. Once the improvements have been accepted and a maintenance guarantee bond has been accepted by the City, the other improvement security described in this agreement may be released provided that such release is otherwise authorized by the Subdivision Map Act and any applicable City Ordinance. 17. That the Developer shall take out and maintain, during the term of this agreement, such public liability and property damage insurance as shall protect him and any convector or subcontractor performing work covered by this agreement from claims for property damages which may arise because of the nature of the work or from operations under this agreement, whether such operations be by himself or by any contractor or subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by said persons, even thought such damages be not caused by the negligence of the Developer or any contractor or subcontractor or anyone employed by said • persons. The public liability and property damage insurance shall also directly protect the City, its officers, agents and employees, as well as the Developer, his contractors and his subcontractors, and all insurance policies issued hereunder shall so state. The amounts of such insurance shall he as follows: A. Contractor's liability insurance providing bodily injury or death lia- bility limits of not less than $30,000 for each person and $1,000,000 for each accident or occurrence, and prooerty damage liability limits of not less than $100,000 for each accident or occurrence with an aggregate limit of $200,000 for claims which may arise from the operations of the Developer in the performance of the work herein provided. B. Automobile liability insurance covering all vehicles used in the per- formance of this agreement providing bodily injury liability limits of not less than 5100,000 for each person and $300,000 for each accident or occurrence, and property damage liability limits of not less than $50,000 for each accident or occurrence, with an aggregate of not less than $100,000 which may arise from the operations of the Developer or his Contractor in performing the work provided for herein. 18, That before the execution of this agreement, the Developer shall file wi'h the City a certificate or certificates of insurance covering the specified insurance. Each such certificate shall bear an endorsement precluding the cancellations, or reduction in coverage of any policy evidences by such certificate, before the, r.p,ratinn of thirty (30) days after the City shall have received notifica- tion by registered mil from tho insurance carrier. CITY OF R:I ;CPO CL'CA,MO ^.CA • COSSTRUC7104 MM BOND ESTL`•1,-,E ESCPOACIVIENT PEMIT FEE SC:EDULE (Atrael, to "Innpeeror's Copy ") DATE: Auoust 1031 PERMIT N0. COt UT ED BY File Neforenec Tract 10045 -1 City having Nn 427 NOTE: Does not include current fee for writing ,emit or pave-,ent replace- ment dcpositz. COSSTFUCl10N COST ESMUNTE STEM O':lO:TIT1' CNIT VNTT COST 5 14 TOM CONSTRUCTION COSTS 1 06.801.]5 FAIFIIF(IL PITFOMAACE 80::0 (100.) 111, (" C.F. 14 L. 48,400.00 ^ A.0 S2'0 1-1 I 327 1_F. (ME SCHEDULE) 5175 S.F. - 9.0°5.£- ' 5" Jr:vu nnor na cl, S.F. 2.1 2171 S.F. 2.559 5 n.t ar,n+ I an" c.Y. 3.00 2 ..n ]00 700 ccdvEnS ay.menc C.Y. Ft •ou rn;tnu of 6uhrczdc S.F. 't> 'c3 P.[ In 'h +1 n13GO .1.F F.r. fo' ; Tp,' A. C., (o00rro MID c n[1 000 Tcl N.C. hmAnr 500 to mns) TIN -,o A ('I'd" 00 - S.F. P. ] i Fl;lh A.C. "Ol Phn[ " TFick A.C. Ov.rla[. S.F. 219 17 :rr N.11. (n rrldn F %. A,, -,I I:r t er I I— m ererin 2 Fa. 50.00 100.00 9 1. �N.1;3 13 500. FA, pp. s ttr -t T-.—I rn. Nil =ct0rs F on sis 3 fA 35.60 lob .CL Ov [let structure H =2' 2 50 EA L 1,500.03 25 A0 3.007.[9 45 .UV 91 2 LF EA 1.00 100.00 1,299.03 200.60 PENN- r- CONSTRUCTION COST 88,001.60 COITINGEDCV COSTS __8 2QQ 14 TOM CONSTRUCTION COSTS 1 06.801.]5 FAIFIIF(IL PITFOMAACE 80::0 (100.) _9fi ,800.00 TABOR AND NATERIAL BOND (500) 48,400.00 ENGINEERING TNlSPECTION FEE 4A31.00 (ME SCHEDULE) Y.O:INENTATION BOND (CAS10 2.000.00 r �J • IMPROVEMENT AGREERENT TRACT NO. 1004$ -1 -PAGE 4 As evidence of understanding the provisions Contained herein, and of Intent to conplY with same, the Subdivider has suttnittcd tNC belov described impravacent security, and has affixed his signature hereto: FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND Description: Prim al Amount: 596,3G0.00 Surety: lNDEMNITy Co. OR CAttxrn Ntq Attorney -in -Fact ANN SPINTi.NC. Address: MATERIAL AND LABOR PAYMENT BOND Description: Principal Amount: S42,100.00 Surety: tND£M Nq Cu. CN%.t PIRNLA Attorney -in -Fact: P, NN SN.T I u Address: CASH DEPOSIT MONUMENTING BOND f 2,000.00 Amount stipulated by tract engineer or surveyor: Amount as shown on Construction and Band Estimate: • Anount deposited per cash Receipt No. 1 6144 Date 612 IIQ 2 MAINTENAOCE GUARANTEE BON0 To be posted prior to acceptance of the tract by the City. Principal Amount 55,000.00 .f.R11111R.111f. +1f.RRRrR IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be duly executed and acknowledged with all formalities required by law on the dates set forth opposite their signatures. Oa to Z $h Z by wr Subdivider Data_ by— Subdivider •.♦ ♦Yf..f.f I.11111f.f111f1fR1R111fYff CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA //a JJmonir.ipal corporation by lima_ ,: Mayor e{ulp.��A�� Attest• 'US �— lcrk City Attorney • 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 20, 1983 5. TO: City Council and City Manager t ° FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: John Martin, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Reimbursement Agreement for Foothill Blvd. and Hellman Avenue Attached for Council approval are Development Co. and Robert and Karen drain structures and street widening This improvement is part of the Reconstruction and Widening. reimbursement agreements with Lewis Packer for the installation of storm at Hellman Avenue and foothill Blvd. approved project of Hellman Avenue The attached agreement have been approved as to form by the City Attorney. The form includes the provisions to prohibit future construction until the reimbursement has been made. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council approve the Reimbursement Agreement for Street and Drainage Improvements at Foothill Boulevard and Hellman Avenue with Lewis Development Co. and Robert and Karen Packer and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign same. esp C u l l y sub /Jm i t]�, ed , LBH:JK:jaa Attachment n r/ • RESOLUTION NO. 83 -56 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS FROM LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AND ROBERT AND KAREN PACKER, FOR FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND HELLMAN AVENUE WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration a Reimbursement Agreement executed on June 29, 1983 by Lewis Development Company, Inc., as developers, and on May 12, 1983 by Robert and Karen Packer, as owners, for the installation of storm drain facilities and street widening to be constructed for proper drainage and traffic circulation, generally on Hellman Avenue, south of Foothill Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the City, at city's own expense, will install the planned facilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer within 18 months; and WHEREAS, developer and owners will refund to City improvement costs, as stated in agreement prior to further development of developer's and owner's property, as described in agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Reimbursement Agreements be and the is same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Reimbursement Agreements on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 20th day of July, 1983. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk L-1 Jon D. Mikels, Mayor r� • RECORDING REQUESTED BY: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: ENGINEERING DIVISION P. 0. BOX 807 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730 REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR STREET AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT AT FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND HELLMAN AVENUE s THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this of 1983, by and between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, Californi'va-mugicipal coporation, hereinafter called "CITY" and Robert Packer and Karen K. Packer hereinafter called "OWNER" provides: WITNESSETH • WHEREAS, in the opinion of the CITY it is desirable for the enhancement of public health and safety and for traffic efficiency to widen and provide improvements at the intersection of Foothill Blvd. and Hellman Avenues; and WHEREAS, said improvements will benefit OWNER to the extent of relieving fronting properties of normal development requirements; and WHEREAS, it is of mutual benefit to the OWNER and the CITY to proceed with said project as expeditiously as possible. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE: 1. The CITY hereby agrees to construct the Foothill Blvd. - Hellman Avenue Intersection Project hereinafter known as PROJECT with CITY funds and provide to OWNER notice of expenditure and itemization of all cost relative to said PROJECT upon completion. 2. The proportionate cost of the PROJECT attributed to OWNERS property shall consist of the actual cost of those street improvements fronting on OWNERS property 1 �?D extending to the centerline of Foothill Blvd, or Hellman • Avenue. The quantity summary and cost estimate are shown on Exhibit "B ". Actual costs to be determined by the CITY upon completion of the project and audit of all cost.. 3. This agreement shall be recorded in the Office c` the San Bernardino County Recorder and owner's o' ligation hereunder shall run with owner's property until such time as all of owner's obligations hereunder have been discharged. 4. This agreement shall be binding upon and shall to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, succesors and assigns of each of the parties hereto. 5. If legal action is commenced to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement, to recover any sum which the City is entitiled to recover from the OWNER hereunder the prevailing party shall be entitiled to recover its costs and such reasonable attorney's fees as shall be awarded by the Court. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this • Agreement on the day and year first above written. CITY: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation on U. M Mayor Attest: Lauren 'w asserman, City C erk 9 �I OWNERS: Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 1983. Notary pub is in an or the County of State of California. My Commission Expires 1y8� • • EXHiBrr'A' OWNER: ROBERT PACKER ASSESSOR'S NO.: 208- 632 -46 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 4 of Parcel Map No. 4270 in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, as recorded in Parcel Map Book 39, Pages 43 & 44 in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA . CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE For Improvement of: Foothill and Hellman Improvements - Bob Packer Date: March 23, 1983 Computed by: John L. Martin NOTE: Does not include current fee for writing permit or pavement deposits. CONSTRUCTION CCST ESTIMATE ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST $ AMOUNT P.C.C. Curb - 100 L.F. 8.00 800.00 P.C.C. Curb Return 55 L.F. 8.00 440.00 4" P.C.C. Sidewalk 400 S.F. 4.50 700.00 Street Excavation L.S. 4575.00 Crushed Aggregate Base 95 Tans 6.00 570.00 A.C. (over 1300 tons) 254 Tons 30.00 7620.00 Removal of A.C. Pavement L.S. 2250.00 Stop Signs 1 L.S. 250.00 Traffic Control L.S. 1,000.00 • CONSTURCTION COST $18,205.00 EXHIBIT "8" • 0 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND RETURN TO: ENGINEERING DIVISION CITY IfF RANCHO CUC.VIONGA Post Office Be. 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE1118URSE1IENT AGE(k AT FOR STREET AND DRAINAGE Nf PnlVE11ENT AT FOOTHILL BOULEVARD Aq0 HELLIIAN AVENUE THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 29th day of June, 1983, by and between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCACIONGA, California, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "CITY ", and LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO., a general partner- ship, hereinafter called "PRIER. ", provides: NITNESSETH WHEREAS, in .`e opinion of the CITY it is desirable for the enhancerent of public health and safety and for traffic efficiency to widen and provide drainage improvments at the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman Avenue; and WHEREAS, said improvements will benefit OWNER to the extent of relieving fronting properties of nomal development requirements; and • WHEREAS, it is of mutual benefit to the LIMIER and the CITY to proceed with said project as expeditiously as possible, NW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE: 1. The CITY hereby agrees to construct the Foothill Boulevard - Hellman Avenue Intersection Project, hereinafter known as "PROJECT ", with CITY funds and provide to OWNER notice of expenditure and itemization of all cost relative to said PROJECT upon cmpletion. Such construction shall reverence within eighteen (18) months from the date of execution of this Agreement, failing which this Agreement shall teminate and W of no further force or effect. 2. The OWNER agrees for consideration of the improvements (provided by the CITY to the OWNER's property described in the attached Exhibit "A ") to reinWrce the CITY the Proportionate share of improvements provided by the project plus ten percent (10.) per annum simple interest firm date of cmpletion of said work. No further improvments upon OWNER's property shall be constructed, and no Wilding pemit for any improvements an OWNER'S property shall be issued until one of the following requirements has been corplied with: (a) OWNER shall have fully reinWrsed the CITY for the amount due as herein provided; or (b) OWNER shall have tendered to the CITY a letter of credit in the full amount of the estivate shown on Exhibit B. which letter of credit ray be drawn upon by the C17Y in the amount owed by OWNER pursuant to paragraph 3 upon cmpletion of the PROJECT and audit Of all costs; provided, however, that Such letter of credit shall be drawn upon only after submittal of CITY`s demand for oavment. to OWNER and a subsequent failure or refusal of OWNER to pay within thirty (30) days thereafter. 3. The proportionate cost of the PROJECT attributed to OWNER's property shall consist of the actual cost of those street and drainage improvments fronting nn OWNER's property extending to the certerline of Foothill Boulevard or uellman Avenue. The quantity sumary and < �.1 Reinbursenent Agreement Page 2 • cost estivate are shown on Exhibit "3t Actual cos's shall he dotes; nod by l the CITY upon that :ion of the i,,, On and dyed of all costs; prop ded, however, that costs eat the one hundred LNenty percent (120'.) of said estivate shall be at the sum¢ risk, antl ex ne nse of CITY. 4. This Agreement shall be recorded in tie Office . the San Berns Minv County Recorder and CWNER's oblination bereo •• shall run with OWNER 's property until such tine , all of .NER's obligaticos hereunder have been discharged, at er on time CITY seal' erecute a Quit ClaIr deed, or similar release, i a form satisfactory to clear title to the property. 5. This Agreement shall be, binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assi Nns of each of the Parties hereto. 6. If legal action is connenced to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement to recover any sun which the CITY is entitled to recover from the CANER hereunder, the prevaiilno party shall to entitled to recover its costs and Such reasonable attorney's fees as shall E2 awarded by the Court. 7. This Agreement shall not constitute a partnership, agency, or other businees relationship deteeen the parties hereto. CITY agrees to save, indemnify, and hold OWNER harmless against any and all liability, claims, jeconents, or demands, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein undertaken, including reasonable attorney's fees incurred by OWNER by reason of Sutn matters. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first above written, • "CITY" "OWNER" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAI VIGA, LEWIS DE' /ELOPMEIIT CO., a municipal corporation a general partnership By: By: Mayor Its Authorized Agent Attest: ,A.... nl rn ua, n m) j I I IIAtt OF 1 AllIOPNIA —1 totery oI-- 51`iN-81JiNARDJNQ o— Jgng i9,_ 138 ._ _ _ hl,r,e m„m ...... b . N-, Pub ", d lo, uWu - "—.11, .rN_ fll 1.1 rd A. le _ S"t. "1, n —Fe nrtuvd me,.m.Ir,.nd nn Mn.url,udr nn,nniv. ^d un x�d r.,'nenNp vaurt1n1 ,.mt • mm TN's, nr I.fda, Edol A. b!nSnn oul _ _ N.-1 Thml w P-sra) / u,[wn alb l'IMI vmvvi P EXHIBIT 'A' OWNER: LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. ASSESSOR'S NO.: 208- 261 -25 do 26 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That portion of Section 10, Township 1 South Range 7 West San Bernardino Meridian, in th City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, bounded as follows: - ON THE NORTH BY: the south line of Foothill Blvd. as described in a deed to San Bernardino County recorded in Book 7464, Page 497 on June 18, 1970 as Document No. 681 of Official Records of the County Recorder of said County. • - ON THE WEST BY: the north line of Tract No. 9083 -2 in said City as per map filed in Map Book 130, Pages 14 M 15 in said Recorder's Office. - ON THE EAST BY: the west line of Helms Avenue as said west line is described in deed recorded in Book 8948, Page 875 on June 15, 1976 as Document No. 611. n � J CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE For Improvement of: Foothill. and Hellman Improvements - Lewis Development Co. Date: March 23, 1983 Computed by: John L. Martin NOTE: Does not include current fee for writing permit or pavement deposits. CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST S AMOUNT P.C.C. Curb - 12" C.F. 375 L.F. 8.00 3000.00 P.C.C. Curb Return 55 L.F. 8.00 440.00 Street Excavation L.S. 4,575.00 Crushed Aggregate Base 261 Tans 6.00 1567.50 A.C. (over 1300 tons) 670 Tons 30.00 20,000.00 • Removal of A.C. Pavement L.S. 2,250.00 Removal of P.C.C. Curb L.S. 1,750.00 Stop Signs 1 Each 250.00 250.00 Removal of Channels L.S. 2,250.00 R.C. Box 45 L.F. 125.00 5,625.00 Outlet Structure Std. 502 1 Ea. 21,875.00 Traffic Control L.S. 1,000.00 Plug Exist. Box L.S. 1,000.00 CONSTRUCTION COST $ 65,582.50 • .D r2 EX HI BIT "B" 0 • 11 f TMv AV D a XTPUn PT TO a TRnATO a The attached contract for subdivision map and plan checking has been negotiated with three consulting firms. They are: C G Engineering, San Bernardino, our present plan checker; Linville- Sanderson and Associates, Rancho Cucamonga; and Derbish, Guerra and Associates, Inc., Ontario It is proposed to utilize all plan checkers to the same extent, subject to their ability to accept new work at any time. With three firms available, it is expected that timely, high quality plan checking will be the case at all times. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the contract be approved and entered into with the three firms listed above. Respectfully submitted, �z LBH:P.AR:jaa Attachments STAFF REPORT ci 1 r C' C DATE: duly 20, 1983 F,I F- > TO: City Council and City Manager 19" FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Paul A. Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Contract for Engineering Services for Map and Plan Checking for 1983 -84 The attached contract for subdivision map and plan checking has been negotiated with three consulting firms. They are: C G Engineering, San Bernardino, our present plan checker; Linville- Sanderson and Associates, Rancho Cucamonga; and Derbish, Guerra and Associates, Inc., Ontario It is proposed to utilize all plan checkers to the same extent, subject to their ability to accept new work at any time. With three firms available, it is expected that timely, high quality plan checking will be the case at all times. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the contract be approved and entered into with the three firms listed above. Respectfully submitted, �z LBH:P.AR:jaa Attachments • CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR NAP AND PLAN CHECKING THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of 19 , by and between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinater sometimes referred to as the "City ", and (7u(;1915N 6U6RRW d IgSSa Gf.SNC. , Civil Engineers, hereinafter sometimes referred to as "Engineer ". NITNESSETH: WHEREAS the City desires to obtain the services of Engineer to assist the City Engineer in the performance of the duties imposed upon the City Engineer in reviewing, checking and approving maps and plans submitted to the City in conjunction with subdivision and parcel map proceedings; and WHEREAS Engineer is willing and able to render such services. • NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the convenants, agreements and undertakings herein set forth and the faithful performasnce of them and each of them by the respective parties, the parties agree and undertake as follows: 1. Term. This contract is for the term of one (1) year from the date of execution of this agreement, and is subject to termination at the will of either party by giving written notice of such termination at least ninety (90) calendar days prior to the date of requested termination. 2. City's Responsibilities. The City, acting through its City Engineer and his designated representatives, will do the following: (a) Furnish the Engineer with copies of all standards, guidelines, criteria, regulations and other written materials having specific application with the City and used by the City to govern the checking of plans and maps; (b) Issue to the Engineer various plans and maps for checking, after having given them a preliminary screening for adequacy; a (c) Assign priorities for the order in which plans and maps are to be checked; J .� 3. Engineer's Responsibilities. The Engineer shall do the follc,�ing: • (a) Check each map and plan for conformance with City standards and requirements and with principles of good engineering and surveying practice; (b) Return to the design engineer map and plan check prints marked to indicate deficiencies; and (c) When a plan or map is checked and found to comply with City requirements, the Engineer shall indicate this by signing a statement to this effect on either final check prints of a map or the originals of the plans. (d) Check the estimate of cost for bonding purposes, and submit, along with the bonds and agreements prepared by the developer's - engineer, with the remainder of the approved package to the City. (e) Provide personnel for a review of all first check prints with a representative of the City Engineer. 4. Time for Performance. The Engineer shall complete his work within the • following maximum times: (a) For the initial checking of improvement plans or a map, ten working days from the date of receipt; (b) For subsequent checking of plans or a map which have previously been checked, five working days from the date of receipt. If a portion of a map or of plans cannot be checked because of information needed from the engineer preparing the map or plans, the Engineer shall have the option of either marking the deficiency or returning the map or plans to obtain the missing information. In either case, checking shall be completed within the time limits specified in (a) and (b) above. A corrected plan will not be accepted for checking unless all comments on the previous check have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Engineer. The intent of this section is to limit the total number of plan checks to three. If substantial plan changes initiated by the City (or by the Engineer with City approval) cause the need for additional plan checks, the additional • %' J L] time will be paid at the Engineer's hourly rates listed in Exhibit A for extra time as approved by the City. 5. Rush Projects. A check will be accepted on a rush basis only with the approval of the City. Projects checked on a rush basis will not -e permitted to delay the processing of previously submitted plan checks and wi " be subject to the following rates and times: (a) For the initial check, five working days from the date of receipt; (b) For subsequent checks, three working days from the date u, receipt; (c) Hourly and maximum rates will be as set forth on Exhibit A. 6. Monthly Status and Billing. The Engineer shall keep a record of dates when work is received and returned, of time spent, of the status of each map or set of plans, and of other pertinent information. This information shall be sent to the City at the end of each month along with a bill for services performed during the month. 7. Compensation. The City wil compensate the Engineer monthly at the rates shown on Exhibit A attached. 8. Conflict of Interest During the life of this contract, the Engineer shall not plan check any services performed for any private client for any land division or land development within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this contract to be duly executed on the day and year first above written. DER91SII, GUERRA & ASSOC. Itd'• By i Ltlfbj 1'ik*W11r /-i I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation By: ayor EXHIBIT "A" Hourly charges will be billed at the following rates, with maximum charges as set forth below: A. REGULAR ' (rates submitted by consultant) B. RUSH MAXIMUM CHARGES 1. Residential Parcel Maps: $400 + $50 per parcel 2. Tract Maps and Non -Res. Parcel Maps of 10 lots or less: $600 3. Tract and Parcel Maps over 10 lot's $500 + $10 per lot or parcel 4. Improvement Plans - A. Widening of existing streets: $400 +$0.40 per lin. ft. B. Interior streets: 1 -2 sheets $400 per sheet 3 -5 sheets $800 + $350 per sheet over 2 shts. 6 -10 sheets $1850 + $325 per sheet over 5 shts. 11 or more $3475 + $300 per sheet over 10 shts. C. Storm drain plans: Same as for "Interior Streets ", except that a "Hydrology Study ", at the discretion of the City, will be subject to an additional checking charge not to exceed $400. D. For improvement plans, title sheet will not be included in calculating charges unless, in the City's opinion, it also serves as a plan- and - profile sheet. 5. Maximums for rush jobs will be 50% greater than those listed above. \J ;� i' J D E R B I S H, G U E R R A & A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. • CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS 134 EAST "F" STREET, SUITE 17 • ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA 91764 714 - 983-]930 714 - 9634739 PROPOSED HOURLY RATES FOR PLAN CHECK SERVICES CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Standard Project Hourly Rates: Principal Engineer $ 62.00 /hr. Tract /Parcel Map Checking 56.00 /hr. General Research /Checking 44.00 /hr. Clerical /Messenger 20.00 /hr. Rush Project Hourly Rates Principal Engineer $ 74.00 /hr. Tract /Parcel Map Checking 68.00/hr. • General Research /Checking 54.00/hr. Clerical /Messenger 24.00/hr. Rush project rates will only be utilized with approval of City. ld J�7 LINVILLE - SANDERSON & ASSOCIATES 9587 Arrme P.M,, Suik "N" Ci>dl Engineers - Land Surveyors Smano Cummonga. i 9lifornia 91730 171;19801x1 • FLE ° rin ciral ......... .........................$66 /hr O.` "ice Engineer .. .........................$3C /hr :ec^nician ....... .........................527 /hr Secretary ........ .........................515 /hr • • fi, CG ENGINEERING Planning and Engineering PREVAILING HOURLY BATES July 1, 1983 - June 30, 1984 OFFICE Principal Engineer $75.00/Hr. Project Manager - 58.00 /Hr. Associate Engineer 52.00 /Hr. Real Property Specialist 50.00 /Hr. Principal Planner 50.00 /Hr. Landscape Architect 46.00 /Hr. Senior Designer 42.00 /Hr. Designer - Draftsman 40.00 /Hr. Planner 39.00 /Hr. Senior Draftsman 34.00 /Hr. Draftsman 30.00 /Hr. Computer Operator 30.00 /Hr. Engineer Aide 25.00 /Hr. Clerical 18.00 /Hr. FIELD Resident Engineer (Professional) 58.00 /Hr. Inspector (Unlicensed) 40.00 /Hr. Field Survey Supervisor (Licensed) 50.00 /Hr. 2 Man Survey Party 98.00 /Hr. 3 Man Survey Party 125.00 /Hr. Electronic Measuring Device 70.00 /Day MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES AND EXPENSES Mileage 0.225/Mi. Prints, Copying, Reproduction and Miscellaneous Materials Cost + 108 outside Consultant Services Cost +10% Equipment Rental Per Caltrans Publications OGFY84 2627 5. WATERMAN AVE., SUITE E • SAN RERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92408 • (714) 824.2420 0 u s CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 20, 1983 TO: City Council and City Manager Gt)CAArp,V o G? y 9 cj; h a c z 197; FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Acceptance of Map, Bonds and Agreement for Parcel Map 6395 submitted by Rancho Center Associates located on the southwest corner of Base Line and Hellman Avenue Parcel Map 6395 is submitted by Rancho Center Associates for final City Council approval. This map divides 10.23 acres of land into three parcels. Tract 11605 has been tentatively approved by Planning Commission for the development of 65 townhouses on Parcel No. 3. An improvement security and agreement in the following amounts has been submitted by TAC Development: Faithful Performance Bond: $160,000.00 Labor & Material Bond: $ 80,000.00 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Parcel Map 6395 and accept the improvement security and agreement. Respectfully submitted, '7 LB • K:jaa Attachments J/!, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 6395 IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG,I, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Remq Lot 12,Sutdrvjs,w'V;'Cucomxga Vtneyard 7rw4AS Recorded k) Book2l"flge 5701 Maps, Records 01 San Be: rveyna Ccunry, Cafilornro f:JOUEYqEL,LS2988 E L L A I A El E pi • RESOLUTION NO. * A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 6395, (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 6395), IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map No. 6395, submitt,d by Tac :,evelopment Company, Subdivider, and consisting of 3 parcels, locatri at the southeast corner of Base Line and Hellman Avenue, being a division of Lot 12, Subdivision "C ", Cucamonga Vineyard Tract, as recorded in 3ook 21, Page 67 of Maps, Records of San Bernardino County, State of California was approved by the Planning Commission as provided in the State Subdivision Map Act and is in compliance with the requirements of Ordinance No. 28 of said City; and WHEREAS, Parcel Map No. 6395 is the Final Map of the division of land approved as shown on said Tentative Parcel Map; and WHEREAS, to meet the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the Final Map, said subdivider submits for approval said Final Map offering for dedication for public use the streets delineated thereon, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of • Rancho Cucamonga, California, as follows: 1. That the offers for dedication and the Final Map delineating same be approved and the City Clerk is authorized to execute the certificate thereon behalf of said City; and V] 2. That said Parcel Map No. 6395 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. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 20th day of July, 1983. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: • 11 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR Parcel Map 6395 RNDW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is made and entered into, in conformance with the provisions of the Municipal Code and Regulations of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referr- ed to as the City, by and between said City and TAC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION hereinafter referred to as the Developer, THAT, WHEREAS, said Developer desires to develop certain real property in said City located on the southwest corner of Base Line and Hellman Avenue; and WHEREAS, said City has established certain requirements to be met by said Developer as prerequisite to granting of final approval; and WHEREAS, the execution of this agreement and posting of improvement security as hereinafter cited, and approved by the City Attorney, are deemed to be equivalent to prior completion of said requirements for the purpose of securing said approval. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the City and the Developer as follows: • 1. desc The Developer hereby agrees to construct at developer's expense all improvements ribed on page 4 hereof wi In in 12 months from the date hereof. 2. This agreement shall be effective on the date of the resolution of the Council of said City approving this agreement- This agreement shall be in default on the day follow - ing the first anniversary date of said approval unless an exten- sion of time has been granted by said City as hereinafter provid. ed. 3. The Developer may request additional time in which to complete the provisions of this agreement, in writing not less than 30 days prior to the default date, and including a statement of circumstances of necessity for additional time. Jr, considera. tion of such request, the City reserves the right to review the provisions hereof, including construction standards, cost estimate, and sufficiency of the Improvement security, and to require adjustments thereto when warranted by substantial changes therein. 4, if the Developer fails or neglects to comply with the provisions of this agreement, the City shall have the right at any time to cause said provisions to be completed by any law. ful means, and thereupon to recover from said Developer and /or his Surety the full cost and expense incurred 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 wore ,ithlu the public right- of-way. and the developer shall ,,Iq -t such work full rompli antn with are re ?ol3tions contained [nor r.,n, non - Compliance may result in stnnp,nq of the work by the City, and assessment of the penalties provided. 6. Public rirht -of -way imorpvpnent work required shall be constructed in conibrm ante eith approved improvement Dl ans, Standard Spe ,fir,atuons, and Standard Ornwlnjs and any special amrn;lnents thereto. Construction shall include any transitions amt /or other Incidental work deemed necessary for drainage or public safety. Errors or ommissions discovered during construo- • tion shall be corrected upon the direction of the City Engineer. Revised work due to said plan modifications shall be covered by the provisions of this agreement and secured by the surety covering the original planned works. 7. Work done within existing streets shall be diligent- ly pursued to completion; the City shall have the right to complete any and all work in the event of unjustified delay in completion, and to recover all cost and expense incurred fro, the Developer and /or his contractor by any lawful means. 8. The Developer shall be responsible for replacement, relocations, or removal of any component of any irrigatilin wate• system in conflict with the required work to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the owner of the water system. 9. The Developer shall be responsible for removal of all loose rock and other debris from the public right -of -ray. 10. The Developer shall plant and maintain parkway trees as directed by the Community Development Director, 11. The improvement security to be furnished by the Developer to guarantee completion of the terms of this agreement shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney. The prin- cipal amount of said improvement security shall not be less than the amount shown: • • • S FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE Type: Principal Amount: $150, OCO. CO Name and address of surety: MATERIAL AND LABOR Type: P —n ipal Amount: S 60,000.07 Name and address of surety: CASH DEPOSIT MONUMENIATION Type: Principal Amount: Name and address of surety: TO BE POSTED PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be duly executed and acknowledge with all formalities required by law an the dales set forth opposite their signatures. Date / — �+ by \ /Cis "!i .. i .� �— Developer / S/ignaLur Too I7wetopment Corporation Terry A. Christensen, president Printed OateL / — b u.—.. Developer lac Development Corporation Linda L. Christensen, secretary n me Accepted: City of Rancho Cucamonga, California A Municipal Corporation By: _— Mayor Attest: Approved; �ry,r C Ity Attorney lWlml �r /O,�• d n. a1• oin laet M tlW Mw_dry 01 i.!le.l .atpy2, baler �, ti YnanlpmU own MYbhL pwismily Vp W TE KRy /:•CfIR IS TC .r'SE /V NNJ L /NON L, Cgpr,j7SN -Ffe 0 ,wowWMkno.nlonr O prowElo monlM OKi.oI YII.IKlwy wkMnaw M IM MwwUl �Iw �xKUIK IM �Nhlw Wlnmwn r fx. me"Mf el lMw Man uwY YnM,wtl Kandwtlg abIM INI1M rapoi u., KKYIM,1. MTNE nna wWO kW Ual. o � Cm or R,,xm cm,m':'2 • CoaSTRfCTION AND EOI:D CSTI'L \Tf. ESCECAC101EYT PERMIT FEE SCiIEDCLE (Ar.aM1 [o °Inspee[o:'1 C,V 9 DATE: 12/21191 PERMIT NO. CC : ?VTED 5y C.G. En,eerin9 File Reference Parr..1 iia0 63n5 City Drawing N..,_ - ::OTE: Does not include cu r. cnc fee far . uing PemL r pour -men[ repl�ce- men[ deposi[s. COI:ST.r.I'CTlC`1 COST FSTIICTE LTC hl %17M' '11 1 'li . ^.PCT _ •• ` - P' r tA" Fl,lt— do L. Is"M I � R" rev nr nac0 I 198 2.50 4y5 rrf .C. f:n rc[rc I S�F'. �S: re•[ F.vav nr!en M.Y. [ed L anAnen[ C. 1'. A. r. 19011 m 1300n1onvi TU4 ,. C, andr- 400 [ nn9 [ nsl snn [ U.VJ vn•adrr A.C. (rrrnch) F. 1�a ` :r4 A,C. Rn•rinr 1 9 a .s F. n 11 1-4 Y.N. + f.r telr r Vlil- 11 1 r.l d,• 1 EA. ;5.00 75 '�. 1 ;00.00 4,;C0 e. 1 6 584 S.F. 0.55 3.621 narn.aaes ntD... L,Jq = r = pow Pn: -oval of H.C. Pa, -1 -lt I 1 192 S.F. 0.35 al4 P,"al P.C.C. Curb 30 L. F. 3.30 99 nrn IP^C1 r. n a .nn 7 a, >,! Prp r 4 1 9 .F. 5x.00 94.0 E;•' R2 n0 p 1 576 Lf. 75.00 43.200 vrp 0T PI, M 1 391 16 . 130.00 31.2-0 rfh n,asn 'N�' d En. 1.200.00 a.°7 Local 0enres.... 4' 1 4 ta. 501),00 2,000 I 3 EA. 2 507.00 7 500 2 Ea. 600.00 1 200 clwcuf 425 L,F. 2.00 850 Mrd wn Is and - Landacane and Irng. 1 2709 S.F. 2.75, 1,450 CONSTRUCTION COST _ S145,534.00 CONTINGENCY COSTS 14,466.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS 5160,000.00 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE DONO (100:) 5160.000.00 1 I.A60R AND MATERIAL BOND (50:) _$ 80, Ono ro - UM'IEERIN, IOSPECT!r9 FEE 3,522.50 (FEE SCHEDULE) PONUMENTAT;ON BOND (CASH) 0- • A cash restoration deposit wiii Ee repufred at [ime, Permit issuance, . PfEtIL'n: S1,920.00 • FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ranc'no Cucamonna, State of California, and TAC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (hereinafter designated as "principal ") have entered into an anreement whereby principal agrees to install and complete cer {aim designated public improvements, which said agreement, dated , 198 , add i'- ntified as project drew Map 63 is hereby referred to and made a part hereof and, WHEREAS, said principal is required under the terms of said agreement to furnish a bond for the faithful performance of said agreement. NON, THEREFORE, we the principal and tevelooers Innurance Cenci.." as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Rancho Cucamonga (hereinafter called "City "), in the penal sum of One hundred and sixty thousand and 00 /100 Dollars (5160,000.00) lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. The condition of this obligation is such that if the above bounded principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, • and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and provisions in the said agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless City, its officers, agents and employees, as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and effect. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasnnable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the d(?ree.ort or to the work to be performed thereunder or the speci- (ICdtiops accompanying the same shall 10 anywise affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such Chadds, extension or time, alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work or to the specifications. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the principal and surety above named, on .h:iv at. 1931 Toc )eve iopment Corporation Developers imnurance Company t. ^,, ,n,a turel -o n•ncr•• ,y 1. Ctirtstrner np resrdn ,t F-__ ,TW �•��tarne y - in - cQ, _ — —1 :aelArn A. y;v, rtnlo PLEASE ATTACH POWER OF ATTORNEY TO ALL BONDS SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED Tac ne veto •nr nt Cpr •n Tau om • (Develolder) ~ . u`u i,in3a i.. Chr,ctcu,,o n, sex rt•tnry r7 901ab N0. !05092 -A PRa11.71: C'. T LLM LABOR AND MATERIALMEN BOND • WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. State of California, and TAC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (hereinafter designated as "principal ") have entered into an agreement whereby principal agrees to install and complete c tain designated publ iC improvements, which sal agreement, dated . 198 , and ident,fied as pro,lect Parcel Map 9 ,s ne re y referred to ad made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, under the terms of said agreement, principal is required before entering upon the performance of the work, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with the City of Rancho Cucamonga to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California. NOW, THEREFORE, said principal and the undersigned as a corporate surety, are held firmly bound unto the City of Rancho Cucamonga and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, mater ialmen and other persons employed in the performance of the aforesaid agreement and referred to in the aforesaid Code of Civil Pro cadore in the sum of Eighty thousand and OD /100 Dollars (580,000.00), for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that said surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount hereinabove set forth, and also in case suit is brought upon this bond will pay in addition t0 the face amount thereof, costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, Incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, to be awarded And fixed by the court, and to be taxed as costs and to be • included in the judgment therein rendered. It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies and corporations ant l fled to file claims under Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Di vitch 3 of the Civil Code, so is to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any snit brought upon this bond. Should the cord itican of this bond be fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void, otherwise it shall be -' and remain In full force and of f act. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of said agreement or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any manner affect its obligations on this bond, and it does here- by waive notice of any such change, extension, alteration or addition. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the principal and surety above named, on Jule let 953 _TaC Dovplonr,pmt Cornorntinn DeveTone rs insurance CompAny jsu rely BY:I DV. r •�/ � Tarry A. Chrin_srn, rrside nt ilpphpn "' SFnimnlb PLEASE ATTACH POWER OF ATTORNEY TO ALL BONDS SIGNATURES MUST DE NOTARIZED Tap Development CorPnretion By: .+'rt gna morel - -••�' /II —�� Linda L. Chr E Stnnoen, shcret any /�. 1 0 11 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 20, 1983 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Monte Prescher, Public Works Engineer SUBJECT: Acceptance of Hillside Road Improvements �o GLCAI,101, v �� n 19- The Hillside Road and Beryl Avenue Street and Drainage Improvement Project has been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. It is recommended that the Council approve the acceptance of the project, authorize the final contract amount of $460,827.41 (see attached Progress Report No. 4) and direct the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder and release performance surety and retention. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council accept as complete the Hillside Road Improvements and pass the attached resolution authorizing the City Engineer to file the Notice of Completion and release performance bonds and retention and authorize final payment. Respectfully submitted, r Xwlc�; LB ;4P:jaa Attachments n u 0 0 CITY OF RANCHO COCAMONGA CONTRACT P R 0 G R E S S REPORT ESTIMATE NO.: 4 FOR PERIOD ENDING: 7 -20 -83 PROJECT: Hillside Rd. Improvements CONTRACTDR: Riverside C.onst. WEATHER NON -WORK DAYS: 10 CONTR. CHANGE ORDER DAYS: -0- DTHER ALLOWED DAYS: -0- TOTAL EXTRA DAYS: 10 CONTRACT START DATE: 3 -14 -83 CONTRACT COMPLETION DATE: 8 -4 -83 CONTRACT DAYS: 100 TOTAL REV. DAYS: 110 REV. DATE OF COMPLET.: 8 -19 -83 PERCENT CONTR. COMPLETED: 100% % TIME ELAPSED: 80% DAYS REMAINING: 22 THIS ESTIMATE TOTAL ESTIMATE Item Item Unit of Estimated Unit Original Quantity Amount Quantity Amount No. Measure Quantity Prices Avtlmrizad 1 Disc. Removals Lump Sun 26,000.00 25,0^0.00 0 100% 26,000.00 2 A.C. Pvmt. Removal Sq. Ft. 72,500 D.03 2,175.00 0 72,500 2,175.00 3 A.C. Rem. on Dory] Sq, Ft. 42,100 0.11 4,631.00 0 42,100 4,631.00 4 Cold Plane 5' Min Lin, Ft. 11,900 0.41 4,879.00 11,900 4,879.00 5 Curb & Gutter Rem. Lin. Ft. 2,475 1.18 2,920.50 2,531 2,986.'0 6 UnCls. Fill 3 Ord Cu. Yds. 11.450 1.42 16,259.00 986 1400.12 11,436 17,657 7 Str. "cav & bkfl Cu. Yds 600 3.75 2,250.00 0 0 600 2,25400 8 Misc. E.rcav &grdng Lump Sum 15,000.00 :51000.00 100% 15,000.00 9 Crushed Agq or Sig Tons 1927 5.50 10,598.50 1088.:3 5,984.72 10 A.C. Paving Tans 5750 23.00 155,25D.00 90.71 2,086.33 7166.75 164,835.25 11 8' A.C, Berm Lin, Ft. 2368 1.56 3,930.88 D 2695 4,473.70 E 0 Item Item On it of Estimated unit Original No. 6,051.21 Measure Quantity Prices Authorized 12 Cross gutter /Spndrl Sq. Ft. 1487 3.63 5,397.81 13 B" PCC Rolled C. & G.Lio. Ft. 190 10.00 1,900.00 14 8" PCC C & G Lin. Ft. 4500 5.80 26,100.00 15 12" PCL C & G Lin. Ft. 960 10.00 9,600.00 16 P.C.C. Or we Ap. Sq. Ft. 1480 2.15 2,182.00 17 Catch Basin Ang.Ck Each 2 773.50 1,547.00 18 Double Boa Culvert Lump Sum 3,192.00 52,000.00 52,000.00 19 Catch Basin -Beryl Lump Sum 4,300.00 4,300.00 20 PCC Loc. Dep. k /si Lump Sum 1472.00 700.00 700.00 21 AEC I. c. Dep. E /st Lump Sum 13,542.00 1,5DO.OD 1,500.00 22 Catch Basin Rchkash Lump Sum 3,700.00 3,700.00 23 24" RCP w/s Beryl Lin. Ft. 76 42.00 3,192.00 24 4" PVC pipe Lin. Ft. 30 10.00 30O.DO 25 1B^ CMP Lin. F.t 18 17.00 306.00 26 Adjust Water Valves Each 30 32.00 960.00 27 Type "L" or "I" MkrS Each 9 20,00 180.00 28 Equest. flailing Lin. F.t 735 16.50 13,597.50 0 Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 0 1667 6,051.21 0 204 2,040.00 0 4625 26,825.00 0 1014 10,140.00 137.5 295.63 2701.5 5,808.25 a 2 1,547.00 0 100% 52,DDG.00 0 0 100% 4,30D.00 0 0 :00% 70D.00 0 0 0 0 0 100% 3,700.00 0 C 76 3,192.00 0 30 300.00 0 18 306.00 2 64 46 1472.00 0 i9 390.00 732 13,542.00 732 13,542.00 409,999.99 420,595.03 Item Item Unit of Estimated Unit Original Quantity Mount Quantity Mount N, Measure Quantity Prices Authorized 29 Red.00d Leader Lin. F3 660 1.33 877.80 0 0 0 0 30 Rancho Wash /Wly Lump Sum 2,000.00 2,000.00 0 0 100% 2,000.00 31 Rancho Wash /Ely Lump Sum 4,400.00 4,400.00 0 0 100% 4,400.00 32 Rancho wash /SEly Lump Sum 3,200.00 3,200.00 0 0 100% 3,200.00 ' 33 Rancho Wash /SWIy Lump Sum 6,800.00 6,800.00 0 0 100% 6,800.00 34 G•.nite "Vee" Drain Lin. Ft. 108 10.00 1,080.00 0 0 0 0 -Sr 35 6' Gunite Bench Lin. Ft. 145 14.00 2,030.00 0 0 0 0 36 Catch Basin(52 «26) Lump Sum 2,000.00 2,000.00 0 100% 2,000.00 37 Catch Basin(52N11.41) Lump Sum 4,000.00 6,000.00 0 100% 4,000.00 38 Catch Basin(28 +07) Lump Sum 4,400.00 4,400.00 0 100% 4,400.00 39 Under Sdwlk Drain Lump Sun 2,450.00 2,450.00 0 IDO% 2,450.00 40 A.C. Dike Removal Lin. Ft. 2930 0.20 406.00 0 2030 406.00 41 6' Non- retain Wall Lie- Ft. 80 50.00 4,000.00 0 0 80 4,000.O0 42 6" P.C.C. Curb Only Lin. Ft. 465 4.00 1060.00 0 241 964.00 43 6' P.C.C. Sidewalk S9. Ft. 1490 1.85 2756.00 0 1512 2797.20 409,999.99 420,595.03 TOTAL OF PAGES 1, 2 6 3 5420,595.03_ Contract change orders: #1 - Additional grading at Rancho Cucamonga Mash !2 - Additional C.M.P. Pipe b Ga. of Pipe - 2 P.C.L. collar's 13 - Add. Basin @ 6250.00 6 40 L.F. 30" R.C.P. @ 54.30 per L.F.. 2172.00 Delete Item 21, Included in Item 21 04 - Add slotted 72" C.M.P., R 6 R Deck, P.C.C. collars, remove spandral 15 - Remove curb and gutter, install rolled curb 6 install spandral Included in Items 5, 13, 12 N6 - Add. Drive Approach, B" curb b gutter, C.A.B. /C.S.B, Sidewalk 6 6" curb only, Included in Items 16. 14, 9, 42 b 43 Grade for 8" Curb and Gutter Reconstruct Transition, Pave Drive Approach I7 - Matchup Paving Grindings 955 C.Y. @ 9.50 pr C.Y. M8 - Construct grouted Rip Rap, Delete 3' 6' "Vee" Drains, Included in Items 34 G 35 19 - Delete Hydro Seed 20,000 S.F. @ .03 = {(S600.007 Remove b Replace P.C.C. D.A. included in Item 16, Install 16' of 24" CMP @ S9. DO - $144.00 Remove b Replace A.C. pavement at Force Account $2994.41 TOTAL VALUE OF WORK COMPLETED (Pgs 1, 2, 6 3 and Change Orders) ----------------------------------- ---------------- -- ------ LESS: 10% Retained------------------------------------------------ -- ------------ --- ---- ---- - - ---- - ------ - - ---- MDUNTPAID AND PAYABLE----------------------------------------------- ----- ------------------- ---- -- ------------------- - - - - -- LESS: Trial Amount Previously Paid ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------- MOUNT DUE. TINDER THIS ESTIHATE--------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------- RECOM:1INDEDU APPROVED: Resident Engineer: Public Works Engineer By: Date: By:__ Date: Distribution: Finance Dept. _ Contractor Project File ACCEPTED BY Contractor 1.814.11 6,1391.00 8,422.00 -0_ 2,422.33 -0- -D- 75.02 1,690.67 3,799.45 9,072.50 4,246.09 2,538.41 $460,627.41 146,062.74 $414,744.67 396,810.81 $17,933.66 \3 RECORDING REQUESTED BY: CITY OF RANCHO CUCX40NGA Post Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Post Office Box 001 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate In the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which interest or estate is: Street Improvements and Drainage Facilities 2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is: CITY OF • RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 9320 -C Base Line Road, Post Office Box 807, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. 3. On the 20th day of duly 1983, there was completed an the hereinafter described real property the work of improvement set forth in the contract documents far: Hillside Road Improvements 4. The name of the original contractor for the work of improvement as a whole was: Riverside Construction Company 5, The real property referred to herein is situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, California, and is described as follows: Hillside Road from Sapphire to Amethyst and Beryl Ave. from Sunflower Hillside Road Date: it J CITY Or RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation, Owner on M,kels, Mayor • RESOLUTION NO. * A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR HILLSIDE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Hillside Road between Sapphire and Amethyst and Beryl Ave. and between Sunflower and Hillside have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this * day of *, lg *. AYES: NOES: • ABSENT: ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City C er 19 Jon D. Mike s, Mayor 0 r1 L J V A OTMV nc U A ATOWn PT TPA MnMrA N STAFF REPORT�1° `_.° OI'. iry� C GATE: July 20, 1983 F, TO: City Council and,City Manager 1977 FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Approval of Bonds and Agreement for D. R. 82 -15 submitted by Michael J's and located at the southeast corner of Foothill Blvd. and Turner Avenue Development Review 82 -15 for the development of a 6394 square foot restaurant on 1.30 acres of land in the C -2 zone located at the southeast corner of Foothill Blvd. and Turner Avenue was approved by the Planning Commission on December 8, 1982. Mr. Michael Tooley, owner of Michael J's restaurant has submitted an agreement and security in the following amounts: Faithful Performance Bond: $118,500.00 Labor & Material Bond: $ 59,250.00 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the bonds and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement. Respectfullyry submitted, LB SK:Jaa Attachments l RESOLUTION 10. * A RESC'.UTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 82 -15 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement executed on July 20, 1983, by Michael J's as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located on the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Turner Avenue; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said real property as referred to Planning Commission, Director Review No. 82 -15; and .. WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of • Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Agreement and said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 20th day of July, 1983. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk 11 on 07Mi a s, Mayor • RESOLUTION NO. * A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR EMERGENCY RESTORATION AND REPAIRS AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvemef.;s for Emergency Restoration and Repairs, Various Locations, Storm of 1983 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this * day of *, 19 *. AYES: NOES: • ABSENT: ATTEST: Laure'i M. Wasserman, City C erk Is f„ LI Jon D. Mikels, Mayor Ll RECORDING REQUESTED BY CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM04GA pest Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Post Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California MOO NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which interest or estate is: Street Improvements and Drainage Facilitl.' . 2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is: CITY OF RANCHO CDC AMONGA, 9320 -C Base Line Road, Past Office Box 807, Rancho Cucamonga, California 41730. 3. On the 20th day of July 1983, there was completed on the hereinafter described real property the work of improvement set forth in the contract documents for: Emergency Restoration and Repairs, Various Locations, Storm of 1983 4. The name of the original contractor for the work of improvement as a whole was: Mathis Construction S. The real property referred to herein is situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, California, and is described as follows: Haven Avenue between Highland and Wilson Archibald between 4th St, and 6th St. Hellman Ave. between Cucamonga Channel and 9th St. Date: il li CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation, Owner on M,ke s, Mayor • RESOLUTION NO. * A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ESTABLISHING A FEE FOR PROCESSING LAND AND ASSESSMENT DIVISION APPLICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE 'IMPROVEMENT BOND ACT OF 1915' BEING DIVISION 10 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE OF THE STATi. OF CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, this City has recently completed assessment proceedings for the construction of certain public improvements in what is known and designed as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 82 -1 (5th Street Industrial Area) (Hereinafter referred to as the 'Assessment District') pursuant to the provisions of the 'Improvement Bond Act of 1915', being Division 10 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California; and WHEREAS, assessments have been levied and bands issued on certain parcels of property whereby it is determined that substantial numbers of parcels will be sold and divided, and requests and application will be made for the division of assessments on the divided lots or parcels, all as so • provided in said 'Improvement Bond Act of 1915'; and WHEREAS, the Legislative Body is desirous of establishing a reasonable fee for processing applications for division of land and assessment in order to reimburse the City for the necessary costs so incurred as set forth in said 'Improvement Bond Act of 1915'. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, as follows: SECTION 1: That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2: That the following fee schedule is hereby determined to be reasonable and is an amount that will reimburse the City for the necessary costs in processing applications for division of land and bond pursuant to the 'Improvement Bond Act of 1915', being Division 10 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. All applications for division of land and assessment shall be accompanied by a fee as determined by the street superintendent of $800 + b50 per parcel of land into which the original lot or parcel has been divided. 6/1 Resolution No. Page 2 • B. If no application is filed at the time the superintendent of streets files the amended assessment pursuant to order by this City Council. the fee is determined to be $800 + $50 per parcel o: land into which the original lot or parcel has been divided. Prior to making the divis,on, the superintendent of street shall notify the owner as to the costs for the apportionment. In the event the costs are not paid within fifteen (15) lays of notification, the superintendent of streets shall, in preparing the amended assessment, show separately thereon the amount of said fee charged to each individual parcel. The amount so charged shall then be entered, if not paid, upon the assessment roll and then collected along with the first installment of the amended assessment. SECTION 3: That all fees so collected either by application or as an installment on the assessment, are to be deposited in the general fund of the treasury of this City. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 20th day of July, 1983. AYES: * • NOES: ABSENT: Jon 5. Mike-Ts, Mayor ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk • -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA pcvcA.treyp • MEMORANDUM ��� , July 15, 1983 F:: p A U Z U D 19` TO: City Council FROM: Beverly Authelet Deputy City Clerk SUBJECT: Resolution No. 83 -68A The subject Resolution went to Council on May 18, 1983 and was approved. The public hearing was set for June 15th. However, the item was inadvertently omitted from the Agenda. It is necessary to approve the Resolution setting • a new hearing date for August 3, 1983. ba 11 /n n u CF RANCHO I TO LEVY iNTENAOCF, dSUANT To FFEiTNC A inga, pYrsuant to the being Division 15 of .is, doe, r..Ile a, nieroe require and it ct assessments Within year 1963 -8b for the lee thereon dedicated .sion tract map within geratica includes the gram, plantings, • , connection with Said to be located Within I in the report of the .ch are on file in the .andocape Maintenance opinion or said City it, and the said City !able upon a district, expenses thereof, and he Cucamonga lncloded aim "Map of Laod,cape , line the extent of ]strict and which map rther, full and more d the said map no on or sald aa,e,,s.sot colp cl on No. 63 -67 has report lndicatcs the ry, ,ineament eport, al Engineer's Report, IC office of the City hereDy made for all and for the extent or gmolution No. 83 -68 Page 2 0 Tme a- ". 'lace of Nearin4 SECT:CN 5: Notice is hereby given that on the 3rd day of August, 1983, at t`.e ho.r of 7:30 p.m• in the City Council Chambers in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, any and all persons may appear and show c a use why said work i should no: be done or carried out or why assessments should net be levied and collected for fiscal year 198344. Protests must be in writing and m9s, contain a description of the property in which each signer thereof interested, sufficient to identify the Base, and must to dsiivared to the City Clerk of said City prier to the time set for the Nearing, and no other pretests or objections will be considered. If the signer of any protest is nut shown upon the last equalized assessment roll of such protest must contain or be a eagan:ed by Written evidence that such signer is the owner of the property so described. Landscapine and Lighting Act of 1972 S.-IDN 6: All the Work herein proposed shall be done and carried through in pursuance of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated the Landscaping and Lighting Act or 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and highways Code of the State of California. Publication of Resolution of Intention SECTION 7: Published notice shall be made pursuant to Section 6961 of the Government Code. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be • published 10 days before the date set for the hearing, at least once In The 9a aY Bepurt, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of 1983. AYES: NOES: ASSENT: Jan D: Mikels, 4ayn A ATTEST: Lauren '1. was„ernan, C: ty clerk . 71J • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • MEMORANDUM July 15, 1983 TO: City Council FROM: Beverly Authelet Deputy City Clerk SUBJECT: Resolution No. 83 -97A • Resolution No. 83 -97 had been approved on June 15, 1983, but had not been published. Therefore, an amendment must be approved to set the public hearing date for August 3, 1983. BA 131 �r Pi I RESOLUTION NO. 83 -97 A A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUt7CIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE A 20 FOOT ALLEY ADJACENT TO LOTS 2 THROUGH 12 OF TRACT NO. 2521 GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga 'as follows: SECTION 1: That the City Council hereby elects to proceed under Section 8300, et. seq., of the Streets and Highways Code, also known as the Street Vacation Act of 1941. SECTION 2: That the City Council hereby declares its intention-to vacate the alley adjacent to lots 2 through 12 of Tract No. 2521 generally located between Foothill Boulevard and Red Hill Country Club Drive, a City street, as shown on Map No. V -028 on file in the Office of the City Clerk, a legal description of which is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof. • SECTION 3: That the City Council hereby fixes Wednesday, the 3rd day of A"','s— tom, 9Wat 7:30 p.m., in the Lions Park Community Center Building, located it 9161 Base Line, Rancho Cucamonga, California, as the time and place for hearing all persons objecting to the proposed vacation for the purpose of its determining whether said City street is necessary for present or prospective street purposes. SECTION 4: That the City Street Superintendent shall cause notices to be posted conspicuously along the line of the street or part thereof r proposed to be vacated at least 10 days before the hearing, not more than 30 I feet apart and not less than three signs shall be posted, each of which shall have a copy of this resolution on them and shall have the following title.in lettering not less than one inch in height: "NOTICE OF HEARING TO VACATE STREET ". SECTION 5: The subject vacation shall be subject to the reservations and exceptions, if any, for existing utilities on record. SEC ?10;7 6: The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause same to be published 10 days before the date set for the hearing, at least once in The Daily Rope, t, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of 1983• AYES: �C NOES: ABSENT: (� • J ! TMV nT D A T.T% TTn (TT T/ A AXl XT! A CL vr,.i V i- STAFF REPORT DATE: July 20, 1963 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council - 1e7; FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONE CHANGE 83 -01 CHRISTE ON - A change of zone from A- Limited Agriculture to C- General Business Commercial) for 13.1 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN 1077 - 401 -01, 03. Related File: CUP 83 -07 SUMMARY: The Planning Commission, at its meeting of June 8, 1983, held a public hearing and approved the Conditional Use Permit, related Master Site Plan, and recommended approval of the Negative Declaration and Zone Change for the above - described project. Please find attached a copy of the Planning Commission Staff Report, which fully describes the project. The proposed zone change and project are consistent with the City's General Plan and related ordinances. The project site is appropriate in size, shape and access to accommodate the proposed uses. No adverse environmental impacts are anticipated as a result of this zone change. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in The Daily Report newspaper and notices were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site. To date, no correspondence has been received either for or against this project. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the zone change request through adoption of the attached ordinance and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Rep,9 ec fu submitted, ,j�2._ Planner RG:DC:jr Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report and Resolution Minutes of June 8, 1983 Planning Commission Meeting City Council Ordinance • I 1. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of zone change request B. Purpose: Development of business park (Exhibit "B ") C. Location: Northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue xhibit "A ") D. Parcel Size: 13.1 acres E. Existing Zoning: A -1 (Limited Agriculture) F. Existing land Use: Abandoned winery G. Surroundin land Use and Zonin (Exhibit "C ") Nort - Vat ant; MR estrlcte Manufacturing) South - Vacant; MR (Restricted Manufacturing) East - Vacant; A -1 (Limited Agriculture) West - Vacant; R -3 and A -1 H. General Plan Desi nat9 ions: - ro3ect Me - commercial North - Commercial South - Office East - Community Commercial West - Commercial and Industrial Park %1{ STAFF REPORT DATE: June 8, 1983 19ri T0: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONE CHANGE 83 -01 - CHRISTESON - A change of zone from A- Limited Agricu tore to C -2 (General Business Commercial) for 13.1 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN 1077- 401 -01, 03. Related File: CUP 83 -07 1. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of zone change request B. Purpose: Development of business park (Exhibit "B ") C. Location: Northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue xhibit "A ") D. Parcel Size: 13.1 acres E. Existing Zoning: A -1 (Limited Agriculture) F. Existing land Use: Abandoned winery G. Surroundin land Use and Zonin (Exhibit "C ") Nort - Vat ant; MR estrlcte Manufacturing) South - Vacant; MR (Restricted Manufacturing) East - Vacant; A -1 (Limited Agriculture) West - Vacant; R -3 and A -1 H. General Plan Desi nat9 ions: - ro3ect Me - commercial North - Commercial South - Office East - Community Commercial West - Commercial and Industrial Park %1{ Zone Change 83 -01 /f isteson Planning Commissiu,. Agenda June 8, 1983 Page 2 • I. Site Characteristics: Property is the former Garrett Winery site, a portion of which is designated as a historic landmark. Six buildings exist in deteriorating condition; Eucalyptus windrow exists along Haven along with other mature trees. Property surrounds a General Telephone facility and abuts Deer Creek Channel to the west. J. Applicable Regulations: C -2 zone permits retail, office, bank, and restaurant uses. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The proposed zone change to C -2 is consistent with the General Plan designation of Commercial. The developer, Christeson, has submitted plans for a business park consisting of office, banking, and restaurant uses (see related staff report - CUP 83 -07). Exhibit "B" shows a conceptual master plan of 10 buildings, including preservation of the main winery tower, B. Design Review Coa ittee: The Committee recommends approval of the master site pan subject to resolution of the concerns listed in detail in the staff report for CUP 83 -07. C. Environmental Review: Part I of the Initial Study has been complete by the applicant and is attached for your review. Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study and found that this zone change will not have a significant effect on the environment. If the Commission concurs with such findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order. D. Historic Preservation Commission: The proposal was presented to the Commission on May 5, T98T. The Commission set a public hearing for June 2, 1983 in accordance with the Historic Preservation Ordinance. The Commission is required to forward a recommendation to the City Council. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The project site is appropriate in size, shape and access to accommodate future development consistent with the General Plan and compatible with the surrounding area. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in Th" Daily Report newspaper, the property posted, and notices were sent to property owners within 300 feet of the project site. To date, no correspondence has been received either for or against this project. • -26- • Zone Change 83 -01 /i isteson Planning Commissic}}Vr agenda June 8, 1983 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider all material and elements of this project. If after such consideration the Commission can support the facts for finding, adoption of the attached Resolution recommending approval of the zone change request and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. Respp`actfully bmitted, 14 Rick omez City Planner L DC:jr Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "8" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Initial Study, Part I • Resolution E C C • CITY OI' RANCHO CUC MONGA PLANNING DIVISION �7 • KOR'1'H rm%l: Z C $�'�/ p • TITLE @XI m1IT: !-A- SCALE: �� Q FOOTHLL BOULEVARD CITY OP ITEM: 2G %06.0 RANCH() CUC,\,,NIO.NGA TLTL.I;: X31 PLANNING DIVISION EXIIBIT:-0-SCALE+ ••'� V NORTH C � C,7MM L 1 FC9THlw WU,5,WIFD I i 1 I I viN�Yr�v , I I i • ` ID I Q Z � j'LANr,IcD M5,(A D CoMM CI�L 0075! * CCNNCTES Wk-TJ5 VWFE` K-t:� V� �olrrl I CITY OF ITEM; s 3`O / RA \CI --IO CUGkNIO \GA TITLi ;/AO— S 1 PLANNING DIVISION ESIi11i1T SCALE:� —./z4/ • CITY OF P V;C!IO CCClJ10NGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT III`0RD1-ATION SHEET - To he completed by applicant Enviro =rental Assessment Review Fee: $87.10 For all projects reaui.ring environmental review, this form m..cst he completed and submitted to the Davelon^ent Review Co- mittee throoa the department w$cre the project application is -,ads. Upon receipt of this application, the Envirc:uaental Analysis staff will precare Part II of the Initial Studv. The Developnent Review Committee will meet and taste action no later than ten (1.0) day=_ before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will mate one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no sicnificant enviro=ertal 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 information concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: Virni.nia Dare Business Center APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Christescn Investment Co., 17922 Pitch Avenue, Irvine, California 92714 714 -540 -2851 M -,ME, ADDRESS, TELEFHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED C014CERNING THIS PROJECT: Don or Jon Chri.steson - same address as above LOCATION OF PRO,-,! CT (S'P i; :i iiT ADDRESS A17 ASSESSOR PAitCEL No.) Northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonoai CA LIST OTIiER PERMITS C=. -,RY FR061 LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE ANT FEDEPAL 7,(:,FI ;CTES AND ':..E ACT iNCY ISSUING SUCH PEFiPtITS: Zone chanGo _ I- I BCD DESCRIEE THE SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUD =SG Ii4FO R:•LATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PIA!vrrS (TREES) , ANI :IALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROL -NDINP PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): A flat piece of land with six buildings now in various stages of deterioration, all of which have lost their roofs, windows doors and anv framed structure within. The surrounding la was nnce a Droductive vinevard: now in a general state ok consisting of an area 150 by 312 s.f.; this site has ur t buildinq. On the east border of the property, fronting on Haven, are a series of Eucalyptus trees, row planted as an 60 to 70 feet in height. The existing remains of the six ui gs -i^T ngs mentioned above were once use or t e purpose o making table and sacramental wine and was known as the Virginia Dare Winery. It was constructed in 19'0 ape was -designed by Arthur Benton, who also was the architect for the famous Mission Inn in River ^ide. Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series Of c-m- lative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have sicmifi.cant enviroa^:ental irinact? The project is planned to he built in either two or three Initially, it is planned to begin with several restaurant banking or financial institutions; ultimlLely leading to development n_ office buildings with some unique retailing involved. 1' 'Z rI i DF.SCRI PT TON • PROJECT DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: see attached ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTI:;G AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY. Approximatelv 13.1 acres; approximately 528,000 s.f.; Dr000sed buildings anticipated square footage- 170,000 s.f. DESCRIEE THE SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUD =SG Ii4FO R:•LATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PIA!vrrS (TREES) , ANI :IALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROL -NDINP PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): A flat piece of land with six buildings now in various stages of deterioration, all of which have lost their roofs, windows doors and anv framed structure within. The surrounding la was nnce a Droductive vinevard: now in a general state ok consisting of an area 150 by 312 s.f.; this site has ur t buildinq. On the east border of the property, fronting on Haven, are a series of Eucalyptus trees, row planted as an 60 to 70 feet in height. The existing remains of the six ui gs -i^T ngs mentioned above were once use or t e purpose o making table and sacramental wine and was known as the Virginia Dare Winery. It was constructed in 19'0 ape was -designed by Arthur Benton, who also was the architect for the famous Mission Inn in River ^ide. Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series Of c-m- lative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have sicmifi.cant enviroa^:ental irinact? The project is planned to he built in either two or three Initially, it is planned to begin with several restaurant banking or financial institutions; ultimlLely leading to development n_ office buildings with some unique retailing involved. 1' 'Z rI • DESCRIPTION OF PROTECT: The property is described as being approximately 13.1 acres in size; the front in an irregular shape bounded on the west by Deer Creek channel with approximately 935.86 s.£. fronting on Foothill Boulevard to the south and 900 s.f. on Haven Avenue fronting to the east and having approximately a 584 foot common border with a vacant vineyard property to the north. The topography of the land is flat and consists of a grouping of buildings once known as the Virginia Darn Winery and more fully described as six cement and earth farm buildings of one to three stories. The buildings are in delapidated condition due to the closing of the business in the early 1950's caused by economic conditions and a fire. C WILL T*iIS PRO,7-CT: YFS NO X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? • X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial chance in demand for municipal services (po�_ice, fire, water, sewage, ete.)l (No more than would be created by any commercial activity.) X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5: Remove any existing trees? How many? approx. I --- 3T— x 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: 3. There is to be increase in services because the land is beinq cverte create a window to the project and to allow for ingress and 1930's will be retained in front of the original Virgins power. IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnishe 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 nrecented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional infor:raticn may be required to be submitted before an adeouate evallation can be made by the Development Review committee. Date Signature - Title 1 -3 q3 I C t 0 RESOLUTION NO. 83 -76 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 83 -01 REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE ZONING FROM A -1 TO C -2 FOR 13.1 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND HAVEN AVENUE WHEREAS, on the 7th day of April, 1983, an application was filed and accepted on the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the 8th day of June, 1983, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: 1. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and 2. That the proposed zone change would not have • significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and 3. That the proposed zone change is in conformance with the existing and proposed General Plan. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project will not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration on June 8, 1983. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 8th day of June, 1983, Zone Change No. 83 -01. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Zone Change No. 83 -01. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. IAPPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF JUNE, 1983. r rr Resolution No. 83 -78 I Page 2 l PLANNING COMMISSION BY:, CITY OF-RANCHO CUCAMONGA I, JACK 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 8th day of June, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, BARKER, JUAREZ, MCNIEL, REMPEL NONE NONE D� ►J r U • • tin: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barker, carried unanimously, to adopt Item the Consent Calendar. B Tentative Tract 10349 - - Tentative Tract 11563 - Red Hi t Tentative Tract 10046 - Anden Tentative Tract 10047 - Andes Tentative Tract 11625 - Roberts Group Tentative Tract 11663 - Marlborough i t i * M PUBLIC HEARINGS E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONE CHANGE 83 -01 - CHRISTESON - A change of zone from A -1 (Limited Agricultural) to C -2 (General Business Commercial) for 13.1 acres of land in the A -1 zone (C -2 pending) located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN 1077 - 401 -01, 03• F The development of the Virginia Dare center, a business park eonsiscing of office, banking, and restaurant uses comprising of 10 buildings on . 13.1 acres of land in the A -1 zone (C -2 pending) located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN 1077 - 401 -01, 03. Senior Planner, Michael Vairin, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Remoel opened the public hearing. Mr. Donald Christesen, 17522 Fitch, Irvine, the developer, stated that he and Mr. Glenn Glatny of the Bissell Company, the architectural firm, were available to answer any questions. Mr. Christeson indicated that he had slides available if the Commission wished to view them and indicated that they would ask for several modifications in the requirements. Mr. Christeson indicated in the May 5, 1983 letter from the City, Item lA requires an equestrian easement of 30 feet along the flood control channel and asked that a portion of that trail in the lower southwest corner of the property be allowed to deviate from the required width by 5 feet. He indicated that this would allow for parking and the driveway as shown on the map. F\rrther, they have tried to work with General Telephone to shrink the depth of the planter corner and to allow parking in the back along with additional landscaping, but General Telephone has refused. 11 Planning Commission Minutes -5- June 8, 1983 Mr. Christeson asked that the 15 -foot equestrian right -of -way he reducei to 10 feet. He also asked for clarification on Item 5, page 2, requiring tree • planters every seven car spaces. He indicated that they could rearrange this to get compact cars rather than full size cars and not lose the parking count. Mr Cnristeson also asked about Item 5B, the construction of the Haven Avenue landscape median, indicating that they do not oppose this but asked for relief in the bonds for construction until Lewis Hones and the City are sure of the design. Mr. Vairin stated he would he able to provide comments on the three it ^ms Fr. Christeson mentioned. There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Vairin stated that the tree planter wells are still conceptual and must come back for a final plan. He indicated that what Mr. Christeson has in mind would meet the parking requirement. With regard to the regional trail issue, Mr. Vairin indicated that the strip is 20 feet wide and with the addition of landscaping that will be put in even if it were reduced by the requested five feet, it will appear as 20 feet. Further, with regard to the Haven Avenue median, this has been discussed with engineering staff and coordination as described by Mr. Christeson would be appropriate. Chairman Rempel stated that one thing that most be looked at regarding the • trail is that no one seems to know where it will go once E. gets to Foothill. He indicated that a trail should be looked at that would really be used. Commissioner Barker indicated that Mr. Vairin made a good point and stated that there will be adequate room for the minimum 10 foot trail. Of the 30- foot regional trail, 10 feet is devoted to asphalt with the remaining 20 devoted to landscaping and trail. Since they are only asking for a 5' deviation, 15 feet of trail will still remain. Commissioner Stout stated that there is already 10 feet of asphalt along the creek. Chairman Rempel stated that it would be all right to deviate but felt that it should be for the entire length of the property rather than just the section indicated by Mr. Christeson. He indicated further that this is especially true if the County will give him the additional easement. Commissioner Stout asked Mr. Rougeau if there is a need for a deceleration lane. Planning Commission Minutes -6- June 8, 1983 is C • Mr. Rougeau replied that this is a good feature to add and is not in the conditions out would be goad for all the driveways along Foothill because they will be used in the future. He indicated that the only additional -width needed is 6 feet. Commissioner Stout asked if there is anything needed on Raven. Mr. Rougeau replied that it would not charge the right -of -way line Commissioner Stout stated that it is hard to conceptualize but he does not know what this area will be like in 20 years and this should be considered. He felt that there should be a deceleration lane north on Foothill and west on Haven as determined by the traffic engineer. Mr. Hopson advised the Commission to act on the zone change first and then the site plan. Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barker, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 83-78, approving zone change 83 -01, issuing a Negative Declaration. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Stout, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 83 -79, approving Conditional Use Permit 83 -07 end issuing a Negative Declaration, with an amendment to add deceleration lanes, 5 -foot encroachment requested on Deer Creek channel, and a lien agreement for the median island. • • R R R R 7:45 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed 8:C0 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened Y R R R R Commissioner Stout stated that he would like to make an additional request with regard to the previous project. He asked that a letter be sent over the Mayor's signature requesting General Telephone to cooperate with the developer of the 'Virginia Dare Center. Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Mc Niel, carried unanimously, to request that the Mayor send such a letter. Mr. !oe Di Iorio, came forward and indicated that Mr. Ralph Lewis is a member of the board of General Telephone and indicated that he may be able to personally speak with the chairman of the board. Chairman Rempel stated that perhaps the Mayor could write a letter to Mr. Lewes to get it to General Telephone. Is Planning Commission Minutes -7- June 8, 1983 i1;11 Commissioner Stout stated that whenever you write a letter, it commits the person receiving it to a response. He indicated he would rather take this • approach than the more informal one. Commissioner Barker asked if Commissioner Stout would like a polite letter set with a copy to Mr. Lewis. i f * M f IENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12414 - ALMAR - A total .tent and subdivision of 12.3 acres into 93 lots comprising of 92 J single family units in the R -2 zone, generally located south of tte Street between Beryl and opal Streets - APN 202 - 032 -71. Frank Dreckme, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Rempel ONned the public hearing. Mr. Terry Lane, engin r representing the developer and Mr. Curt Beckmeier, the arc'nitect, stated t y are in agreement with the requirements for approval. Mr. Robert Brown, owner of ttT property to the south and east of this proposed development stated that his pr erty is zoned A -1 and asked what future effect this development will have on hi property. Mr. Hopson replied that the A -1 zon currently is not in conformance with the • General Plan; however, it has not as et been changed. Fr. Hopson stated further that regardless of what zoning hange occurs, Mr. Brown will be able to keep his property and use it the way has been without anyone stopping him. Chairman Rempel stated that if Mr. Brown has No-half acre of property or more, he will be able to continue the keeping o \du�ing on it. There being no further comments, the public healosed. Commissioner Stout stated it was his understandduring the Design Review process there was some recommendation rerecreational vehicle parking and he is unable to tell if it ot. Mr. Dreckean replied that there is a condition s the ecreational vehicle storage area which is buffered and hiddiew of a street and the single family dwellings. Commissioner Stout asked if the compact car spaces would require rede 'gn of the house. Planning Commission Minutes -8- June 8, 1983 • • ORDINANCE NO. * AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER'S 1077 - 401 -01, & 03, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, FROM A -1 TO C -2 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 as duly heard and considered said recommendation. B. That this rezoning is consistent with the General • Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. C. 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 zoning map is hereby amended accordingly. Assessor's Parcel Numbers 1077 - 401 -01 & 03, approximately 13.1 acres in size and located on the northwest corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard, is hereby changed from A -1 (Limited Agriculture) to C -2 (General Business Commercial). PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 20th day of July, 1983. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: IJon D. Mikels, Mayor / 6 • 10 rTMv nV n n NTPUn PT Tn n 1 MM01 a STAFF REPORT DATE: July 20, 1983 70: Mayors and Members of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner SUBJECT: RESIDENTIAL PARKING STANDARDS BACKGROUND: Because of the Council's concerns regarding the proposed parking standards for two - bedroom cluster developments (condominiums, townhomes, patio homes, etc.) and three - bedroom apartments, I have provided a summary from a study done by Barton - Aschman in 1982 for a city in Orange County for both apartments and condominiums and townhomes. 1. Apartments Results of the Barton- Aschman survey of apartment dwellers indicates that, on the average, there are 1.44 automobiles per apartment. The auto ownership distribution is shown below. Number of Autos Per Apartment No. of Autos + Total No, of Apartments IT Tg Tf7 TV 0 --s Percentage 3.3 52.4 41.3 3.0 0.0 100.0 AVERAGE = 1.44 AUTOS /APT. In addition to this, under 3 percent of the apartments surveyed indicate that they owned some type of recreational vehicle (including motorcycles, campers, trailers, boats, etc., which may or may not require a parking space). None of the respondents indicated that they owned more than one such vehicle. Probably the most important informtion obtained concerns the number of autos relative to the size of the unit. The table below contains this information. z; Bedrooms No. of Autos O T T Total — —M 0 P > u (0.3 %) (3.3 %) 1977 1 BACKGROUND: Because of the Council's concerns regarding the proposed parking standards for two - bedroom cluster developments (condominiums, townhomes, patio homes, etc.) and three - bedroom apartments, I have provided a summary from a study done by Barton - Aschman in 1982 for a city in Orange County for both apartments and condominiums and townhomes. 1. Apartments Results of the Barton- Aschman survey of apartment dwellers indicates that, on the average, there are 1.44 automobiles per apartment. The auto ownership distribution is shown below. Number of Autos Per Apartment No. of Autos + Total No, of Apartments IT Tg Tf7 TV 0 --s Percentage 3.3 52.4 41.3 3.0 0.0 100.0 AVERAGE = 1.44 AUTOS /APT. In addition to this, under 3 percent of the apartments surveyed indicate that they owned some type of recreational vehicle (including motorcycles, campers, trailers, boats, etc., which may or may not require a parking space). None of the respondents indicated that they owned more than one such vehicle. Probably the most important informtion obtained concerns the number of autos relative to the size of the unit. The table below contains this information. No. of Bedrooms No. of Autos to io —� 0 T T Total — —M 0 (2.7 %) (0.3 %) (0.3 %) (3.3 %) 1 0 92 74 8 174 (27.7 %) (22.3 %) (2.4 %) (52.4 %) 2 0 44 85 8 137 (13.3 %) (25.6 %) (2.4 %) (41.3 %) 3 0 2 5 3 10 TOTAL 0 — 547 _T6_5 20 332 Residential Parking Standards City Council Agenda - July 20, 1983 Page 2 • The average number of automobiles per apartment is as follows (with the average number of total vehicles per apartment, including recreational vehicles, shown in parentheses): 1. One bedroom apartment - - - 1.27 (1.28); 2. Two bedroom apartment - - 1.57 (1.58); and 3. Three bedroom apartment - - 1.65 (1.70). Recommendation - - Bachelor /1 Bedroom 1.3 spaces per unit 2 Bedroom 1.6 spaces per unit - - 3 or more Bedrooms 1.7 spaces per unit In addition to the above requirement, 1.0 guest space must be provided or every five units. 2. Condominiums On the average condominium owners have a slightly greater number of automobiles than do apartment dwellers. According to the survey, there are an average of 1.7 automobiles per condominium. Thr table below shows the results of this portion of the survey. No. of Autos Per Condominium • No. of Autos + Total No. of Condos T3T M7 7- -1F Percentage 1.4 37.5 50.6 9.5 1.0 0.0 100.0 AVERAGE = 1.71 AUTOS /CONDO Approximately the same proportion of condominium respondents as apartment dwellers report ownership of some type of recreational vehicle. Three percent of the condo residents have such a vehicle, including one case where two PV's are owned. The table below illustrates the number of automobiles owned by residents of the various size units. Number of Autos versus Number of Bedrooms per Unit r�o' • No. of Bedrooms No. of Autos -- Studio - -I -7- -�_ -G- Total 6 3_ (0.0 %) (0.0 %) (1.0 %) (0.5 %) (0.0 %) (1.4 %) 1 15 (3.6 %) 45 (10.8 %) 72 (17.2 %) 25 (6.0 %) 0 (0.0 %) 157 (37.6 %) 2 3 28 107 73 0 211 (0.7 %) (6.7 %) (25.6 %) (17.5 %) (0.0 %) (50.5 %) 3 1 (0.2 %) 2 (0.5 %) 20 (4.8 %) 16 (3.8 %) 1 (0.2%) 40 (9.5 %) 4 (0.5 %) (0 ?5% 0.0% 1.-0 ( x) TOTAL (415 %) (1850 %) (4950 %) (2883 %) (0.2 %) (1100.0%) r�o' • • • Residential Parking Standards City Council Agenda - duly 20, 1983 Page 3 The average number of automobiles (and total vehicles) per condominium is as follows: 1. Studio - - 1.26 (1.26); 2. One bedroom condo - - - 1.43 (1.47); 3. Two bedroom condo - - - 1.73 (1.76); and 4. Three bedroom condo - - 1.92 (1.95). Recommendation Studio 1 BR 2 BR 3 BR 1.3 spaces per unit 1,5 spaces per unit 1.8 spaces per unit 2.0 spaces per unit In addition to the above requirement, 1.0 guest space must be provided for every unit. The following tables illustrate a comparison of the City's current regulations versus the proposed regulations for a hypothetical 200 unit apartment project. II re :S ienp (CCE pROpOSCO CODE ra SII1�le Fan�lY $ [ovpreC Sp d ceS $ ^nyol Up —enr �LCr C01 dnd IQc0AAE9i s„ sem ry Ee to creel single ) end robne non ?t rC l,, pa rMS, o rccm (c; 2 or —ore te!rors (d) • "slta a r rry paltora nce far u nc U+:rM'ipa ces II wM Cb lis cpveree 1.5 Snace I covereJ 2 spacer t corerea I voter evPrY 5 du. I space /ere rY d du, 20: of tbp uncovered 50: 01 th, uncovered (al ba c �P rar ..nd i ;rarcom (b) 2 bedrocn (c) ) (d) vmtar parking (P) cn -t,,. Car all;ina n lP fOr u nfTm reJ SUa cps. ua ces. I � z rb. ic red L] , I rw.ree Le J <� I.] S,a r es; vcpe rpo ann nL VPS Au. I r 4 du. 2(;; f ^il Ova rn f. 5O: u JCO VPred rZ Residential Parking Standards City Council Agenda - July 20, 1983 Page 4 0 V E L 0 P M E 4 T 4%Ae.I v0'CSnIS TYPE CORREMT CODE PROPOSE) CODE` —___ canacm: nl vx (al SO t- pedrpors (o) YO 2,pedrroms (c) 50 J. pedropnscpvered (d) v, zi :pr spaces TOTAL 1000 spaces; 1200 od be JS spae s: SO coveren 200 space 100 coverea 100 space 50 covered no spaces 0 soar ex 440 ((II 425 2. 200 aoar;xnos (a) $0 Lbedrrmz (b) ICO 2- Jedroo, (c) 50 3- pedroms (dl visit•., or :a0 oru 4DO spaces; 200 to to covered J fi5 spaces; So covered 160 spaces; 100 coverer 85 spaces; 50 covered 4v spaces SO spaces 440 Jc) \J ANALYSIS: The proposal which staff has developed closely follows the recommendations of the parking study. The requirement for conventional single family dwellings is proposed to remain the same (2 parking spaces • per unit within a garage or carport). For clustered development, semi - detached single family, and mobile home parks, the requirements have been broken down into studio units, one bedroom units, and two or more bedrooms. The major difference between staff's proposal and the study's recommendation is with regard to guest parking. The consultant's report recommended that in addition to the base requirements, one additional guest parking space would be provided for each unit. Based upon the study results, staff found no substantive information to require that high of a ratio of visitor parking spaces. Therefore, staff proposes that only one guest parking space shall be provided for every four units. This is different from our current regulation which requires one space for every five units. We have found a higher need for visitor parking within multiple family or clustered developments because of the lack of on- street parking. For apartments, the number of parking spaces for each category of bedrooms is slightly less than what is being proposed for the clustered development category. Additionally, the requirement for guest parking is proposed at one guest parking space for each four units rather than one for each five units which the code currently requires. In addition to the changes for required spaces, this proposal also includes a provision to allow up to 50% of the required uncovered spaces to be of compact car size. Surveys conducted within the automobile manufacturing industry indicate approximately 65% of the automobiles either on the road or being manufactured are considered compact car • size. �q Residential Parking Standards City Council Agenda - July 20, 1983 Page 5 Additionally, the Council expressed concerns regarding the use of carports. The current ordinance lists carports as permitted, subject to Planning Commission approval. There are basically three alternatives for consideration by the City Council regarding the use of carports. 1. Do not permit carports in conjunction with conventional single family detached dwellings. 2. Permit carports only with approval by the Planning Commission. 3. Permit carports only with the approval by the Design Review Committee. The concern with carports generally revolves around design and aesthetics. In some instances, a carport may be appropriate when located out of view. In other instances, the use of carports added to the front of an existing structure could be detrimental to the overall design of the structure, as well as the aesthetic integrity of the neighborhood. Carports do require some review and regulation therefore the Code should contain some flexibility in the event that carports are appropriate. Staff recommends that the use of carports be subject to review and approval by the Design Review Committee for both single • family and clustered developments and semi- detached single family dwellings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council proceed with the secon reading of Ordinance 123 -b. 0 ORDINANCE NO. 123 -B AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCA61ONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 61.0219(b)(7) OF THE ,RANCHO CUCAMONGA INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 123, RESIDENTIAL PARKING STANDARDS The City Council of the City of Rancho Cur.amenni, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Section 61.0219(b)(7) of the Rancho Cucamonga Interim Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended to read as follows: (7) Residential Uses: (A) Single - family dwellings (conventional). Two (2) parking spaces within a garage or carport. The use of carports requires approval from the Design Review Committee. (B) Cluster development (condominium, townhome, etc.) semi- detached single family (zero lot line, patio homes, duplexes, etc.) and mobile • home parks: (I) Studio: 1.3 off - street parking space per unit in a garage or carport. (II) One (1) bedroom: 1.5 off - street parking spaces per unit of which one space shall be in a garage or carport. (III) Two (2) bedrooms: 1.8 off - street parking spaces per unit, of which one space shall be in a garage or carport. (IV) Three (3) or more bedrooms: Two off - street parking spaces per unit of which one space shall be in a garage or carport. (V) In addition to the required number of parking spaces for each unit, one off - street uncovered parking space shall be provided for each four units for visitor parking. For single family zero lot line, patio homes, and duplexes, on- street parking may be substituted for visitor parking. Ordinance No. Page 2 (VI) For developments containing five or more units, up to fifty percent of the required uncovered spaces may be compact car size. (VII) The use of carports requires approva' from the Design Review Commit' >_e. (C) Apartments: (I) Bachelor and one bedroom dwelling unit: 1.3 off - street parking spaces for each dwelling unit of which one space shall be in a garage or carport for each unit. (II) Two (2) bedroom dwelling units: 1.6 off - street parking spaces for each dwelling unit of which one space shall be covered for each unit. (III) Three (3) bedrooms or more dwelling units: 1.7 off - street parking spaces • for each dwelling unit of which one space shall be covered for each unit, plus 0.2 off - street parking space for each bedroom in excess of three (3). (IV) In addition to required number of parking spaces for each unit, one (1) guest parking space shall be required for each four (4) units. (V) For building sites containing five (5) or more dwelling units, up to fifty (50) percent of the required open parking spaces may be of compact car size. SECTION 2: The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, hereby finds that this amendment will not cause significant adverse impacts on the environment and issues a Negative Declaration for this Amendment. 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 Dail RReport, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. • l7 • ORDINANCE NO. 204 -A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 204, REGARDING PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR SECOND DWELLING UNITS IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Section 1, Subsection (f) of Ordinance No. 204 is hereby amended too readas follows: (f) the unit shall provide parking and access pursuant to Section 61.0219(b), except temporary removable structures shall provide one (1) off- street parking space. SECTION 2: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. • PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this * day of *, 19 *. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Lauren N. Wasserman, City Clerk Is Jon D. Mike s, Mayor �L a • Ap n,mv n1 n ♦ wr I. III a wenw,n STAFF REPORT z 1 i DATE: July 20, 1983 1977 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Order to Vacate An Alley Located Between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Foothill Boulevard requested by Developer of D. R. 83 -08 Due to delays in obtaining the necessary documents to proceed with this vacation, Staff recommends that this item he continued to August 3, 1983. Respectfully submitted, LBH:BK:,iaa Y7 DRIVE -? HILL COUNTRY CLUB � ! °a r Ja � N P n � a cn, av,t p O , zo n 9 Ju ro .oe no 0 o 0 A � •O A � ° N 0 ° M . O y a °a r Ja � N P n � a cn, av,t p O , zo n 9 / �.� O ° .y • 0 0 A � •O A JC i / �.� O ° .y • • M E M O R A N D U M TO: Lauren Wasserman, City Clerk FROM: Robert E. Dougherty, City Attorney DATE: June 24, 1983 RE: Admissions Tax Ordinance Enclosed please find proposed Ordinance No. 198A. This is a "technical corrections ordinance ". Our publisher called our attention to the fact that our definition of "Operator in ordinance No. 198 is somewhat confusing. We agree. In the future, we should all be more careful to proofread that which we plagiarize. is RED:sjo Enclosure 12 /0 / ORDINANCE NO. • AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SUBSECTION F OF SECTION 3.36.010 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE TO DEFINE THE MEANING OF "OPERATOR" FOR PURPOSES OF THE - ADMISSIONS TAX. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Subsection F of Section 3.36.010 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "F. OPERATOR: 'operator' includes any person, association, firm, or corporation owning, operating, conducting, directing, managing, or controlling, alone or in conjunction with any other person or as an inde- pendent contractor, any event or portion thereof which is subject to any tax imposed by any provision of this Chapter." and in all other respects, Section 3.36.010 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code shall remain the same. • SECTION 2: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once in The DaT ily Report, a newspaper of general circulation, published in the—City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of 1983. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: CITY CLERK 932-7750 ode 2 GENERAL CONTRACTOR — RHONE VffAM� • 7544 CAMINO NORTE CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA July 15, 1963 City of Rancho Cucamonga 3320 gasoline Road Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Attn: Ms. Lauren M. Wasserman Gentlemen: This is a request to be placed on the Council meeting agenda for July 20 to address the problem of a enonlconforming business being conducted within a residential area at 7560 Camino Norte. Efforts have been made for six weeks to stop this operation without any success, and in telephone conversation with planner Rick Gomez this date was informed that an agreement had been made between the operators of the business and city officials to allow this business to proceed. Yours truly, cc: Richard Dahl, councilman Tom Wicum, Sheriff Jim Bowman, Foothill Fire Jim Marxen, Daily Report ID /�)3 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Co V, MEMORANDUMS ' 0 Date: July 14, 1983 'O z To: City Council and City Manager From: Bill Holley, Director, Community Services Department 19i Subject: Review of Agreement ... (for) Recreational improveme „ along the Cucamonga Creek and Demens Channel. This agreement, continued from a previous Council meetino for legal review, is being brought back for your attention on the July 20 agenda. Legally the. document is acceptable now, although very wordy and not easily deciphered in one reading. It is technically correct in total concept. A missing part of the Agreement, which the Corps has indicated it will have to us before the meeting, is the Feature Design Memorandum, listed as Exhibit "A" of the agreement. Hopefully, this will arrive with time enough to distribute to Council prior to the meeting. As a precaution, in case they do not get it here on time, I have enclosed a 'Preliminary Cost Estimate' from a memorandum to Council of October 4, 1982. (Ignore the attached costs in this document ... they have subsequently been refined ... it is provided only to show the type of amenities included within the project for your information in lieu of a timely arrival of the Feature Design Memorandum.) • Second, agreement for use of the CCWD property, which is the site of the Rest Area south of Base. Line, is progressing . . but slowly. The CCWD Board has reconsidered tying our use of the property to the prior rights issue. This is no longer a condition. This is proper as they are two separate issues. Now they are determining, through appraisal, the value of the land and its associated water rights. It is the impression given us that a mutually acceptable arrangement for park use of the property will be available for Council action in mid - August. I feel comfortable with the direction this is taking ... comfortable with its direction but not with its lengthy timing. Council Options: 1. Approve Agreement 2. Postpone, approval of agreement if the Feature Design Memorandum is not present as Exhibit "A ". (Staff is very confident that the FDM will reflect the sane concepts as cited in the previous memo attachment, but understands that council may be reluctant to sign for a 'pig -in -a- poke'.) 3. Postpone approval of agreement based on awaiting results of negotiations with cCWD. 4. Determine to reverse previously stated intent and reject Agreement. Staff Recommendation: Option No. 1. Staff believes the two problems cited in options 2 and 3 will resolve themselves in reasonably short order. There may, and probably will be, costs associated with the CCWD matter, however. rl CUCAMONGA CREEK CHANNEL • BIKE /EQUESTRIAN TRAIL SYSTEM PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE i. Baseline Road Rest /Community Park " a. Parking (30 cars) = 75,000 sq. ft. @$1.50 a 522,500.00 b. Turf (plus tillage, amend., etc.) = 75,000 so. ft. 0.30 - $22,500.00 c. Groundcover (etc.) = 60,000 sq. ft. @$.20 = $12,000.00 d. Trees and Shrubs - Allow $14,000.00 e. Masonry, Slopes, etc. = 12,000 sq. ft. @$3.00 = $36,000.00 f. irrigation = 135,000 sq. ft. @$.40 = $54,000.00 g. Restroom - Allow $45,000.00 h. Shade structure (timber beams, concrete foundation) _ (2) @$8,000.00 = $16,000.00 i. Benches (6) @$450.00 = $2,700.00 j. Signs = Allow $1,000.00 k. Picnic Tables (8) 0350.00 - $2,800.00 • 1. Drinking Fountain (2) @$350.00 = $700.00 ' M. water Supply - Allow $3,000.00 ' n. Sewage Disposal = Allow $3,000.00 " o. Electrical Supply = Allow $3,000.00 P. Bicycle Path (2) @$250.00 = $500.00 q. Railings above slopes = 700 I-f. @$3.00 - $2,700.00 r. Delete S. Equestrian /Bicycle Bridges - Allow $12,000.00 t. Bollards - Allow $300.00 U. Concrete walks = Allow $6,000.00 V. Mounding = Allow $6,000.00 W. Horse Trough - Allow $350.00 X. Horse Hitching Post (2) @$150.00 - $300.00 Y. Delete Subtotal $265,750.00 2. • Confluence Rest Stop a. Service Road /walkways (asphalt) = 11000 sq. ft. @$2.00 - $ 00 " h. Delete elete f C S 977,1MAYM L "C VT Equestrian: From Base Line to Demens Debris Basin (3.58 Miles) Bicycle: From Base Line to Beryl Avenue (3.2 Miles) 3. Trail Systems - NOTE1 Landscaping along channel reach is covered under the Cucamonga channel project (including street nodes) a. Grading, soil prep, etc. of Equestrian Trail (8 foot wide) _ 8' X 18,902' _ $.14 - $21,170.00 b. Delete C. Signs = Allow $3,000.00 d. Additiona Landscape Upgrading = Allow $10,000.00 e. At qrade crossings (3) @$3,200.00 - $9,600.00 f. Street /Trail Entrance Improvement - Allow $25,000.00 q. Ramp Deepening @Base Line Road =Allow $10,000.00 h. Typical Underpass (1) only @$75,000.00 - $75,000.00 1. Trash receptacles (12) each @$250.00 - $3,000.00 j. Bollards or restrictive gates (19) @$400.00 = $7,600.00 1 0 /, 11 " • 1. Groundcover area = 2,000 sq. ft. @$.20 = $400.00 • d. irrigation = 2,000 sq. ft. @$.40 = $800.00 e. Trees and Shrubs = Allow $3,000.00 f. Restraom = Allow $35,000.00 g. water Supply = Allow $7,000.00 h. Sewage Disposal Allow $8,000.00 i. Electrical Supply = Allow $8,500.00 j. Masonry = Allow $10,000.00 k. Mounding Allow $1,500.00 1. Shade Structure = Allow $4,000.00 m. Benches (3) @$450.00 = $1,350.00 n. Signs = Allow $600.00 o. Picnic Tables (2) @$350.00 = $700.00 P. Drinking Fountain = Allow $700.00 • q. Bike /Equestrian Bridge - Allow $12,000.00 r. Bollards = Allow $150.00 S. Bicycle Path = Allow $250.00 t. Horse Trough = Allow $350.00 U. • Horse Hitching Post (1) @$150.00 - $150.00 V. waste Receptacle (2) @$125.00 - $250.00 Subtotal $108,700.00 Equestrian: From Base Line to Demens Debris Basin (3.58 Miles) Bicycle: From Base Line to Beryl Avenue (3.2 Miles) 3. Trail Systems - NOTE1 Landscaping along channel reach is covered under the Cucamonga channel project (including street nodes) a. Grading, soil prep, etc. of Equestrian Trail (8 foot wide) _ 8' X 18,902' _ $.14 - $21,170.00 b. Delete C. Signs = Allow $3,000.00 d. Additiona Landscape Upgrading = Allow $10,000.00 e. At qrade crossings (3) @$3,200.00 - $9,600.00 f. Street /Trail Entrance Improvement - Allow $25,000.00 q. Ramp Deepening @Base Line Road =Allow $10,000.00 h. Typical Underpass (1) only @$75,000.00 - $75,000.00 1. Trash receptacles (12) each @$250.00 - $3,000.00 j. Bollards or restrictive gates (19) @$400.00 = $7,600.00 1 0 /, 11 " ' � C Subtotal $164,340.00 Total $538,790.00 • plus 88 contingency $ 43,103.00 - Denotes changes from Attachment "B" Grand Total 581,839' /67 #Cu • • • CONTRACT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA for RECREATION DEVELOPMENT at the CUCAMONGA CREEK AND DEMF.NS CREEK CHANNELS, SAN BERNARD IND COUNTY, CALIFORNIA THIS CONTRACT entered into this day of , by and between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (hereinafter called the "Government "), represented by the Contracting Officer executing this Contract and CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, (hereinafter called the "City-). WITNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS, construction of the Cucamonga Creek and Demers Creek channels, San Bernardino County, California (hereinafter called the "Project ") was authorized by Act of Congress, Flood Control Act of 1968, Public Law 90 -483, 90th Congress, 2nd session, approved on 13 August, 1968; and WHEREAS, recreational development at the project was authorized by public Law 543, 78th Congress, as amended and was included as a post authorization change of 12 May, 1976; and • WHEREAS, the City is authorized to administer project land and water areas for recreational purposes, and operate, maintain and replace facilities provided for such purposes and is empowered to contract for such purposes, and is empowered to contract in these respects; and WHEREAS, the City has the authority and capability to arrange for the non - Federal cooperation required by the Federal legislation authorizing the recreation features of the project and by their applicable law; and WHEREAS, the Government is authorized by Section 207 of the 1962 Flood Control Art, as amended, (16 U.S.C. 406 d) to make contracts with non - Federal bodies for development, management and administration of the recreation resources of Federal water resources projects; and WHEREAS, the City is required by separate agreement with the Government to acquire use rights all lands, easements, and rights -ef -way necessary for the construction of thp, . flood control features of the Project upon which the subject recreational features will also he constructed; and WHEREAS, the recreational development at Federal nonreservoir water resources projects shall be in accordance with the cost - sharing provisions in the Federal Water Resources Project Recreation Act of 1965 (Public Law 89 -72). NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: ID -1 �CS ARTICLE 1 - DEFINITION OF TERMS. For the purpose of this contract certain • terms are defined as follows: a) First costs, used interchangeable with the terms "capital costs" and "project costs ", is the initial capital recreation cost of the project, including engineering, design and sup,-rvisioe, and administrative costs. b) Recreation lands: Project lands ac•;alred primarily for recreational purposes, excluding lands nee'ed for flood control or other Project purposes. C ) Recreational facilities: Those facilities for recreation which may be installed pursuant to this agreement. ARTICLE 2 - LANDS AND FACILITIES• a) The City will secure use of any additional lands outside the boundary of the flood control features necessary for recreation, access, health and safety. b) The Government agrees to design and construct the recreation features of the Project to provide for optimum enhancement of general recreation consistent with other authorized Project purposes. Details on lands and facilities necessary for such enhancement will he shown in the Feature Design Memorandum. • c) The Government, in cooperation with the City, will prepare a mutually acceptable Feature Design Memorandum which will depict anal identify the types and quantities of facilities which the Government and the City will construct in accordance with this contract. The full cost of facilities to be so provided, as described in the Feature Design Memorandum (Exhibit A), is estimated at $570,000.00. Such estimate of facility cost is subject to reasonable adjustment as appropriate upon completion of construction and approval of the above- mentioned Feature Design Memorandum. J) The facilities shown in Exhibit A, as it may be adjusted in accordance with paragraph (c) above., shall be constructed jointly by the parties through mutually satisfactory division of responsihility for construction, which takes into account direct and indirect cost savings that may be gained by the parties in the public interest for certain specific facilities, provided, that the facilities to he constructed by each party shall be fornally agreed upon by the two parties prior to construction, consistent with the provisions of Article 3. e) Title. to all lands acquired by or with Government assistance specifically to enhance the recreation potential of the project, and title to all recreation facilities constructed on such lands, shall at all times be in the United States. • -2- J^ Title to all lands acquired by or with Government assistance for • other authorized project purposes, and title to all recreation facilities constructed on such lands, shall at all times be in public ownership. f) The performance of any obligation or the expenditure of any funds by the Government under this contract is co.tingent upon Congress making the necessary appropriations a • hei ^c allocated and made available for the work required ).,reunder. ARTICLE 3 - CONSIDERATION AND PAYMENT. Each party hereto will pay or contribute in kind fifty percent (SOB) of the first separable costs of recreation development and fifty percent (50%) of the sep.rable cost of future development. a) Initial Development. Fifty percent (504) of the estimated separable first costs of initial recreation development is estimated to be $285,000.00. Before advertisement of the first construction contract hereunder and again before advertisement of each subsequent construction contract thereafter, the Government Contracting Officer shall calculate the estimated expenditure which the Government and the City shall have made through the end of such contract. If the total estimated expenditures by the government shall exceed those of the City, the City shall pay to the Government such sum as will equalize the expenditures of both parties before award of such contract • in computing expenditures, there shall be considered, in addition to cash expenditures, contributions in kind such as land and facilities, at the fair market value thereof at the ti -e such land and facilities are provided by the City, which value shall not include enhancement due to the Project. Upon completion of initial recreation development, an adjustment will be. made on the basis of actual costs incurred. It is understood and agreed that the City's share of the cost of each construction contract shall he computed on the basis of actual costs to the Government of the work included in the Government construction contracts above and on the basis of unit prices in each Government contract and final quantities covering labor, materials, and equipment required for the work under each Governnent's constructional, engineering and overhead expense and not on the basis of previous estimates. b) Future Development. Neither the Government nor the City is obligated by this contract to undertake any future recreation development of the project, except to the extend this contract Inay be so modified by future supplemental agreement signed by all parties and approved by the Secretary of the Army or his Authorized representative. If at any time the City wishes to undertake further development of the facilities hereunder, it may do so at its expense provided prior approval of the Contracting Officer is obtained, but the Government shall not be obligated to reimburse the City for any portion of such expense R1 in the absence of a supplemental agreement hereto as aforesaid. -3- c) Other Federal Funds. No repayment credit of any kind whatsoever will be allowed the City for expenditures financed by, • involving, or consisting of, either in whole or in part, contributions or grants of assistance received from any Federal agency, except HUD block grants, in providing any lands or facilities for recreation enhancement hereunder. d) Adjustment to Reflect Costs. The dollar amounts set forth in this Article are based on the Government's best estimates, and are subject to adjustments based on the cos-s actually incurred. Such estimates are not to he construed as representations of the total financial responsibilities of each of tie parties. ARTICLE 4 - CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF ADDITIONAL FACILITIES. Certain types of facilities including, but not necessarily limited to, restaurants, lodges, golf courses, cabins, clubhouses, overnight or vacation type structures, stables, marinas, swimming pools, commissaries, chair - lifts, and such similar revenue- producing facilities may be constructed by the City or third parties and may be operated by the City or third parties as concessions. Any such construction and operation of these types of facilities shall be compatible with all project purposes and shall be subject to the prior approval of the Contracting Officer. However, the City shall not receive credit for costs of such facilities against amounts due and payable under Article 3. ARTICLE 5 - FEES AND CHARGES. The City may assess and collect fees for • entrance to developed recreation areas and for use of the recreation project facilities and areas, in accordance with a fee schedule mutually agreed to by the Government and the City. Not less often than every five (5) years, said parties will review such schedule and upon the request of either, re- negotiate the schedule. The re- negotiated fee schedule shall, upon written agreement thereto by the parties, supersede prior schedules without the necessity of modifying this contractual document. ARTICLE 6 - FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS. a) In acting under its rights and obligations hereunder, the. City agrees to comply with all applicable Federal and State laws and regulations, including by not limited to the provisions of the Davis -Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276 a -a (7)); the Contract work House and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 327 -333); and part 3 of Title 29, _'ode of Federal Regulations. b) The City furnishes, as part of this contract, an assurance (Exhibit B) that it will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ('.B Stat. 241, 42 U.S.C. 2000 d, et sec) and Department of Defense Directive 5500.11 issued pursuant thereto and published in Part 300 of Title 32, Code of Federal Regulations. The City agrees also that it will obtain such assurances from all its concessionaires. c) The City furnishes, as part of this contract, its assurance that • it will comply with Section 210 and 305 of the Uniform Relocation Assistance. and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Public Law 91 -646). -4- ) I • ARTICLE 7 - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE. The City shall provide for the operations, maintenance and replacement without cost to the Government of all facilities developed to support project recreation opportunities. The City shall provide for the maintenance of all project lands, waters, and facilities to the satisfaction of the Contracting Officer. ARTICLE P - RELEASE OF CLAIMS. The Government and its officers and employees shall not be liable in any manner to the City for or on acco:at of damage caused by the development, operation and maintenanc- of the recreation facilities of the Project. The City hereby releases the C..evernment and agrees to hold it free and harmless and to indemnify it `rem all damages, claims or demands that may result from development, operation arl maintenance of the recreation areas and facilities. ARTICLE 9 - TRANSFER OF ASSIGNMENT. The City shall not transfer or assign this contract nor any rights acquired thereunder, nor grant any interest, privilege or license whatsoever in connection with this contract without the approval of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative except as provided in Article 4 of this contract. ARTICLE. 10 - DEFAULT. In the event the City fails to meet any of its obligations under this agreement, the Government may terminate the whole or any part of this contract. The rights and remedies of the Government provided in this Article shall not be exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this contract. • ARTICLE, 11 - EXAMINATION OF RECORDS. The Government and the City shall maintain hooks, records, documents, and other evidence pertaining to costs and expense incurred under this contract, to the extent and in such detail as will proporly reflect all net costs, direct and indirect, of labor, materials, equipment, supplies, and services and other costs and expenses of whatever nature involved herein. The Government and the City shall make available at their offices at reasonable times, the accounting records for inspection and audit by an authorized representative of the parties to this contract during the period this contract is in effect. ARTICLE 12 - RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES. The parties to this contract act in an independent capacity in the performance of their respective functions under this contract and neither party is to be considered the officer, agent, or employee of the other. ARTICLE 13 - INSPFCTION. The Government shall at all times have the right to make inspections concerning the operation and maintenance of the lands and f.militics to be provided hereunder. ARTICLE 14 - OFPICIALS NOT TO BENEFIT. No member of or delegate to the Congress, or Resident Commissioner, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract, or to any benefit that may arise therefrom; but this provision shall not he construed to extend to this contract if made with a corporation for its general benefit. -5- I ! ,7 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this contract as of the day and year first above written. • THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA By Colonel, Corps of Engineers Commanding Contracting Officer APPROVED: By Deputy Commander, ASACE Authorized Representative Secretary of the Army 11 J CITY OF RANCHO COCAMONGA City of rancho Cucamonga Da to ATTEST By City Clerk • • 0 • is CERTIFICATION I. Robert E. Dougherty, as Attorney for the City of Rancho Cucamcrca, State of California, hereby certify that the foregoing agreement executed by Jon D. Mikels, Mayor of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, is w--`Ain the scope of his authority, and that in my capacity as Chief Legal Officer for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, I have considered the legal effects of Section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962 -5b) and find tha� the City of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California, is legally and financially capable of entering into the contractual obligations obtained in the foregoing agreement and that, upon acceptance, it will be legally enforceable. Given under my hand, this day of , 1983. City Attorney City of Rancho Cucamonga P ll ASSURANCE OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DIRECTIVE UNDER TITLE VI OF CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 • City of Rancho Cucamonga (hereinafter called "Applicant- Recipient ") HEREBY AGREES THAT it will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88 -35) and all requirements imposed by or pursuant to the Department of Defense Directive 5500.11, December 28, 1964 issueE; pursuant to that title, to the end that, in accordance with title VI of that Act and the Directive, no person in the United States shall, on the •.riund of race, color, sex, or national origin be excluded from participat.i -n in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity for which the Applicant- Recipient receive; Federal financial assistance from the Department of the Army, and HEREBY GIVES ASSURANCE THAT it will immediately take any measures necessary to effectuate this agreement. If any real property or structure thereon is provided or improved with the aid of Federal financial assistance extended to the Applicant- Recipient by the Department of the Army, assurance shall obligate the Applicant- Recipeint, in the case of any transfer of such property, any transferee, for the period during which the real property or structure is used for a purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits. If any personal property is so provided, this assurance shall obligate the Applicant- Recipient for the period during which it retains ownership or possession of the property. In all other cases, this assurance shall obligate the Applicant- Recipient for the period during which the Federal financial assistance is extended to it by the Department of the Army. • THIS ASSURANCE is given in consideration of and for the purpose of obtaining any and all Federal grants, loans, contracts, property, discounts or other Federal financial assistance extended after the date thereof to the Applicant- Recipient by the Deparment, including installment payments after such date on account of arrangements for Federal financial assistance which were approved before such date. The Applicant - Recipient recognizes and agrees that such Federal financial assistance will be extended in reliance on the representations and agreements made in this assurance, and the United States have the right to seek judicial enforcement of this assurance. This assurance is binding on the Applicant- Recipient, its successors, transferees, and assignees and the person or persons whose signatures appear below are authorized to sign this assurance on behalf of the Applicant - Recipient. By Jon Mikels, Mayor Da te: EXHIBIT B IIh I 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 20, 1983 1977 TO: Members of the City Council and City Manager FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Rick Marks, Associate Planner SUBJECT: INLAND MEDIATION BOARD: 1983 -84 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES ABSTRACT: This report contains information regarding existing fair housing services provided by the Inland Mediation Board and a proposed new contract for 1983 -84. BACKGROUND: As a recipient of federal Community Development Block Grant funds, the City of Rancho Cucamonga is obligated by program regulations to provide fair housing services to City residents. The City has, for the last year as an Entitlement City and for several years prior as part • of the San Bernardino County Cooperating Cities Program, contracted for these services with Inland Mediation Board (formerly the West End Mediation Board). ANALYSIS: For the first five months of the last CDBG program year July 1, 1982 - November 30, 1982), the City of Rancho Cucamonga contracted for fair housing services independent of other jusrisdictions. The final arrangements under that contract were as follows: July 1, 1982 - November 30, 1982 City of Rancho Cucamonga $875 (based upon a monthly cost of $175 over a 5 -month period of time) I Early in the year, the West End Mediation Board was notified by the City of Ontario that it would no longer be contracting for services with them and could no longer afford to donate City Hall office space, equipment, and supplies to them (items which helped to keep Rancho Cucamonga's costs down). The West End Mediation Board relocated to Rancho Cucamonga, reformed as the Inland Mediation Board, and asked Rancho Cucamonga to join a consortium of service users consisting of the City and the County of San Bernardino and Rancho Cucamonga. This request and a revised contract with the Inland Mediation Board were approved by the City Council in January 1983. Inland Mediation Board City Council Agenda July 20, 1983 Page 2 • The City's existing contract for fair housing services, based on a seven (7) month funding cycle approved in January 1983, consists of the following financial arrangements: City of Rancho Cucamonga $ 2,100 6% City of San Bernardino 12,282 35% County of San Bernardino 20,709 59% Total $35,091 100% 1982 -83 Year -end Statistics Total City dollars expended $2975 on fair housing services $2800 - 2nd Contract) Total Rancho Cucamonga Cases 145 handled by IMB (WEMBg Average number of cases 12 handled per month Average cost to City $20.52 • per case handled Under the conditions of the proposed new contract, the obligations and expectations of each party to the contract remain essentially unchanged. The budget, based on a 12 -month cycle, is as follows: City of Rancho Cucamonga $ 2,921 4% City of San Bernardino 25,000 34% County of San Bernardino 45,099 62% Total $73,020 100% RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attaehea Resolution approving the contract with the Inland Mediation Board and authorize the Mayor to execute it. tfull yZbmitted, Rick 6omE+,t.../ r ity planner . G:RM:jr Attachments: Agreement with Inland Mediation Board Resolution of Approval l--� A G R E E M E N T • • THIS AGi.Er -am is m'ide and entered into this day of 1963, by and between the Corcwnity Development Co=,issien of the City of San Ecrnardio, hereinafter reterred to as "CU IISSI0:1 ", the COU,'M OF SAM EEF?L'vRDR:O, hereinafter referred to as "COLNly ", the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and the Inland mediation Board, a non- profit organization hereinafter referred to as "MUD "; for purposes c`_ establishi.g and irpl.nting a Fair Housing Program to service residents —' the above referenced areas. W I T N E S S E T H S =A.S, pursuant to Section 570.304 (h) (2) (iii) of the Federal Regulaticns, the Ccmcission, County, and City are mandated to irple, t a strategy for increasing the housing opportunities for members of minority groups and female -head households, and including etforts to achieve spatial deconcentration of such housing opportunities and actions to affirmatively further fair housing and; MIEPFTS, the Comrission, County, City and Board propose to provide the community with a local office for receiving assistance in resolving complaints with regard to housing discrimination and landlord /tenant problems; and M EREAS, tale Commission, County, City and Board recognizes the need to inform the public of the law with regard to housing discrimination, landlord /tenant rights, and building and safety laws in order to foster affivicative action to eliminate housing discrimination; and W aTTii;Z, the Courassion, County, City and Board recognize the need to encourage the resolution of caTlaints through the process of mediation; and 1,71EFT,N3, the Ccamission, County and City have received CDBG funds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (hereinafter referred to as "HUD ") to be used for the implementation and maintcn:ance of a Fair Housing Program; and Dm, 'PIUMZORE, the Ccardssion, County, City acid Board, for and an ccnsideration of the mutual. premises and agrcurrnts herein contained, do agree as fol,luas: 'Mo Comnio: ;ion, County, and City resmve the right to review and approve action and decisions related Lo all applicable regulations. I!� 2. Each party agrees to indemnify, defend, and save harmless the other party from any and all claims, losses, or damages occurring or resulting from, any negligent or wrongtul act or omission of its . officers, agents, or employees in the performance of this contract. 3. The Co.^,mission, County, and City recognizes the Hoard as an independent non - profit organization and agrees tc cooperate in protecting its image as a politically neutral organizat:_�. 4. The service area is the County of San Bernardino excluding the City of Ontario. 5. The Board shall be responsible for: a. Hiring, salary, benefits, and full responsihility for its staff; Is. Training volunteers to handle mediation sessions, perform telephone counseling, and initiate conplaint resolution; C. Making an effort to negotiate or mediate a remedy between landlords and tenants; d. Accepting complaints from individuals alleging discrimination in housing; e. Making an effort to negotiate or mediate cases of discrimination • in housing and if unsuccessful refer cases for further investigation to State Department of Fair Fhployment and Housing; f. Providing mortgage detault counseling services; g. Publicizing the existence of the Board throughout the service area; h. Preparing monthly statistical reports for the County, Commission and City on the number of complaints /questions, the status of their resolutions, and related information as required and requested by the Canmission, County or City; i. Conducting two housing workshops per year to inform the entire community as to its rights and responsibilities under State and Federal laws with respect to fair housing; j. Disseminating materials to the public regarding State and Federal laws with respect to fair housing; k. Acting as referral agency for those p>rsons who require technical or professional inform -ition as mny be available from existing caanwnity organizations or other institutions; and 1. Handling all ac.'�inistrative duties pertaiing to accrued costs of •oVxttion and paying all bill::. 2 • W.. Participating in the training program for the San Bernardino Ccnrr:nity Housing Board (CHRB) n. Furnishing the County, Comnissien and city with a copy of a financial audit corpleted within 12 months of execution of contract, but in no case later than June 30, 1984. 6. In consideration for the services perforred by the Boar,: tereunder the Cm, ssion, County and City shall fund the activities of the Board under this Agreement uOng the method of pay� . describk.� below: F]EIBCD OF PAA RM The total contract amount for this project is $73,020. The allocation breakdown includes: City of Rancho Cucamonga 48 or $ 2,921.00 City of San Bernardino 348 or 25,000.00 County of san Bernardino 628 or 45,099.00 IVIAL ALLOCATIOU 73,020.00 Upon execution of the contract and release of funds from the Deparumnt of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the Commission and County will pay to the Board in twelve (12) equal instalLments beginning July 1, 1983, the =mounts indicated below: • County of San Bernardino $2,083.00 City of San Bernardino 3,159.00 5,842.6-0 Upon execution of the contract and release of funds from the Department of Housrng and Urban Bevelopnrnt, the City will pay to the Board, in a lip sum, the amrnmt indicated below. City of Rancho Cucamonga $2,921.00 Pl TOrr SI WRY AND gVIAL COMVkCr n-aI1T $73,020.00 The Board will be rewired to provide proper hick -up docu;en4ition to support all expenditures prior to disbursement of monthly installments. 7 This Agreement miy lie vrrncled or-tiaaiLtied ,,r:y-try wrir...rr ayru iu,L- signal by all parties; and failure on the pat of either party to enforco any provjsicn of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of the right to corq)el enforcaxcnt of such provision or provisions. 8. All participx,,ts of this ,gre.t must act in accordance with L�ccutive Order tdo. 1124G which provides that no person shall be discriminated against on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in all pfv8os of cuploynert during the performvse of federally assisted contracts. 3 1!, 9. This Agreere t shall be in effect frcn July 1, 1983 through June 30, 1984. . IN WITNESS WHEPBDi', the parties have caused this Agre it to be executed as of the day and year first written above. BY Agency and Co:miission Legal Counsel APPROVED AS TO FORA: By County Counsel BY City Attorney P3 -nUnID 6!13/83/jl ) ^I I COR UNITY DEVE[ME77: CCi`4tIS.SION OF THE CITY OF SAN I.: 7APD]NO By Chairman COUNTY OF SAN BMINAMIM BY— Chairman of the Board • CITY OF RANCHO CU)0Wa%GA TI FIT , -13 671.79 � By- Chairman at the Board BY EXec=ive Director • • RESOLUTION NO. * A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, AND INLAND MEDIATION BOARD, A NON - PROFIT ORGANIZATION, FOR THE PURPOSES OF ESTABLISHING A CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENT PROVIDING f n FAIR HOUSING PROGRAM TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OFV RANChO CUCAMCSCA WHEREAS. the City of Rancho Cucamonga is an Entitlement City under the regulations of the Federal Community Development Block Grant Program and therefore has the obligation to provide fai., housing services to City residents; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to enter :nto a contractual arrangement to continue to provide services which assist the city in pursuing matters of fair housing; and WHEREAS, this agreement is pursuant to Section 570304 (h)(2)(iii) of the applicable federal regulations and is designed to implement a strategy for increasing the choice of housing opportunities for tow and moderate income persons, including members of minority groups and female households and to promote actions to affirmatively further fair housing. _ . NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as fcllows: SECT I0:1 1: To approve the contract between the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the ity of San Bernardino, the County of San Bernardino and the Inland Mediation Board for the purpose of establishing a Fair Housing Program. SECTION 2: That the City Council direct the Mayor to execute the contract with the nland Mediation Board. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 20th day of July, 1983. AYES: NOES: I E I 114, — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �x"MOro STAFF REPORT . < GATE: July 20, 1983 0 A TO: City Council and City Manager I =-,, U � Z > FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer 7977 SUBJECT: National Flood Insurance Program, FlooJ ;;azard Map Update Attached for the Commissions review are recent correspondence received from the Federal Emergency Management Agency concerning the newly revised Flood Hazard and Insurance Maps and the procedure the City must accomplish to enroll to the regular Flood Insurance Program. The City currently is participating in the interim program and has adopted into the Municipal Code the necessary measures to qualify for the program. The newly revised flood hazard map reflects changes in flood hazard related to the construction of the Cucamonga Creek Project. The areas west if the alignment of Milliken Avenue have been removed as category AO flood hazard and been designated as Category B subject to infrequent 500 year flood potential. From a practical standpoint this relieves a great many areas of the City from restrictive flood insurance mitigation measures and federal insurance requirement on F.H.A. and similarly funded loans. • The new map retains the AO designation for most of the area between Etiwanda Avenue and Milliken Avenue throughout the City Limits or roughly the nits of the Day Creek watershed. The effect of this designation is to place severe restriction on the development and financing of development within the limits of this designation. In the absence of City certification of protection development of these areas will be prohibited from F.H.A. financing and most other financing as a result. In order for the City to retain eligibility for Flood assistance and other federal funding programs within flood hazard areas must enroll in the regular program. The Flood Hazard Maps are preliminary at this time and are subject to review until the end of October. The City must then submit all commen's generated or received requesting revisions. Following this review the Council must adopt Ordinances qualifying for acceptance into the program. A model Ordinance is _._ _atd ach Pd. for -ywr 1nfhcnlPtl40�--- --- I will have the maps available for review at the meeting and will further explain ramification of the Flood Insurance Program. Respec fully su�ttQd,4 GLA71fiH s City V neer n �. 3 Federal Emergency Management Agency 7 k• >'"�,Yp '/ Washington, D.C. 20472 JUN 171903 CERTIFIED MAIL_ _ SL-4T-NH: RLrURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 155 Honorable John Mikles ' Mayor, City of Raacn....wamonga 9320 Baseline Road P.O. Box 807 • "' ' Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Dear Mayor Mikles: On May 18, 1983, a fina& community coordination meeting was held for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Prior to that meeting our regional representa- tive provided you with a preliminary draft of the flood insurance study for the community- This study includes certain base flood elevations and was prepared pursuant to provisions of t`,e National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended (Public Law 90 -448, signed August 1, 1968). The purpose of this letter is to notify your community of the proposed base flood elevations which will be the basis for the flood plain management measures that the community must either adopt or show evidence of being already in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National • Flood Insurance Program. Public notification of the proposed base flood elevation determinations is being given in the Ontario Daily Heoort on or about June 23, 1983 and June 30, 1983. A copy of this Bali ica ti on is enclosed. In addition, a notice of Proposed ease Flood Elevation Determinations will be published in the Federal Register. Section 110 of the Flood nisyster Protection Act of 1973 (Public Law 93 -234) is intended to assure an equ.table balancing of all the interests involved in the setting of flood ele•ation determinations. The legislation provides for an explicit process of notification and appeals for the community and for private persons prior to this office making the final flood elevation determinations. we have outlined the appeal procedure below for your information at this time. The regulations developed by this agency to implement Section 110 may he found in Part 67 of Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Copies cf. r_he-Act ;nd aCe rnEIgSed During the ninety -day appeal period following the second publication in the above -named newspaper, any owner or lessee of real property in the community who believes his property rights will be adversely affected by the proposed base flood elevation determination may appeal to you, or to an agency that you pulaicly dooignate. it is important to note, however, that the sole basis for such appeals is the possession of knowledge or information indicating that the proposed base flood elevation determinations are scientifically or technically incorrect. This appeal data must be submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency during the 90 -day appeal period. only appeals Page Two of the proposed base flood elevations supported by data, can be considered before the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes its final determin- ation at the end of the ninety -day period. Note that the ninety -day period is statutory and cannot be extended for any reason. Appeals of the proposed base flood elevations shall be based only upon scientific and technical evidence contrary to that of the FSMA study. However, inquiries regarding f.tta other than the proposed base flood elevation (i.e., incorrect street names, typo- graphical errors or omissions, etc.), will be considered ny PENA, and any applicable changes will be made before the Flood insurance Study and Rate Map becomes effective. If your community cannot submit technical data before the end of the 90-day appeal period, you may nevertheless submit data at any time. If warranted, FENA will revise the Rate Map after the effective date. This means that the Rate Map would be issued with the elevations as presently indicated, and flood insurance requirements would be enforced accordingly, until such time as a revision could be made. Private persons who wish to appeal should present the data that tend to negate or contradict our findings to you in such form as you may specify. We ask that you review and consolidate any appeal data you may receive, and issue a written opinion stating whether the evidence presented is sufficient to justify an official appeal on behalf of such persons by the community in its own name. Whether or not the community decides to appeal, you must send copies • of appeal data from individuals, if any, to this ,ffice as they are received. we do not receive appeal data from your community in its own name within ninety days of the second date of public notification, we shall consolidate and review on their own merits such appeal data from individuals that you may forward to us and we shall make such mpdifiaticis oC the proposed elevation determinations as may be appropriate. I£ the community decides to appeal in its own name, all individuals' appeal data must be consolidated into one appeal by you, Since, in this event, we are required to deal only with the local government as representative of al♦ local interests. Our f{.nal decision will be in writing to you and copies will be sent to each individual appellant, and to the state coordinating agency. The appeal resolution process will fully take into vccoant any technical or scientific data submitted by the CG- munity that tend to negate or contradict the information upon, which the proposed determination is based. The appeal will be resolved by consultation with officials of the local government involved, cg ba. an , _.... . LIz t fYf ti :!' 6ZL --- to an indep- ndent scientific body or __ r -. • —. - appropriate Federal agency for advice. The method for resolution will be determined by FE24A. The reports and other information used in making the final determination will be made available for public inspection. Until the conflict of data is resolved, and until the Flood Insurance Rate Map becomes effective, flood insurance currently available within the community shall continue to be available under the Emergency Program, and no person shall be denied the right to purchase the first level of insurance at chargeable rates. • 10'5 Page Three • The decision by the community to appeal, or a copy of its decision not to appeal, should be filed with this office no later than 90 days following the second publication of proposed base flood elevations. You may find it appropriate to call further attention to the proposed base flood elevation determinations and to the appeal procedure by using a piass release or other public notice. 16 If warranted by substantive changes, this office will revi•,,e and Send to you during the appeal period copies of the preliminary Flood Insurance Study and Rate Map. The Revised Preliminary will include all appropriate consents and corrections resulting from the final coordination meeting held May 18, 1983. At the end of the 90 -day appeal period and following t: -e resolution of any appeals, we shall send you the PROOF Copy of the study with a letter of final base flood el.evation determinations. If there are further questions regarding the flood elevation determinationa or the Flood Insurance Study for the community, please contact the Chief, Natural and Technological Hazards Division of ilia Federal Emergency Management Agency in San Francisco at (415) 556 -9840 or members of my Staff in Washington, D.C., at (202) 287 -0230. Sincerely, Richard E. Sanderson, Chief fICLI-� Natural Hazards Division Office of Natural and Technological Hazards Enclosures cc: Luren Wasserman, City Manager F,/ NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations AGENCY: Federal °mergency Management Agency. ACTION: Proposed Rule. SUMMARY: Technical in Cnrmation or comments are solicited on the oroposed base (100 -year) flood elevations listed below for selected locations in the nation. These base (100-year) flood elevations are the basis for the flood plain manage- ment measures that the community is required to either adopt or show evidence of being already in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for partici -. pation in the Nat4onal Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). DATES: The period for comment will be ninety (90) days following the second Publication of thin proposed rule in a newspaper of local circulation in each community. ADDRESSES: See table '�iow. • • FOR. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Brian R. MraziK Chief, Engineering Branch Natural Hazards Division Federal Emergency Management Agency Wasnington, U.C. 20472 (202) 287 -0230 SU.^P:,C-ICiTARY INFOWIATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency gives notice of the proposed .leterminations of base (100 -yesr) flood elevations, in accordance with Sectinn 110 of the Flocd Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (Pit. L. 93 -234), 87 Seat. 480, which a'de.3 Scotian 1343 to the National Ficod insurance Act of 1968 (Title %III of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 (Pub. L. 90- 448)), 42 U.S.C. 4001 -4128, and 44 CFR 67.4(x). The ^e elevations, toc .ier with the flood plain management measures required • b; -- c -tion 60.3 of the prcnran regulations, are the s.inimum that are requires. Tney should not be oonstr -, 1 to mean t..a cammunity must chan)n any existing ordinances that ,re more stringent in their flood plain management requirements. ,rho c=. unity s:ay at any time enact stricter requirements on its own, or pursuant to policies nstabliahed by nther Federal, Stete, or regional entities. These proposed elevations will a_so he used to r1leu :ate the appropriate flood ins.0 - anee premium rates for new buildings and their rontents and for the second Layer of insurance an existing buildings and their content.. Is n� Pursuant to the provisions of 5 USC 605(6(, the Associate Director, to ' whom authority has been delegated by the Director, Federal Emergency Wanagemer.• Agency, hereby certifies that the proposed flood elevation determinations, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of srall entitles. A flood elevation determination under Section 1363 forms the basis for new local ordinances, which, if adopted by a local comm:mlty, _ill govern future construction within the flood plain area. The elevation determinations, however, impose no restriction unless and until the local co=unity voluntarily adopts flood plain ordinances in accord with these eleva- tions. Even if ordinances are adopted in compliance with Federal standards, the elevations prescribe how high to build in the flood plain and do not pro- scribe development. Thus, this action only forms the basis for future local actions. It imposes no new requirement; of itself it has no economic impact. List of Subjects in as CFR Part 67. Flood Insurance, Flood Plains. are: The proposed base (100 -year( flood elevations for selected locations Proposed Base (100 -year) Flood Elevations Above Ground *Elevation in State City /Town /County Source of Flooding Location Feet (BGVD) r ^alifotnia Rancho Cucamon;a East Etiwanda Creek • (City) San Sevaine Channel Cucamonga Creek Channel (shallow flooding) Day Creek Channel (shallow, fl.-Iding) Deer Creek Channel (ahallaw flooding) 10 feet upstream from center of Atchison Topeka, 6 Santa Fe Railway crossing •1123 20 feet upstream from center of Arrow Route -1154 Approximately 800 fert south from intersection of Ilex Avenue and Whittram Averse •1118 600 feet west from - ntersection of 19th Stu et and Sapphire Street I1 At intersection of Rochester Avenue and Foothill Boulevard I1 1800 feet northwest from the con- fluence of Hillside Channel with Deer Creek channel I1 Maps available for inspection at City Engineer's office, 9320 Baseline Mad, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Send comments to Honorable John Mikles, 9320 Baseline Road, P.O. Box 807, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. E U.S. and Housing .. Urban Development Feral Insurance Admri,sliatiori 0 N.M,mli FI..d In SUrance wi r program Entering the Regular Program Community Assistance Series No. 3 '17i 7 qm- WA, 1;4 w�- Foreword Ti- c guide Wrk is designed Io gr'e =a; .,i,.,;ia,s an ovc,lew of the nhationshp between I ^elr crntmunity and R a Federal Insurance Admn,svaIion m the in, nips Allowing the meeting at which he completed Floed!nsurance Stuny is presented to Ire 10mmority It is intended to summarize an oflan misunderstood: recess Heading this pubi cation will insure an awareness of !hie naht5 a ^m •asoonsmimies of cony ntunitie5 p� ¢p., ,g to enter The final pha' , of the National Flood Insurance Program, called the Regular Program 1 � �n The Community Assistance Series CI publications is one comoo ,ehl of the Federal Insurance ArTminsinaucn s efforts to provide general and Technical ,.formation on The Program We are always available to ass6T commur, Iles,n adaressmg issues aTsing from these publications er from any other aspect of the Program Y is only Through mutual understanding and i mat we may effectively protect lives and properly trom tutme nood.ng Gloria M Jimenez Federal Insurance Admmisf ator Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 Seventh Street, S W Washington, 0 C 20410 •1 r1 U • I. introduction 'ti's oub!rCaOOa c'escno"!he Fnne•9i In, unripe Administration s i r iA 7 procoCures and your communM s rgnts anC resnonsibillt'es as /ou oreoare to enter The prermarera Rego'.ar Program phase of the tdarional Flood :nsu•apc,, Program Over about the next 11 month, . son the FIA arc: your Cornmurnry will ,see to wore. Closely together b make sum that you enter the Requiar Program wimoul delay This Crercal Irene period is orchneo n Prgore One This pubPcaiac will also explain the one s of the Program am, the role of the Fl000 Insurance Stud: in reaching there (goals As was emphasized by the PTA reumsentatrve at the meeting to present the POW Insurance Sluoy. the Study will be an important factor affecting'urure uses in the flood plain The Study's Case f boil' elevalions and other mformalion. Showing the degree of good risk, will pro'nde the basis for a comprehensive flood plain management" program The base flood elevations and risk zones in the Study indioale what actuarial` insurance rates will apply to all new conw,ucPon and subslarri al imp•ovemenls Io ex5!ing conslroCl'gn Local citizens will be required to protect new or Substantially improved structures in the flood plain to The base final level shown in the SlUdy. in older b obtain a building permit and bo able to purchase reasonably priced floodinsurance This Study will be the basis for', Ou' Aommunrty'S flood pia, management prngram rn the coming years Carelur revrow of The Study by hood plain residents and local officials is merer^re impnnant grid strongly enmuragotl _ MMnU.. One prpvid CS mformal'p•r nn h ,. !-, rmpnal d�.,r nssary A W day aoi: is pe•'od is ron—d.ly scnecwecto Oegut s,li no:a co'nmunc. s presented w+'n a Sooy T4r5 aopea ', cenoo will Ohre y,pr co'rmuncvy —^ to'eview ME, Sudvs c 31a for accur,6y bebre I is !.naived F 111ov.ing lms appears Dil titers" appears are resolved and F IA nas made a final determination of base !loud elevations your ccmmur ;y wee have six months to formally make use of the Study data by adooling I:ood plain management measures meeting Regular Program requirements rASW,[.m,M.. r.nlMrv..rn....mrrq i. .,ir[nrn n.'M m.1 rr vr.r. arnr. rrvp �0 •'r j �� Ell' Figure One Typical Timetable for Entering the Regular Program 1 {6l. 2 1.. 1— ma t 3 4„a{ _ 4 I I1Ilkl---er 3Arowris-- - - - - -i IMonth —► 6M0ver; (dOerOx 1 I (api 1 I Flood 90 Day Insurance Appeal Period Study canl.,'n a!l.w5 Mmating sirs mr +m„ Fgx;r,twarc! Insurance Programis that flood plain SWr we<mlew s;an �l�s �-vr> CMrrAnM !nur•yq;•4uraK! generalized flood plan management which will decrease their reliance on the elevation of the first floor relative to techniques Now. you have a definite C11-1 — =� ^J. 5 ammo ash r; ^r..,,r rere+0 r0[YOarr�,P $u' G'A nrttwSws C. ^mr, ^ran "[.ir r«vi, N o•,m..n structures under the Regular Program rnr,..•.nl.. m olPis rJ tmr ixnnn.�ny Aiw Oscu55<y MrvrM.ve n sf..e- r+s.wi n ilA TYFO fawn price. if your flood plain management (1 e. to obtain low -onced flood COr.mi,nn n" N n.eC arras o; au. mfi of xrrN r K! are oroleced to me base Cold level enforcing the food plain ordinance will be eased frv!(rttopYS 5uM y ',1nArFnwM RYMYW fo rvvtl.nln wrM ill o•PnaKe rXrevN +rT'M 0 5 6 7 At- 8? MUrwtc! pw"ApUea IBryn COmlrwr I FCw E.ix ee,�N F Pill, MME'PtyM �nA Oi,<y, Gilsews V•9pr 6.h rrrQ, ]tarn .,.- .nrcu 4'WV' .wr.p Mtta3.f''Or aJlbr SDl "11 �NMwrn np,r3 OM LPr5r�0[t` IVnrunr'r arras •... Jrvrrxxr O.O'n{n[4 wpir) ^��_ [rigy wnr M[Pr'a' (r ^re + <w5n n <K ^orrrve•'a ^t s•a b�a.;rve. ^ys ra HMr•vS S.I K[w n<' 1<lnl GSA wri iM h��reryrC aef ,r...,NY was py. tic van r "n py . r•em Nre.NNx'(rA l llx ISr,rrvirn 3W'^14 Cp^munrry rVMM`'S.Me �l�4'lCmv•r!,51 Knvld I< rr+mown•ryr/m rlvr"e^arlx It. Your Flood Plain However, II a variance allows a structure Unless you were able to obtain flood Management Program to be built below the base flood level', elevation data from other sources, your A principle underlying the Nalronaf Flood much higher flood Insurance premiums flood plain management program In the Insurance Programis that flood plain will be charged as illustrated in Appendix pest was probably aimed at fairly resi l^ will purchase flood Insurance. Two Actuarial premium, are based on generalized flood plan management which will decrease their reliance on the elevation of the first floor relative to techniques Now. you have a definite assistance dger Jlsaslers Thelnsurance the base flood Premiums go up quickly flood protection elevation stdpgard li and flood plain management partsgl toe, lbe.mcreth2 i,r! ier a cgitii,f5uiposes ✓rUgnIthwOriliogether floodnsorance base flood elevation since the frequency for new ur substantiary Improved and soya, ry of damage will be Increased structures under the Regular Program Because citizens will have an economic can be purchased at a relatively low Incentive for protecting their property price. if your flood plain management (1 e. to obtain low -onced flood Program has ensured lhal the structures Insurance). the community If lob of are oroleced to me base Cold level enforcing the food plain ordinance will be eased • Wit nrm'.y.11.y,N yv.Ir< :lit elp.nwmm! ipyyl rY.p Mp.rnl bMlKJ yv<i A rM MrulJn.t 2 '�� mwv=wfnwMMren, • � I i E Because of the more derailed data provided in ine Study, our minimum requirements for the cont -nuat ion of Program eligibility become more specr io Your current hood plain ortlinance will probably not sal.sy, all of the Regular Program reouirements at this time Beginning with the mei to present the Flood Insurance Study. FIA Regional Office staff will be working with your community to make sure that you know how t0 satisfy the Regula' Program requirements It is essential that your community work closely with FIA to See the; the draft ordinance being considered for adoption meets minimum FIA requirements You may choose to Satisfy these requirements by amending an existing ordinance. by adopting an oromance spec, al ly suited to local reeds, or by adopting a sample ordinance which has been approved by FIA Your FIA ^ontact person will discuss the relative beoef is of each of the above approaches with your community 4lowever you choose to meet the additional requirements.:hey must be met by the date the Fl000 Insurance Rate Map ,n the Study becomes effective it your community wishes to continue the availability of flood assurance The Flood Insurance Rate Map will become effective about 11 months airer the Study is presented to your community In the next section, we will discuss our procedures to guarantee that your community is aware of this approaching deadline III. FIA's Responsibility During the Conversion Period About one month after the close of your appeals Period, or after all appeals have been resolved, FIA will send a letter formally notifying your community of the final I" elevation determination The leper states That the elevalims will become effecove,n six months This starts the clack for the six -month conversion Period in which your community prepares to enter the Regular Program. The letter also alerts you that an ordinance meeting FIA 's Regular Program requirements most be effective by the end of the conversion period, Of your community Wishes to continue the availability of flood Insurance, Three months later, if an acceptable effective ordinance has not yi coon received at the FIA Regona, Office, a 'x30- day," folkM -UP letter will be sent This alerts a cominti that only three months remain in Inc conversion period, and that the commune has not yet adopted an ordinance meeting the Regular Program requirements One month before the end of the conversion Perim, a "final ales" letter will be sent if a compliant ordinance has no! been received. The lener will advise the community that its eligibility in the Program will be suspended 30 goys later, unless an orcinance meeting the Program requirements is adopted by the community and approved by FIA In addition to these formal letters. our staff will assist you m preparing the flood plain managemem measures. _ _ . _ With these two formal reminder letters and several personal contacts. we feel cen air. ;hat your community will be aware of its alternatives long before the time the "final alert " letter is sent, one month before your community is scheduted to enter the Regular Program ) '�% IV, YourCommunitys Responsibility During the Conversion Period It is essential that your responsible official walk closely wth FIA to ensure that the dart ordinance being considered for adoption meets mimmuna F!A requirements. Amendments to existing ordinances or development of spec al ordinances may, require more coordmal on than using a sample ortlinance. In any event. preparation I. a draft early in the six -month oonwn&On period, or, even prior to that Perri wig avoid a last minute. ,rconvenli rushed adoption procedure We must stress the advisability of senJl g the draft ordinance to the FIA Pegonal Office for renew, well Leto a the Scheduled adoption Oral in this way can we assure you that net ordinance wil meet the mmimum Rogram f"Ifements It ymir community wishes to continue its eligibility m the Program without Interruption, it has a responsibility to assign a caomunty oflicrai to work with FIA a avoid the delays caused by a lack Of coordination. This ofICIal should begin to draw up a Schedule like Figure Two, outlining the steps and! time factors involved In adopting an ortlinance. The key date in ih: schedule will be the data by which your adoption process must begin in order to have an effective ordinance by the end of the corwerson period (Some ordinances do not bacomeeffecive until sometime alter adoption) Fgure Two Sample Schedule 1 2 3 1 vontn (apD(Ox ) 3 Months Flood Insurance 90 Day Study Meeting Appeal Period A Name Address B Name Al `, Name Add`ess n u D Name Add,ess - Key: A FIA Contact Person 6 Community Chief px=culwe 011f cc, P Community Coordinator of Appears Add reSS "hero Maps will oe 4ep! during Armea s Phi iod D Community ContaO to; Dralpng Flucd Plain Management Measures E LIM of ihp,iri.^i'red l n Prepdnnn Fbn^ Plain Maeacgemenl Measures IE ,ample Community Alitnmey Planning Deparin,nnt Zoning Ucola Lxal Environmental G'oup Pelf, I Cnntar t P„nini ;rain :o hi .i ., -.,. F f3WVIoenacI Fro, IP1,1.11 ManagenentM PAS ;,m- (; PIC edoral Pegwrrn.q „IS'U r ^nq' F ")nil F'.nri Marggenin,nt MndmmI: IELamole nllmbar I'd l,nu'g pl °,.I, •pl nnnpn•p,nJw 1, n Jn L,•Iw!!nn Arinni n'itLJn n'ii CIIPCIrvC dale etc t H JLhMi ICODOo of COnipintiOn o'I Psi Dan Schi led DXPof or, o' Fnal Dralt for PIA Approval J Scheduled Date For Adoption Yi ieheduled Date for SuoollSsion of Cerlirien (PdirytneC In I iA r E See Key 7 A Firm Effective F E•�.mi • �.6Wv G See Key l - -� Do, I Da�c J Deo: • K Dx� ��/ 5 mmpm ooca• , 4 5 m b hbn•ns Conversion Period pm,e Frrp:c 7 A Firm Effective F E•�.mi • �.6Wv G See Key l - -� Do, I Da�c J Deo: • K Dx� ��/ 5 if a City Councml meets once a menu❑ and afalr procedures rli readings at three conseC00ve meetings, the ordrance should be ready for consideration three months before your Community q to el,!eI the Regular Program. !o allow enough time Rememper;p allay time for to lling Iwo Ceneted Copies of the ilodG plain management measures to Cie FIA Regional Off Ice before this scheduled Regular Program envy date Many commumbas ask FIA whether the base flood eiela!ic ^e sbould be used outing.. ^.e time between the eno of the appeals period and ,he date of Regular Program entry During this offr:ol your canmumty will still h ava Its rofial flood plain management regulatons me!rec!, winch require that constr._M1On be designed l0 minim¢e malemna! I pod damage Using the basfi elevators as soon as they become available s an deal'ba•, to mm mew potent Ji Lood damage This I protect ;me !ives and property O tndividua :s in you - com uNty as soon as possi e Protecting !ryes and grocery should outs vh Pie convenience of waling unto !! o last possible minute oe'ore using the base I cod eleval,_is V. The Final Days The Inalalert leverwllieaeimi that the eommumtyv l loseellgloA :ly :n the National Flood Insurance. Program one ❑pole later. wiless an acceptable, adopted ordinance is received at the FIA Regional Office This scheduled Regular Program entry date will stark the end of the six -mpnth dormer mperiod The flood maps and actuanal insurance rates will become effective on the same day It will be the community s responstb:lay to ersure that two copies of the compliant, effective, and Certified foi llood plain regulations are received by the FIA Regional Off-.e on a eetae this scheduled convetspn dale FIA cannot give extensions to the Six. month Period so that the rleCOSSary adoption procedures can tie more convententy scheduled The hood mats become effective automatically on the date pnn!ed om!ha reaps (i e,. six montn5 after try; Letter of Final DetannmsnonJ Since actuanal. "(rue risk "food insurance premium rates apply to all new eogctrpchon and subsfannaf improvements atlsr the date, we, must be sup that the community has a Jamoliant ordinance This is to protect the local Ce:zemi frpm unknowingly building unsafe siruclures 4hich rest, me very h,gh0ood insurance premiums Ifa compliant ordmance Is rot adapted. the communir wail l;se its emgpO ty for feed msul which W m i reslnCt the availability of financing in fine flock, plain To avoid a Nfuahorn where a parson can legally build below base flood elevation but be forced Ic pay very high premiums. FIA must make ii the. ,�l iO lC ,'Woain management requ,remerbi areeWoded by the community by me same Eats that me hip risk' flood IMVran<e rates become effective i Flood Insurance may not be sold or renewed In commumlles whose e'igiplity hasp en,;U p r aed Loss uielialoih:y restricts Federal financial assistance to buy or build insurable properties m the flood plain, because flood insurance must he purchased for this assistance. Section 202 of Public Law 93 -234 to rohbits Federal officers or a9enres !ram approving any form of loan grant. guaranty, Insurance, payment, reoate. subsidy, and flood disaster a ivstance ban or grant to buy or build Insurable structures weMn the idemmed YCCd halardafea5 of a suspended community For example. this would affect the following 1) mortgage foams guaranteed by me Veterans Adminisiratpn, 2) mortgage loansmsured by the Federal Housing Admmistravm. 3) mortgage bans by I" Farmers Home Admimsbal which are secured by homes or farm buildings located in the Idenhfled hood hazard area. 4) direct Federal loans or grants t_i4 governments for schools. munic'paI bui:Jings. recreation buildings, and other insurable structures, and 5) Federal disaster relief in connection if a Sind disaster These sarrtions could nave a restrictive effect on flood plain develop: n,if ever a long time period Even tot snort periods of susmnslan. mile sanctions will have the etfKI of exposing citizens denting to Purchase or renew flood msurance policies to the risk of an uninsured flood loss For thin reason, it Is pest to avad Iosmg ell iry. or, it this cannot be avoided, to keep the loss of ei gibun` . �shatro M. :brt —_. A Community Can be quickly reinstated ill the Program Once we receive a cp pl:ant. effe ^.eve ordmance. we will inrnedlaleiy lake steps to mike a .Jn•mumlireltglbledi Acammudity choUld be eligible again Within mmee working days of reCeipf of the ordinance at the FIA Regional Office 0 • 9 VI. The Reason for All This Effort Many people wO ^,per why the covernment spends so muCh ome and more': print ng f:cod mass and assisting nommumlles In adoptmo flood plain management measures Before our Program began in t 9l flood Insurance was almost tmoosAble to obtain on the private market at a reasonable price Only people who anticipated frequent flood damage would purchase flood insurance, Also, there was nocorsisient widespread effort to map the llood hazards So many people did not recognize the seriousness of the nsod hazard The National Flood Insurance Act of 1966 and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1977 passed FIA to make subsidized flood mswance available for existing stnlciures m participating cammunRae FA aso had to begin detailed suo!es m pamctpaing communities so that flood elevations and risk zones could be established (See Appendix Three) you, community has now received one of these detailed studies Citizens who choose to bulld In the flood plain can sill obtain Iow-priced food mSUrance d they protect the structures to the base, flood level Indeed. food Insurance must b r purchased in order to obtain Federal, of federally related, financial assistance to buy or build mine flood hazard areas of a par ;ICipanig community Your flood plain management program should greatly reduce potential food damage over the long run And the availability of food Insurance will help 10 renounce even turner the uninsured flood loss In a disaster Consemle fly, through sound construction practices and Il000 Insurance coverage, your food! -prone residents can protect themselves against most floods This reduces their dependence on uncertain Federal aid in the event of a disaster The National Flood Insurance Program stresses recognition of the flood risk and wise preparation for flooding Instead of belated reaction to a llopi disaster We appreciale your assistance In this endeavor VII. Furthet,Questions It you wish :, begin working immemate'ry win us on a "- flood plain management measures at : � are uncertain wno y' ur Reglmal Office Contact person S. ) u may call Our toll-tree number In "shington,D C (900)424.8872 There is a place to write your contact Person S name, address and phone number in Figure Two of this bonklel You may also call your Regional Office or the number above if you nave any further questions about the National Flood Insurance Program, or if you wish to obtain information on the Hooding. erosion. and/or mucif ow Problem to your cox pop,llty. For exam ate, "have booklets on elevation rr structures, floodproofmg, septic tanks, legal and constitutional @sues. comprehensive rood plain management programs, etc Limited numbers of copies of Mae booklets will pe provioed free of charge f 7 Appendix One Appeals During the 90 -day Appeal Period The Right to Appeal: Any w000nv owner on lessee w no believes that his propel rights are un!aii 0tably afeCcd by .nac curate flood hazard mapping may appeal RR Floyd Insuance Rare Map 11IRtd) of the Flood Insurance Study Tne community may also L!e an appeal in ifs own name on behalf of such persons The appeal prosecutes are proi for by Section 110 of the Food Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (P L 93.234) as amended and Section 1917 of the Proyram regulations Basis for Appeal: The only basis for an appear of the FIRM is the possession of knowledge or information that shows Thal the flood hazard delerminallons are scientifically or technically incorrect Method of Appeal: Or�ce a detailed hydrologic and hydraulic study of the community is completed. the Federal Insurance Administrator proposes Vol elevations lorihecommumty TheSeeievations delermme the shape and size of special 3. No Appeal Received If FIA does not 1. Appeals by individuals a. Attapoears bvmo .dual property owners Fnould be subm Ned inciting hi, 90 -oay appeals period to Ilse community's Chief Executive Officer (CEO) if e . the Mayor, Chairperson o: the Council or Board. etc ) or designated representative to Each appeal Should provide Scientific or technical data demonstrating that the FIRM is inaccurate c. The CEO may sperdy the form in whicn appeals by private persons are to be made (letter. etc ) 2. Filing Appeals With FIA a. Copies of all individual appeals received by the CEO should be forwarded by the CEO to FIA as soon as they are received In. The CEO must review and consolidate all Individual appears and Issue a written opinion staling whether the evidence presemetl is sufficient to justify an appeal by he community on behae of the Individual e The CEO'swrittenopinionandcoven of mdwidual appeals must be tied with FIA before the end of the 90 day appeals period flood hazardifeas and are used to receive an appeal from the community calculate actuarial rates for flood during the 90 -day appeals period, it will insurance The flood elevations are also conclude that the FIRM correctly the basis torregwred first floor Identifies the c0.'nmunrty s flood haZald elevations for newconstruction The areas and the Federal Insurance flood elevations are shown on the Administrator will formally notify the FIRM whrcns the official FIA flood community of the final 11 " elevation. map for a community entering the which will also be pubhshetl m the X!,suaii officially no!died of Pie pr000sr -.f concluoes the community s formal ele vatlons by way of a k.paa from the appealperiodand RID Fl Rrr will become Federal lnsurance AlmmiSllaolo The effective six months lrom the date of the Chief Executive O"icei of me Administrator s final determination, Community Thi ocno%nd olerations are appeals me'/ still be considered for the also publlshen:'n Ilyi f edNal NCg'Sler purpose of ameni the. map Flowil and twipe in a local newspaper The ail appeal received after the class! of the community and innniduals may appeal 90 day appeals period i not delay the proposed elevations (luring the 90 Iormahtsuance of line FIRM pending day period followind the second resolution of the appeal newspaper publication Where to Serve Appeals: Deparimen'. -iof,smgancil Ofeeloome! ° -deral esur, � .e AdmimSbabcn Tlneenng Denson -IZ . Seventh Seear. S W W ten- ugtbn. D C 70410 Ann Piannmgano Control Branch )L ) `J • • 0 Appendix Two Compparison of Actuarial and Subsidized Insurance Rates ® ruMrpL •MMM rt.(r[.'�rMl'J YrYlr frru[ry�r rtu4MOW Mte Vae[MlrrTr T! W4rmflsn d� ^renprppr I 1 lr rxMrwym gar rY� dwrlrrNYrrvy V � f.NYNY IrN r rM rMwn b 1 <rwxoronw rv. I I I I During yo„r community's carnapatlon in ' Tetemocrary , Emergency Program' prase of the National Flood Insurance Program, linh ed amounts of flood Insurance were aearlabte ai subsidized : nsurance rates Thus. !dies 51lbs1drzed ty the Federal Government were charged for all structures regardless of their true I:cod risk Now Tat yc_ pre preparing U enter the pennanen' "Regular Program phase. a Floud Insurance Study has determined true (loop :Isk zones in your community Actuarial. "true risk` Insuraece tales will be based on the zone rn winch the simctule Is located and the relationship of the structure to the base flood elevation' Structures exrstuia at lee time the nsk • zones are dennf red will continue to be elig•b'R for subsidized insurance up to Ine IImRS of l st layer m erage (see. A�oenprx Three) Tre a,ner of an existing Slrtioture can purchase actuarial 'Iruerisk ! nsarance drl is cleaner than the subsd oed premmm for first-layer coverage or it Te owner domes second. layer coverage totiowing are examples ot,rrsmanoe ' rates under the Pegurar Program aoplrcab!e to tldferem strurures dependrrig upon their location and relationship to toe base Ilwd elevation ., We will assume that all of the owners purcnas••d sufl cohf Insurance to cover •a TdaGwnccn yRkninii•pTb stn;C:u al coverage and trial they also purchasod 510.00D o' contents coverage Ttv;,sn!;cfu•gs writ a'r be one . story single - tamely norms with no basement ® ruMrpL •MMM rt.(r[.'�rMl'J YrYlr frru[ry�r rtu4MOW Mte Vae[MlrrTr T! W4rmflsn d� ^renprppr I 1 lr rxMrwym gar rY� dwrlrrNYrrvy V � f.NYNY IrN r rM rMwn b 1 <rwxoronw rv. I I I I ij Example of Regular Program Insurance Rating Existing New New Home' Home' Home — Base Flood Elevabon 2feet bel. 2feetbelow Ifool 5100 /coverage 35 392 above Locabon of Structure. Zone A -7 Zone A-7 Zone A.7 Insurance Rate: Subsq¢ed Actuaral Actuanai Structural Rate per S100 /coverage 25 + 59 Ol Annual Cost 5000 31600 200 Contents Rate per 5100 /coverage 35 392 10 Annual Cost 3500 39200 1000 Expense Constant Charge 1500 1500 1500 • Total Annual Cost 10000 2700 72500 Il,..n VtliMipa)Im nanP.MeMm M+[np .4.tMfM f�.ve.ara IN K.••4J:.,h1, lA5 me rrm nw,.»r.r w.. u.o * »..m peg >a•w<e » «o�++a,nere +red... rooK+ For more inlormdhon do spechc rates. CbMtatra 162At dlsCrance a� nnamiliar wnh the Program If a knowledaeable agent cannot be, readily located. wnie. Or call National Flood Insurance Program Post Office Box 34294 Bethesda, Maryland 20014 • (600) 636.6620 10 I I l a Appendix Three i.J Limits of Coverage Flood Insurance . Emergency Program Regular Program Total Amolaa SUessued Tplat Mkismal Rare Total Amount AvadaSk Rabpar S100 A"Aable PW$I00 A"osare Maatmum • (Fnti-irl i) ofC Imrege (Semria Coverage list&znd Reetueed ayml eased w R15F Laye f smgte Fam•W Fiete Varies Res de,eal S 35,000 $25 150000 With Risk 1115.000 70.000 Olher RCSlderW 5IMM 25 f5d.m0 - 250,000 200,000 Conle,ls. Residenral S 10000 35 50.000 60'" 20000 Small ausme's SIOOg00 w Iw.lxx) .. 250." 2W.000 Conams, Smarr Rurp 000 siss 5100. 75 200" 300000 200 000 - Omer Nonresidential SI00.000 e0 f00.000 200.000 200,000 Conteres. Other SIM000 75 100.000 .. 200A00 200000 Nonreslaemlal (Limits required Section 102(a)(b) of Act of 1973) Niles (II Only meerst laver of coverage is avadabk urWer the Err_rgency ^::.gram SIi ghIlyhghrhmts0m ",ageareava.Wblefo Nmhaseunder Via Emargency Program In Ma'.vaii. Alaska. the U S Virpm lsWrds. and Guam (2) a Fullcwerage is avatlaDle underihe Fegear Prpgrem for Nl simdmevn meCmgturuty D NCW CIXtslri,:Ip and substantial imprw2menls are Charged actuarial rates for all cwCpge . c Ailensprq mwclures are charged acluenal rates lorl"Sec.r iayerol Coverage antl pmperpowrrtrzhave lheoptmn of paying&ther lip SUDSOM of acluantl rate for the first layer. WnKrleMr is Ii Iv 11 FLOOD DAl•ACE PP.EVERTION CRDI11X'CE SECTION 1.0 1.1 STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION, FINDINGS OF FACT, •PUP-POSE AND OBJECTIVES STATUTORY AUTRORIZATION ' The LtgisZaturc of the State of ha- in -4e legated the rcaponsibility (StarAtes) to local govenowntal vats to adopt regulations designed to r otc the public health, safety, and gancm/ welfare of it-- citizenry. Therefore, the of ., (Governing Body) (local unit) doe. orlair as fbZlows: (State) 1.2 FINDINGS OF FACT (1) The flood hazard areas of are X:b.7xet to local unit) • parodic i- nd&ion which results in Use of life and property, health and cafaty hazard.;, disruption of eenmeree and governmental ' seroices, extraordinary, p.&Zic- experditures for flood prctocticn and ratiof, and impairment of the tax base, aZZ of which adversely affect the pubZic health, safety and general welfare. (2) Thcse flood losses are caused by the c. Zatire affect of obstructions in areas of special flood hazards which increase flood heights and veZoeities, and when iradcquately anchored, dcrage uces in other areas. Uses that are inadea:ntcly fleodproofed, . elevated or othetwice protected from flood d-m ge also contribute to the ,flood Zoos. 1.3 STA1y'.'"_"NT of PURPOSE and generaZ weZfara, and to mr'nimiza public and private Zosces due to flood condi ons in specific areas by prevxciors designed: t _ (1) To protact h•.axm life and health; ' (2) To mr'ni^ zc e_-pcn2it : :re of pubZic money fo:• costly flood control prcjocta, (3) To mirimicc the need for rescue end relief efforts asoociatcd w,.ti: • LN • (6) To help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the second use and develop=.mnt of areas of special flood haz :rd cc as to mini, =a future blight areas; (7) To insure thct potential buyers are ratified that pro-perty is in an area of special flora hazard; and, ' (S) To insure that those who occoy the areas of special flood hacard . assume responsibility for their actions. 2.4 FMETRO "S OF ROUCP.)O FLOOD LOSSES In order to accc=Zish its purposes, this ordinance includes =. thada and prcvisio^s far: ' (I) Rest+_dcting or prohibiting uses which are dangerous to health, safety, and property due to crater or m osior. hazards, or which result in damaging immeases in erasion ar in Hoed heights or valocities; (2) Requiring that uses vuZner^.bla to floods, including facilities which servo ouch uses, be protected against flood, ds cge at the ti= of initial construction; • '(3) controlling the alteration of nstt=4 flood plains, stream charnels, and natural protective barriers, which help aeeaamodate or channel flood watersi (4) ControlZing, filling, gwdirg, dredging, and other devoZopmnl; wrieh may increase fZ.wd dosage; and, . (5) Preventing or regulating the construction of flood bar iers which will unaturally divert flood waters or Which my inemsase fta:d hazards in other areas. _ s 2. )N5 SEMMN Z.0 DEMUTIOP.S .. 1'r.Zess cpecifica!Zy defined below, words cr phracea used in this crdirm:eo shall be interpreted so as to give them ti:c . :.ea. : :rg the y have in cc ^-;cn ucago and to givc this ordinance its most reasonable application. ,a "A-veal" means a request for a review of the _ (Ian gamin :orator) interpretation of any provision of this ordinance cr a request for a var mce. 'Free of shat LP•fZ.+ d w" means a designated AO or tro Zoe cn the Flood Ircw•aoc Fate Map The base ,flood depths rage from one to throe feet; a clearly defined chaaal does not er-st; than path of f' coding £a unprcd£otabte and :Indeterminate; and, veZcaity flow may be ev£dat. "Are a of saecial flood hazard: moans the lad in the flood plain within a cc.— rv;ity s::a,7eet to a one percent or greeter chance of flooding in may given year. This area is dasignatsd as Zone A, 10, AR, 13 -30 on than FIRS. 'Bose flood" means the flood having a one porcnet chance of being cgaalled • or C. .aae £n any given year. "drea7 =,-u wells" mpg any type of, walls, whether solid or lattice, and urati :cr cons :rurrod of concrete, macon y, wood, meta' -, plastic or ary other suitable building material which are not part of the str:.•ctaral support of the building and which are so decigred as to brckau:ay, wader abnormally high tides or =a action, witkout doInCge to the structural intcgrlty of the building on which they are used or any buildings to which they might bb carried by flood waters. "cccntaZ high ha:crd area" man- the area aubject to high velocity waters, including but not lurr'ted to coactal and tidal inundation or taw•.. :s. The area is designated on a FIRM as Zone 71-Z0. "DatIoUnment" means any mcn-rnde change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structnrea, !3r`i7.74r;di�g, =;jnq, -=2.V lion or drilling operations located within. the area of special flood- ha :mTd- °Ex {st ire mobile hone cark or robile home cubdivision" meant a parcel (or cor:vigrous paaclsl of lard dea into or more mobiiI hate Lata for :vn: or sale for which the construct ion cf fcailit ies scr• :ccrg for lot en which tl:c mobile home is to be aff•,.:ed (ir+clud£,y, a: a tl > :.:0 the inotallat.0 of utilities, citl:e-r fi,:al :,tits gr� =-' %c or ti ;: pe::ri.rg of concrete panda, and tl ;e core :mac :ion of strce:s) is ^.a- p.ctcd Mo 0 before the effective date of this ordinance. - ,crier: to an cciot?ro mobile home nark or mobile home cubd';•'a'.on" moans t;c properaticn of additiorat sites by the construction of fccilicies for ccrviciag the lots on Which the mobile hones are to be affizcd (incZudi rg the installation of utilittes, either final site grading or pouring of concrete pods, or the construction of streets). 'Flood" a:• "r-ccdira" means a general and te=orcry condition of partial or ev-?,ste inunaCtion of normaZZy drj land arcac from: (Z) Y7-.e overfZow, of inland or tide.Z wa ers and /or (2) :,be vrusiat and :lipid accumulation of runoff of surface watcrc f :'rm any source. "FZcod Rcadart FZoca;Wnr !•!ae" means the 'office MP on Which the Federal ' Inst<rance Admtnistration =a delineated both the areas of flood hazard and the fZooa••mj• "Flood Insu^_mea Rate Fko (FZF�'1 means the off :ciaZI map on which chic Federal • Baurar:ce Addnistretion has de Z.ineated both tie areas of spacial flood h,ardc and i.he risk prep. •.u^ zones cPpl icabte to the ea��runity. z; "F'ood I;tsur: ,O Sttuiy" means the off' -ci.aZ report provided by the Federal iY.,arocncy !—Gr dement Agen* tbat inc Z ::del flood pr,fiZes, the FIRM, the Flood Bma.dery Floccaay kaP, and the water surface elevation of the bace flood. "Flcodvraafina" means any combination of structural and non - structural addict cnc, c'r es or adg'uc tracts to non• recidcrti+.l structures Which redt:cr or eli^ Hate flood da ^gc to real estate or inproved properq,. "e"Zocd- related erosion" a condition that exista in corjvurction Stith a flooding event inc: actors t7j—a compocition of the shoreline or bark of a wotereotmse. One th.at increases the poscib,Zity of Zoos due to the erosion of the lard area adjacent to the there Zinc or watercourse. reors the cnarnel of a river or oilier Fair nFcLw a,.'a - l�:c cress that r. :;I.t be reccrved in order to dicd:arge the Casa flood Wj tl :o:a me ^�ietiva 2y incrcasi r :g the cater cvrface el- ,vation more than one (1) foot. The ficodjay }s delineated on the Flood eovtdcrnj FZood:cj 1:'ap. 2c foor" means ary floor uceblc for living purposes, ' ^c'n includes uc:v;irvg, sleeping, eating or roeroation, or ecT.H,ation thcraof• For floe incurencc purposes habitac le floor and lr.%xt floor Will share the rnra definition. I1 LJ 4. IU% "iti^ 'ion, Plcn" - A plan that incorporates a process whereby the • potcrci.r7 of )'atone Zoss due to flooding can be mini=zed by planning ari i p:c.:anting altcr,:ctives to flood plain dcvelopment ecr. pity wide. "p ?chest Coax" means the highest natural elevation of the ground curfcco prior to en:ctrust.iaa next to the proposed walls of a ttr:eture. "F.'rbiTe homer rears a stn:ct_re that is trarspertsbZz in one or more saceios, built on a pormanent chassis, and designed to be used with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities. I, does not include recreational vehicles or travel trailers, or manufactured houcirg on permanent slob foundation. "Few ccrs!nution" means structures for which the "start of construction" ecr..enccd on or after the effective date of this ordinance. ' ew rob-'le home vark or mo>ila home subdivision." means a parcel (ar cortiguc:;s perccls) of land divided into Aso or more .mobile how lots for rent or sale for which the contraction of faci Zitias or servicing the lot (including, at a minimum, thin installation of utilities, either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads, and the construction of ,treats) is completed on or aftar the effective data of this ordinance. "5ar:d dunes" mean naturally occurring aecu^ul.tions of sand in ridges or mounds landward of the beach. • "glen! of corrtruetion0 means the first pZaaemant of permmanert construction of stn;ct:a•c ( other than a mobile home) on a site; such as the pouring of slabs or footings or any work beyond the stage of excavation. Permanent construction doss not include land preparation, such ao clearing, grading, and filling, nor does it include the installation of strests and /or naekwcys; nor does it include excavation for a basement, footings, piers or faodations or the erection of temporary fcros; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as d•'e lling units or not as part of tha main structure. For a structure (other than a mobile hams) without a basement or poured footings, the "start of construction" includes the first permanent framing or assembly of the structurz n:• any part thereof on its piling or foundation. For mobile homes not within a mobile hcme park or mobile home subdivision,. "star' of construction" means the nffiting of tho mobile home to its permanent site. For mobile homoa within mobile home parks or mobile home subd ivisions "start of construction" - .is -tks .'L-!r•en- iiiab ;ha Lpr QCI'1LiciIIq`tkfe =iv 4r. �.�_.. -. whia:a the mobile home is to be affixed (includirg), at a r'nirmen, the eonctr:etian of streetc, either final cite grad+.xg or the pa::ri•:g of concr•otc pads, and in tatlation of utilities) is completed. 'Ctrmturc" mcana a 4allcd and roofed baiZdir:g or mcbila no. ^a that is ' principally abovo ground. • ' S. ! tl�( "S:bstanticl improvem ^.nt" means any repair, reconctructdon, or dmrovamcnt of a s.r.�arre, the cost of which equals or exccaes 50 percent of the market value of the strict�re either., (1) before the isprovement or repai', is started, or (2) if the structure has been do agcd and is being restored, cf ^re the damge cccrred. For the purposca of this definition, "substantiaZ *=m- .,cmnt" is considcred to oee:a, when the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other strneturaZ part of the building cc, nces, whether or not that cZtcration affects the external dimensions of the structure.. This tem. does not, however, include either: (1) any projsct for iTp xT ement of a structure to comply with existing state or locaZ health, sanitary, or safety code specifications'w.hich Ora solely necessary to assure safe living conditions, or (2) any alteration of a structure lis ed on the National Register of Historic Places or a Stata Inventory of historic Places. °Var14Y,CE" means a grant of relief from the requirements of this ordinance which pem.n:ts constraction in a manner that would otherwise be prohibited by this ordin_^ncc. 1 - i G. Y ,L` SECTION 3.0 -0 G£i:EPAL PFiOVISIOi:S 3.7 LAiiDS TO T!dICH TRIS ORDINANCE APPLIES This ordinance sluaZZ apply to alt areas of special flood hazards W { Chin. the jurisdiction of ( ocaL unit) 3.2 BASIS FOR ESTABLISP.INC THE AREAS OF SPECIAL FLOOD RAZA.gD The areas of special flood hazard identified by the FedcraZ Incurance Administration, through the Federal Emergency Waragemenz Agency in a scientific and engineering rreport_entitted 'The Flood Insuraroe Study for the ," dated (local unit) with an accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Map is hereby adooted by reference and declared to be a part of this ordinance. The FZccd Insurance Study is on file at eaddriiss) 3.3 CGVPLIANCE No structure or land shall hereafter be constructed, located, axtendcd, • converted, or altered Without fu:Z compliance With the terms of this ordinance and other applicable regulations. 3.4 AHP.OSATION AND GREATER RESTRICTIONS This ordinance is not intended to repeaZ, abrogate, or impair ary existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. However, Where this ordinance and another ordinance, easement, covenant, or deed restriction conflict or overlap, Whichever imposes the mory stringent restrictions shall prevail. 3.5 INTERP::ETATION In the interpretation and application of this ordinance, all provisions shall be; ~(1) Considered as minimum requiremants; (2) Liberally lconstrued in favor of the governing body; and, (3) Deemed neither to limit nor repeal any ether pavers gran:cd u,dor state atatutes. • 7, • 3 -6 LARNING AND DZSCLAIKFR OF LIABILITY The degree of flood protection required by this ordinance is considered reasonable for reaulatond purposes and is baced on scientific and engineering considerations. Larger floods can and will o,car on rare occasions. Flood heights may be increased by man -made or srtural causes. This ordinance does not imply that land x.tside the areas of special flood hazards or uses permitted within such areas will be free from flooding or flood damages. This ordinance sh2ZZ not create liability an the part of (local unit) any officer or employee thereof, or the Federal Insurance Adm irictration, for any flood d=ges that result reli<nce on this ordinance or any ad-inistrative decision lawfully made thereunder. ' d if I t'. 8 ''s , lei SECTIO;; 4.0 ADNR71STSATION 4.1 ESTA£L= Si:.'E'T OF DEI:LC EA'T FE-17,7-1-IT A Dcvcicpment Perm. ^ it shall be obtained before cor:I ction or develccment begins within any area of speciaZ flcai hazard estcbZiched in Section 3.2. Application for a Development Per ^:t shell be made on fog s, furnished by the and may (local administrator) include, but not be limited to; plans in duplicate seals showing the nature, Location, dimensions, and elevation of the area in question; existing or proposed structures, fill, storage of materials, drainage facilities; and the location of the foregoing. Specifically, the follow" ng information is required: 1 Proposed elevation in reZaiion to mean sea Zeus Z, of the lowest ' habitable floor (including- basement) of all structures; in Zone AO \elevation of existing grade and proposed elevation of lowest habitable floor of all structures. 0 (2) Proposed elevation in relation to mean sea ZeveZ to which any structure w,ZZ be floodproofed; (31 Certification by a registered professional engineer or architect • (that the fZoodproofing methods for any nonresidential structure 'meet the floodproofing criteria in Section 5.1 -3(3); and, (4 / Description of the extent to which any watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of proposed development. 4.2 DESIGNATION OF THE The is hereby appointed to cdmirister ( oe4 administrator) and implement this ordinance by granting or denying development permit applications in accordance with its provisions. 4.3 DUTIES AND RESpous.,B LITI£5 of TRF (local administrator) "Iclude, out -no. -1 tom•: L:.: to:. ...._ . .. . 9.3 -1 Permit Aeview .� 1) Review all development pemito to determine that the prrtit requirements of this ordinance have been satisfied. (2) Review all pomits to detcrmine that the site is rearonai" cafe from flooding. • 15a (3) Review all development permits to de ter. n:ne if the proposed deveZcpment adversely affects the flood carrying capacity of the area of special flood hazard. For purposes of this ordinance, "advcrceiy affects" means that the cumulative effect of the propeved deveZopment uhen combined with all other existing and anticipated development will rot increase the water surface elevation of the base flood more tl:an one foot at any point. (4) Review all proposals for the development of 5 parcels or more to assure that the flood discharge exiting the deveZopment after construction is equal to or less than the flood discharge at the location prior to development. 4.3-2, Use of Other Base Flood Data _// When base flood elevation data has not been provided in aeco dance with Section S. 2, BASIS FOR ESTABI ISHIHG THE AREAS OF SPECIAL FLOOD HAL:RD, the shall obtain, review, and.. (local aamintstraiorl reasorabl;; utilize any base flood elevation data available from a Federal, state or other source, in order to administer Section 5.0. 1 4.3 -3 formation to be Obtained and Maintained' Cbtain and maintain for public inspection and crake available as needed for Flood Insurance Policies: (Z) the certified elevation required in Section 5.1 -30); (residential) (2) the certification required in Section 5.1 -3(2); (shallow flooding) (3) the floodproofing certification required in Section 5.1-3(3); (non - restdential) (4) the certified elevation required ih Section 5.4 -2; and (subdivision) �51, tjiq - hig azc cer i ica}�i certification required in Aection 5.6-1 _(mobile home) IZ- AZ raotio:n . .4 ( 7) cf1tly -'�' a:y acent co^auraion and the c,.� Sta to ooraitrattng Aacncy) prior io any alteration or relocation of a wa course, and submit evidence of such notification to the Federal Emergency f :'arcgca„ -nt Agency. • (21 Require that the flood carrying capacity of the altcrcd or rclo.m:c3 Ypa le7 portion of said water=arse it maiatairod. 4.J -6 Interpretation of FIRM Boundaries Ma :<c interpretations where needed, as to the exact location of t;;e boundaries of the areas of special flood hazards (for, exc.pZc, -::ere there appears to be a conflict between a mopped boundary and cctuci field conditions.) The person contesting the Zocaticn of the boundary shall be riven a reasonable opportunity to appeal the interprecticn as provided in Section 6.0. 4.3 -6 Maintenance of Blood Protection Measures The maintenance of any and all flood protection measures, (Zeveas, dikes, do-s or reservoirs), will be required of the jurisdiction where such measures provide protection. If these measures are privately mined, an operation or maintenance plan, will be required of the ovAer to be on file with the (two! administrator 4.3 -7 Bayard Mitigation Plan The local agency or board reeponsibU for reviewing all proposals for new development shall weigh all requests for future flood plain development against aa. nity'e General Plan. Consideration of the • following eZementa are required before approval: (1) Determination if proposed development is in or affects a known flood plain (2) Inform the public of the proposed activity (3) . Determine of there is a practicable alternative or site for the proposed activity (4) Identify impact of the activity on the flood plain (6) Provide a plan to mitigate the impact of the activity with provisions in Section 4.3 -1(4). 11. 141 • s SECTION S.0 PROVISIONS FOR FLOOD HAZARD REDUC710P S.1 STA!)DARDS OF CONSTRUCTION In all areas of special flood hazards, the foNcva g standards are required: 5.1 -1 Anchoring (1) All new construction and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral• rovcr..enc of the structure. (2) All mobile hares shall meet the anchoring standards of Section Corstruc on Materials and Methbd� (1) All raw construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood d=ge. • (2) All new construction and substantial improvements shall be using nethods and practices that minimise flood damage. (3) All eZeme'nis that function its a part +of the structure, such as furnace, hot water heater, air conditioner, atc., shall be elevated to or above the base flood elevation or depth nur..bcr FIRM. 5.1-3 Elevation and FZoo . CC (]) New construction and aubstantiaZ improvement of any structure sha22 have the lowest habitable floor, including basement, elevated to or above the base flood elevation. Nonresidential str4atures may meet the standards in Section 5.7 -3(3). Upon completion of the structure the elevation of the lowest habitable - - - - _ - floor including basement shall be certified by a registered - profecaionai'engineer or surveyor 6r- varifWd -!;9' t.'.d$•:.'c'_ building inepretor that elevation requirements have been r..et. Nntification of compliance chaff be recorded as set forth in Section 9.3 -3(1). (2) New conctruotion and rubstantial 07roccment of or-!/ n o^.1c'ura in �Za;e AO chalZ have the lowest 1Zoor, including basement, elevated to or above the depth numLcr cpccified on the FIRm. If there is nc depth ru,hcr on the FIR)•1, the lose,t floor, inelu2ina Lascre,:t, • 12. shall be elevated to a depth of one foot above the hichest adjacent grade. Pion residential strictures :gnu meet standards in Section 5.1 -3(3). Upon completion of the structure compliance to the elevation requirement shall be certified by a registered professional engineer or surveyor or verified by the locaZ bu'Zding inspector. Notification of co.:rliance shall be rerordca as set forth in Section 4.3 -31'2). (3) Nonresidential construction shall either be eZ,.va-ed in cocfcrnanre with Section 5.1 -3(1) or (2) or together with ottcndart utility and sanitary facilities. - (a) be flocdproofed so, that below the base flood Zeve Z. the structure is watertight with walls substantial Zy impermeable to the passage of water; (b) have stnwctunaZ oomoonents capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic Zoada and affects of bouycncy, and; (c) be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the standards of this subsection are satisfied. Such certifications shall be provided to the official as set forth in Section 4.3 -3(3). t (4) Mobile homes shall meet the above standards and also the standards in Section 5.5. Ank 5.2 STANDARDS FOR STORAGE OF MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT 5.2 -1 The storcgc or processing of materials that are in time of flooding buoyant, flammable, expZosive, or could be injurious to human, ari.m.aZ or plant Life is prohibited. - 5.2 -2 Storage of other mmteriaZ or equipment may be allowed if not subject to major damage by floods and firmly anchored to prevent flotation or if readily removab Le from the area within the time available after flood warning. _ TA- DA.4DS FOR UTXLTTZE3 5.5 -] A new ar. replacement water supply and sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the system and discharge from systems into flood waters. S.3 -1 On -site wast, dispooaZ systems shall be located to avoid i=aim ^nmt to them or contamination from them during flooding. 13. 40 • S.S S;10 -.i-S F0.•i SUBDIL'iSIOI!S� a S,,- :rt_i -ircry subdivisien proposals shall idcra i; �r the flood hcsa:•.d area and the elevation of the base flood. S.4 -2 All ",rI subdivision plans will provide the elevation of proposed stns:urc(s) and pads. If the site is filled above the bate floor.', the fa:aZ pod elevation shall be certified by a registered profcccicnal enct.:car or surveyor and provided to the official as set fort',: in Section 4.3 -3(3). 5.4 -3 ALL subdivision proposals shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage; S.d -4 ALL subdivision, proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems located and constructed to minimise flood damage; 5.4 -5 All subdivision proposals shall ,have adequate drainage provided to rca:ee exposure to flood damage as set forth in Section 4.3 -1(4). certification of compliance sh the developer. 5,$� 4i6::D.L4DE FOR P)OBILn' H VES ADD MOBILE HOPE PARRS AND SUBDIVISIO;!S • S.5 -I All mobile homes crd adr.'tions to mobile homes shall be anchored to resat flotation, collapse, or lateral movement by one of the folZc,.+irg rzthcds: 9 (1) by providing an anchoring system designed to withstand T :oricontal forces of 15 pounds per square foot and up lift forces of 9 pounds per square foot; or (2) by the anchoring of the unit's system, designed to tz in cc-, Iiarce to tho Department of Housing and Development MobiZe Rome Construction and Safety Standards; or to ground at each of the into radiate cation Zen equ ire or Zu one burl -'etl - I , - -. i (b) , c c; br_ pr.vided ataa h .erne. o the l:vme wit' ivo '.t Liar lice p e at t to die a lintlr, wry bile he a le then; I, 50 f.,dE�lorigl rt rr, only foam rs\',�t,?or:aZ t cr �•da; c�:d, all com_t1Gr?znto of the amchori,:? c_ •�_Irt c cc„ . 2' lc of ra r•rZ.i r;. 14. (>) As set forth in Section 9.3 -3(6), certification meeting the st¢rdar_'s above is required ,of the installer or state agency recporcicle for regulating the placement, installation and anci:oring of individual mobile home units. 5.5 -2 F:ebi Ze Nome Parks and Mobile Nome Subdivisions The following standards are required for (a) mobile homes not placed in mobile home parks or subdivisions, (b) new mobile home parks or subdivisions, (c) ¢scansions to existing mobile home parrs , or subc'visians and, (d) reps r, reconstruction, or improvements to ¢sic ling mobile home parks or subdivisions that equals or exceeds 50 percent of the value of the streets, utilities and pads before the repair, reconstruction or improvement commenced. (1) Adequate surface drainage and access for a hauler shall be provided. " (2) All mobile homes shaZZ be placed on pads or lots elevated on compacted fill or on pilings so that the Zones, floor of the mobile home is at or above the base flood level. If elevated on pilings: (a) the lots shell be Zarge enough to pernit step:; (b) the pilings shall be placed in stable soil ng.Znore titan ten feet apart and, (c) reinforcement shaZZ be provided for pilings more than six feet above the ground level. S.5 -3 No mobile home shall be placed in a fZoodway, exczpt in an existing mobile hone park or existing mobile home subdivision. �5- 1' m iL fig Z�Z`y' yce /d�vn c tai' hj''�h V LQ>�i m tZ N" .,� n i n.,ncO =ii cti'L' 5.5 -5 Certification of compliance is required of the developer responsible for the plan or state agency responsible for regulating mobile home S.6 �reas of special flood hazard estabZiched in Section 3.2 arc areas designated as flocduays. Since the fiood:.vy is an estrcmciy haccrdous area due to the velocity of flood watmv^ which carry debris, potential projectiles, anal erosion potential, the following previcione apply: 15. I -�r I' • v • S.0 -1 Prohibit encroach. ^eats, including fill, new construction, sybctcntiaZ tirprovemcrts, and other deveZoprcnt unless certification by a reciatervd professional enaircer or architect is provided demonstrating that ercrcaeh-cnts shall not reau7t in may increase in flood levels during the occurrence of the base flood di- chage. S.E -2 If no fZo6zbway is identified then a set back of _ feet : ^cr.. the of the watercourse wiZZ be established, where e-,•rxch=enz will be prohibited. 5.7 CCASTSL NIGH HAZARD AREA Coastal high hazard areas (V Zones) are located within the areas of special flood hazard established in Section 3.2. Thase'areaz have speciaZ flood hazards associated with high velocity waters fron coastal and tidal inundation tsunamis; therefore, the following provisions shall apply. 5.7 -7 Location of Structures ' (1) All buildings or structures shalt be located Zan&Lard of reach of the mean high tide. (2) The placement of mobile homes shall be prohibited, except in an existing mobile home park or mobile home subdivision. • 5.7 -2 Construction Methods (1) EZavationj ! { All buildings or structures shall be elevated so that the lowest supporting member is located no lower than the base flood elevation level, with all space below the lowest sit pportive member open so as not to impede the flow of water, except for breakaway walls as provided for in Section 5.7 (2) Structural Support (a) All buildings or structures shall be securely anchored on pilings or column.. oohrcna .cad cc sircct:<ral ^:ppar• ^wrt7 ¢. desiened and anchored so as to withstand all impact forces and buoyancy factors of the base flood. (c) Thare shall be no fill used for structural support. (3) Certification Ca-sl -anco with t)m provisionc of Sccticn S.7 -2 and 5.7- :(:)(a) a•; IC. '(b) shalZ be certified to by a registered profession engineer or architect and provided to the official as set forth. in Section 4.3- 3.(5). (a) Any alteration, repair, reconstruction or improvement to a structure started after the enactment of this ordinance shall not enclose the space below the lowest floor unless breancvy calls are used as provided for in this section. (b) HreakaWay walla any be allowed below the base flood elevation ' provided they are not a part of the structural support of the building and are designed so as to brekaway, under abnor. -allu high tides or wave action, without damage to the structural integrity of the building on which they are to be used. (c) If braa.'km.ay walls are utiZiead, such enclosed space shall not be used for hw•an habitation. (d) Prior to construction, pla.a for any structure that will have„ breakaway walls must be submitted to the (local aunimst.tor) for approval. 0 1 17. • SECTZOf) 6.0 VARZA7CE PROCEDURE 6.1 .AppcCZ Hoard 6.1 -1 The as est- sLtsnec s;! (appeal board) shell near and decide appeals and requests for variances from the requirements of this ordinance. 6.1 -2 The shaZZ hear end (appeal coard) decide appeals when it is alleged there is an error in army requirement, decision, or determination made by the (local administrator) of this ordinance. ' 6.1 -3 Those aggrieved by the decision of tha appea ooard) or any ta_rcyer, my appeal such decision to the . as provided. in (appropriate court) ;statute) • 6.I -4 In passing upon such applications, the (appeac board) sha Zl consider all technical evaZuations, all relevant factors, standards specified in other sections of this ordirancs, ard: (1) the danger that materials may be swept onto other Zands to the injury of others; (2) the danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion d=.age: (3) the susceptibility of :he proposed facility and its contents to 'flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner; (41 the importance of the services provided by the proposed facility _....-itr Zhe• Do ... M'[ i -Y ; ._ -.._.. . .. .` - .. - -.- ' - - I - -- (5) the necessity to the facility of a waterfront location, c):,. r.: cppticable ;: (6) the ova )lability of alternativc locations, for the propoved use which ere not subject to flooding or erosion damage; (7) the cempatability of the proposed use with existing and era iaipa:c.: dcvelop�4nt; ]H. W (8) the relationship of the proposed use to the comprekens!vc plan, anal • flood plain management proaram for that area; (9) the safety of accasa to she property in times of flood for crdir -:r•, and emergency vehicles; (10) the expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sedircrt transport of the flood waters and the effects of cave action, if app Zicab Ze, expected at the site; and, (11) the costs ,:f providing governmental services during and after fZcod ccrd:ti.,ns, including maintenance and repair of public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water system, and streets and bridges. 6.1 -5 CereraZly, variances may be issued for new construction and substantial improvements to be erected on a lot of one -half aer• or less in size contiguous to and surrounded by lots with existing 3omctures constr mtcd below the base flood level, providing items (1 -11) in Section 6.1 -4 have been fully considered. As the lot size increases beyond the ona -h—Z f acre, the technical justification required for issuing the variance increases. 6.1 -6 Upon consideration of the factors of Section 6.1 -4 and the purpo. ^.es of this ordinance, the may attach such (appeal board) conditions to the granting of u¢riancea as it deers necessary to further the purposes of this crdin¢ nee. 6.1 -7 The sha I maintain the records of a Z Z (local a¢. Strstor) appeal actions and report any variances to the Federal Anergency Panager..ent Agency upon request. 6.2 Conditions for Variances 6.2 -1 Variances my be issued for the reconstruction, rehabilitation or restoration of structures listed on the National Register of Historic Places or the State Inventory of Historic Places, without regard to the procedures sat forth in the remainder of this section. 6.2 -2 Variances shall not be issued within any designated floo& y if any innrva.se. : :n f).gnd 1o..a ?_ &,,i.,ug tha b.isa fluod discharge would result. 6.2 -3 Variances shall only be issued upon a determination that Um variance is the minimum necessary, considering the flood hazard, to afford relief. 6.2 -4 Variances shall only be issued upon (1) a showing of good and sufficient cause such as renovation, 19. • • rehabilitation or rccorctraoticn. Variances issued fsr cease -ic considerations, aesthetics or becaucc varicrcac have been •recd 'n the pact are not good and sufficient -ause. (2; a deteraination that failure to r:rant the variance wou °? recult in emocptioral hardship to the applicant; and (3) a dot.3..•nation that the granting of a varianr:: n.ZZ not recuZt in ircreaced flood height., additional threats tc �Zic cafcty, vtracrdirn g public expense, create nuicances, ^mace fraud on or victinization of the public, or conflict with e_ssting local laws or ordinances. 6.2 -5 Ang applicant to whom a variance io .ranted shalt be given urittcn roticc that the structure will be per.-itted to be built with a lowest Ilcor elevation below the base flood elevation and that the cost of flood insurance will be cr, nsurate with the increased r sk resulting from, the redvcad lowest floor elevation. u P 20. U s CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 20, 1983 TO: City Council and City Manager GUGMp^� C p s U° p 1917 FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Enqineer SUBJECT: Maintenance Agreement and Assurance of Maintenance for Flood Protection Devices in Conjunction with Tracts 11934, 12044, 12045 and 12046 The necessary documents were not ready to be inserted into the Council packet on Friday afternoon. They will be delivered to the Councilmembers before the Council meeting on July 20. 1rf- y -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CpCAMO STAFF REPORT. 4�V T >.j Z Hi U c; > July 20, 1983 1977 TO: City Manager and City Council ." FROM: Jim Robinson, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Article 8 Claim Transportation Funds for Fiscal Year 1983 -84 Each year it is necessary that the City Council authorize the City Manage- to sign the attached Article 8 claim form to authorize receipt of the city's Transportation Development Act Funds for streets and roads purposes. Fir Fiscal Year 1983 -84 the City of Rancho Cucamonga will receive a total of $689,601 in Transportation Development Act Funds. Of this amount $348,074 will be claimed directly by Omnitrans to continue our existing level of - transit in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. This amount claimed by Omnitrans will provide for the continuation of Route 60, one general purpose Dial -A -Ride sedan, and the City's share of the cost to oparate lift equipped vans for the elderly and handicapped in the Meat End of San Bernardino County. The remaining TDA funds in the amount of $341,527 may be utilized for street and roads purposes. Recommendation: 1. The City Council authorize the City Manager to sign the attached Article 8 claim. 2. The City Council adopt by minute action authorizing the following distribution of Transportation Development Act Funds for FY 1983 -84. a. Omnitrans $348,074 e' tp" 0 -Rai oro cr <ara;aga _ _ _ _ _ _ 41 1527_ 11I Total Allocation: $689,601 I 7R:mk Attachments fi SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TDA NONTRANSIT CLAIM FORM FISCAL YEAR: DATE: 1983 -84 July 20, 1983 CLAIMANT: N N City of Rancho Cucamonga City of Rancho Cucamongi COUNTY LTF: (Claimant) San Bernardino P. C. Box 807 PURPOSE: Check one box only Mailing Ad.!ress ( ) Article 3, PUC Section 99234 Rancho Cuc•:m,.noa, Ca 91730 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities ity an ip a e (x) Article 8, PUC Section 99400a Harry Empey, Finance Director Local Streets and Roads en lon - ame —anFTI e ( ) State Transit Assistance Fund 7 a 89- PUC Section 99313.3 -local ontact erson - one um er • Streets and Roads i ( ) Article 8 PUC Section 99400a Bic cle and Pedestrian Facilities $3a;,s2-r.00 D TA L 0 R OU D ALL N: AMOUNT 1. Payment from Unallocated Funds 2. 11 Planning Contribution to IVAG _ (Imperial County onl 3. 3% Planning Contribution to SCAG (Imperial and Ventura only)_ 1. Total Allocation Requested (Line 1 less Lines 2 and 3 ) $341,527.CC 5. Payment from Reserves (Drawdown of funds reserved in a revious ear CONDITION OF APP. ".OVAL: Approval of this claim and payment by the County Auditor to this claimant are subject to monies being available, and to the provision that such Ln')niea.w.illha _ - -used only in accordance with the allocation instructions. 1. DATE APPROVED: 2. SIGNFD: SCAG - TDA 3/83 wp5 AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE(CLAIMANT -S CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR OR FINANCIAL OFFICER) Lauren Wasserman, City Manager Z r nt Name and Title) 41 • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 20, 1983 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer G�K'AM1IO,yC i 0 F, Z J 1977 SUBJECT: MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT ANU ASSURANCE OF MAINTENANCE FOR FLOOD PROTECTION DEVICES IN CONJUNCTION WITH TRACTS 11934, 12044, 12045 and 12046 Attached for Council adoption is a Resolution dealing with the mainteannce of flood protection and drainage improvements for the subject Tracts in the Victoria Planned Community. This Resolution has been requested by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as a condition of final loan commitment under their Title x Program. With the exception of the proposed Training Levee and tract boundary wall maintenance,all other maintenance has been secured through separate mainte- nance agree,aents with R. C. Land Co. executed at the time final maps were approved nearly a year ago. The agreement and security covering these final elements is also attached for your approval. It should be noted that the Proposed levee is located on lands not owned or controlled by the developer and are located outside the corporate boundaries of the City. As was discussed in a previous memo, it may become necessary for the City to exercise powers of condemnation out- side the City to insure construction of this levee. In order to not repre- sent in the maintenance resolution that construction of these facilities is guaranteed, the second resolve stipulates the maintenance will begin upon completion and acceptance of facilities. The proposed levee goes byond the flood protection deemed necessary for City approval and is strictly a HUD requirement. Enforcement of construction is, therefore, between HUD and the developer. We are merely insuring maintenance if and when construction and appropriate easementsare provided. 'f am tole that w'I Of tn-1 'A 86i u Ion, aYl ne4&r emekncs—W: l'r ha :c -bee^- ^'"t_fox--' the project to proceed. continued..... J STAFF REPURT Maintenance Agreement and Assurance of Maintenance for Fllod Protectinn Devices in Conjunction with Tracts 11934, 12044, 14045 and 12046 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council adopt the Resolution Guaranteeing Maintenance of Flood Protection Measure ..in conjunction with Tracts 11934, 12044, 12045 and 12046. That Council approve the Improvement and Maintenance Agreement for Tracts 11934, 12044, 12045 and 12046 (Training Levee, Retaining Walls, Flood Walls) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute documents on bahalf of the Council. Respectfully s bmitted, ./i LBHtjda I/ Attachments U.B. Wpvtman. of Housing end urban Dswlopnrant a: t SaMS Ana Service Cmcs, Region IX 34 Civic Center Plaza S Senta Ana, Cditrnia 92701 TV July 18, 1983 Mr. Lloyd Hubbs City Engineer 9320 Baseline Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Mr. Hubbs: This is to confirm your conversations with Joel Trachtenberg of my staff regarding the Victoria project and the City's role in providing for the maintenance of the interim flood control improvements to be constructed in connection with this project. The condition attached to the Firm Commitment issued by the Department for this project reflects the requirement of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as stated on Page 87 of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The final determination for removing the Victoria Development from the special flood hazard area remains with FEMA upon completion of the improvements and compliance with the main- - tenance agreement requirements. FEMA has indicated that the ">t form of the City's commitment to maintenance should be an ordinance established by City Council. However, as discussed, this office, for the purpose of meeting our com- mitment condition on this matter, would accept a resolution passed by your City Council, accompanied by the City Attorney's opinion covering the use of a resolution vs, an ordinance. FEMA has indicated that the request by a City to establish by resolution, lieu of a City ordinance, the maintenance agreements, is not uncommon and that at the time of final determination by them would consider the accep- tability of the resolution if such were supported by the City 2 The re ! .tion should be explicit in detailing the improvements subject to the City9s Maintenance Agreement. The improvements as discussed would cover those interim flood control and protection improvements listed (but not limited to) in the EIS on Page 87 as well as those improvements referenced in the March 18, 1983 FEMA letter, addressed to Mr. Hugh H. Foreman, covering Phase 1. I hope this letter serves to assist you in your efforts for City Council presentation. If you have any Questions, please call our Title X Coordinator, Joel Trachtenberg, at. (7'4) 836- 2305. Sincerely, i earl G. Fields Supervisor, 9.10HT CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR TRACTS 11934, 12044, 12045, 12046 (Training Levee, Retaining Walls. Flood 'Walls) KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is made and entered into, in conformance with the provisions of the Municipal Code and Regulations of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, by and between said City and hereinafter referred to as the Developer. WITNESSETH: THAT WHEREAS, Interim Flood Control Facilities, a training levee, retain- ing walls along west boundary of Tracts 11934, 12044, 12045, and 12046, and a flood wail along Highland Avenue shall be constructed for said tracts being an Improvement Requirement of said City for said tracts; and WHEREAS, the Developer shall ^aintain said facilities until such time as Day Creek Channel is improved and it is determined by the City that a possible outbreak is no longer a threat; and WHEREAS, the execution of this agreem^nt and posting of maintenance security; as hereinafter cited, and approved by the City Attorney, as deemed to be sufficient to guarantee continual maintenance of said facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the City and the Developer as follows: 1. The Developer agrees to construct at Developer's expense said Interim Flood Control Facilities. 2, The Developer agrees to maintain the facilities to the satis- faction of the City, at no expense to the City. The facilities required to be maintained are as follows: a. Training levee shown in plans entitled "Training I.evee Plan for the Victoria Project (Tracts 11934, 12044, 12045, 12046) ", prepared by Hall 8 Foreman, Inc., dated January 17, 1983. b. Retaining walls along west boundary of said four tracts as shown in plans prepared by Hall 8 Foreman, Inc., Job No. 3156, dated December 20, 1982, and in plans entitled "Storm Ora—in improv2ment r i'anS Fat Trrn�t> ;•13:+; :26-54; :CO4:, 3 . - -- - - - - 12046" prepared by Hall b Foreman, Inc., dated December 10, 1981. c. Flood wall along Highland Avenue shown in plans entitled "Plan and Profile Highland Avenue Tract No. 12046 ", prepared by Hall 8 Foreman, Inc., dated Uecember 10, 1981. 3. Maintenance shall include clearing of debris from pipes through levee, removal of sedimentation along training levee and wall, reoair of training levee and grouted surface, repair of retain- ing :i3lls and flood walls which failed or are endanger of failure. -2- 4. All maintenance shall be done prior to October 15th, each year. In the event an emergency situation arises concerning these facilities, the City may require the Developer to perform rea- sonable maintenance activities with twenty -four (24) hr-ors from the receipt of written demand therefore from the City. 5. Developer agrees :o indemnify and hold the City harmless from and against any and all liability arising from Developer's maintenance of said facilities as provided herein. 6. If after thirty (30) days following notification by City of deficient maintenance of the facilities, the Developer fails or neglects to comply with the provisions of this agreement, the City shall have the right ac any time to cause work to be done by any lawful means, and thereupon to use the hereinafter stated cash security and /or recover from said Developer the full cost and expense incurred in so doing. Developer shall be billed for said costs and shall make restitution to the City within thirty (30) days of date of billing. Should Deveioper fail to make said restitution, within the time allotted, then the City may cause a lien to be filed against said Developer, on the real property described on Exhibit A attached hereto, for said resti- tution plus reasonable attorney fees. 7. This agreement shall remain in full force and effect from the date hereof until notice by City that construction of Day Creek Channel is completed and Interim Facilities are no longer needed for flood protection. At that time said maintenance security shall be returned to Developer and this agreement shall terminate. 8. The maintenance security is to be furnished by Developer to guarantee completion of the terms of this agreement and shall be subject to approval by the City Attorney. The principal amount of said maintenance security shall not be less than the amount shown below: Maintenance Security Submitted: Total Cash: $10,000.00 3 IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be duly executed and acknowledged with all formalities required by law on dates set forth opposite their signatures. BY WITNESS DEVELOPER DATE DATE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BY DATE Jon D. Mike s, Mayor ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk Approved as to Form: City Attorney DATE EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR TRAINING LEVEE THE EAST ONE -HALF OF THE WEST ONE -HALF OF THE NORTHNEST ONE- QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TO~tP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNAROIND PERMIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAW BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF. E%H[BtT "A" TRAINING LEVEE glJar �,yvs�Ci.,� .R.r•.,a� �i �cl�✓io 9fierf 0