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