HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981/05/06 - Agenda PacketLSO �� c4 zigiC7
< � n
o o
Z
U >
1977
CITY OF
RANCHO CUXCAMONCd1
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
May 6, 1981
All items submitted for the City Council Agenda must be in writing. The dead-
line for submitting these items is 5:00 p.m. on Thursday prior to the first and
third Wednesday of each ,ninth. The City Clerk's office receives all such items.
1. CALL TO ORDER. 7'. o eg
A. Flag Salute.
B. Roll Call: Frost - Mikels:t Palombor
L, Bridge, and Schlosser. �*W4.
C. Approval of Minutes: March 30, April 1, April 6, and April 23, 1981.
2. ANNOUNCEMENTS.
A. Historical Preservation Commission: May 12, 7:30 p.m.; Lion's Park
• Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road.
B. Proclaim: Month of May as "Older Americans Month."
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. 81 -5 -6 for $155,101.14. 1
B. Acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien 4
Agreement for 8850 Center Avenue.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -54
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A
REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN
AGREEMENT FROM REUBEN HERNANDEZ.
C. Acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien 9
Agreement for 8406 Orchard Street.
•
is
U
City
Council Agenda
-2-
May
6, 1981
Avenue submitted by Schlosser Forge Company, Inc.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -55
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -56
10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A
REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN
AGREEMENT FROM ROLAND L. TAYLOR AND CAROLYN A
TAYLOR, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN
THE SAME.
D. Acceptance of Agreement, Security and Real Property
14
Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for Director
Review 81 -10; located on Arrow Highway and Rochester
Avenue submitted by Schlosser Forge Company, Inc.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -56
15
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, SECURITY, AND REAL
PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREE-
MENT.
E. Acceptance of Improvement Agreement and Security for
24
Director Review 80 -39; located on the southeast corner
of Jersey Boulevard and Utica Street. Submitted by
Roberts Manufacturing Company.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -57
25
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY
FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW NUMBER 80 -39.
F. Acceptance of Improvement Agreement and Security for
Installation of Arrow Route Storm Drain by Daon Corp;
located on the northside of Arrow Route between Haven
and Milliken Avenues. Submitted by Daon Corporation,
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -58
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY
FOR INSTALLATION OF ARROW ROUTE STORM DRAIN.
30
31
City Council Agenda -3- May 6, 1981
G. Acceptance of Parcel Map 6544, Agreements, and Security; 36
located at the northwest corner of Haven Avenue and 6th
Street. Submitted by Solen Enterprises.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -59 37
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
PARCEL MAP NO. 6544, IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT,
AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY.
H. Acceptance of Church Street and Highland Avenue Street 38
Improvement Project.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -60 39
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE
CHURCH STREET AND HIGHLAND AVENUE STREET IMPROVE-
MENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF
COMPLETION FOR THE WORK.
I. Agreement with Caltrans for Improvements to the Railroad
• Crossing on Vineyard Avenue. Purpose to provide for
federal aid in the funding of improvements to the rail-
road crossing on Vineyard Avenue north of 8th Street.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -61 42
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING
THE EXECUTION OF LOCAL AGENCY -STATE AGREEMENT
NO. 08 -5420 PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 4.
J. Approval of Contract Change Order No. 1 - Carnelian Street 45
Storm Drain Improvement Project.
K.
Cooperative Agreement with the County Transportation Depart-
ment for Maintenance of Streets. Purpose to maintain cer-
tain high maintenance border streets during storm conditions,
normally maintained by both agencies, to minimize over-
lapping maintenance efforts.
RESOLUTION N0, 81 -62
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING
THE EXECUTION OF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH
THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO FOR STREET
MAINTENANCE.
49
51
City Council Agenda -4- May 6, 1981
L. Release of Bonds and Notices of Completion. 55
a. Minor Subdivision 78 -0046: located on Helms Avenue south
of 9th Street. Owner: Albert W. Davies.
Performance Bond (road) $ 11,000
b. Tract 9444: located on the east side of Amethyst
at Banyan. Owner: Fox Hollow III (Nubank Inter-
national).
Performance Bond (road) $ 76,000
c. Tract 9329: located west of Haven Avenue, south of
Hidden Farms Road. Owner: Kenneth Ketner and Assoc.
Performance Bond (road) $158,000
d. Approval of Resolution authorizing the filing of Notices
of Completion for M.S. 78 -0046, Tract 9444, and Tract
9329.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -63 58
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE ROAD
IMPROVEMENTS FOR M.S. 78 -0046, TRACT 9444, TRACT
9329, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF
COMPLETION FOR THE WORK.
e. Parcel Map 4804: located on the south side of 9th Street
at Lion. Owner: Ninth Street Industrial Park.
Monument Bond $ 2,500
f. Tract 9403: located east of Mayberry and north of High-
land Avenue. Owner: Olympus Pacific Corp.
Performance Bond (landscaping) $ 7,563
g. Minor Subdivision 77- 0665C: located on the north side of
Foothill west of Lion. Owner: Lewis Development Co.
Performance Bond (block wall) $ 21,000
h. Tract 9446: located on the south side of 9th Street west
of Baker north of A.T.S.F. Railroad. Owner: Kingsway
Construction Co.
Labor & Material Bond (road) $108,000
Labor & Material Bond (water) 41,000
Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 30,000
City Council Agenda -5- May 6, 1981
•
i. Tract 9454: located west side of Haven, north of Southern
Pacific Railroad. Owner: Lewis Homes.
Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 74,000
Labor & Material Bond (water) 17,400
Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 20,400
j. Tract 9530: located on Archibald Avenue, north of Hillside.
Owner: Lewis Homes.
Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 75,000
k. Tract 9482 -2: located on the north side of Wilson at Beech -
wood Drive. Owner: The Deer Creek Co.
Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 68,000
1. Tract 9380: located on the south side of Manzanita, west
of Beryl. Owner: Kenneth C. Elmore.
Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 15,000
m. Tract 9479: located north of Church Street and east of
• Turner. Owner: Kaufman and Broad.
Labor & Material Bond (road) i $ 86,400
M. Tract 9302: located 9638 7th Street, Owner: Vanguard Co. 62
Release of Temporary Occupancy Permit (T.O,P.) Bonds:
Subdivision sign bonds on Lots 28 and 32.
Amounts: $150 and $1000.
N. Funding for New Special Accounts. Recommended that: 63
$ 15,250 to be transferred to the Insurance Fund;
$205,000 to be transferred to the Capital Reserve Fund;
$ 86,162 to be transferred to the Central Service Funds.
Funds were established by Resolutions June 12, 1980, but
were not funded in the process.
0. Authorization for Director of Community Services to Attend 65
the California Park and Recreation Society /National
Recreation and Park Association Legislative Conference
on May 14 and 15.
P. Set May 20, 1981 for public hearing for Environmental
Assessment and Planned Development No. 80 -14 (TR 11781) -
The Roberts Group: A total residential development of
76 condominiums on 6.4 acres in the proposed R- 3 -P.D,
zone, located on the west side of Hermosa about 330 feet
north of 19th Street - APN 202- 171 -20 and 38.
n
lJ
City Council Agenda -6- May 6, 1981
Q. Set Thursday, May 7, 1981 for Budget Meeting. It is
recommended that the City Council meet for an additional
budget meeting to continue discussions regarding the city
budget and financial outlook for the comint fiscal year.
4. SPECIAL ITEM:
MOBILE HOME RENT REVIEW BOARD CONSIDERATION. Item continued from
the April 1, 1981 City Council meeting.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
66
The following items are public hearings in which concerned citizens may voice
their opinion. Please wait to be recognized by the Mayor and address the City
Council from the public microphone by giving your name and address. Please
sign the "Sign -up Sheet" on the podium before taking your seat.
A. REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND A PLANNED 66a
COMMUNITY NO. 80- I - WILLIAM LY NY.
. This request is for the establishment of a planned com-
munity zone and text which sets forth specific land uses,
development standards, circulation system, and an over-
all design theme. Project area consists of approximately
2,150 acres bounded on the north by Highland Avenue,
following Deer Creek on the west until it intersects the
Southern Pacific Railroad which then jogs east and then
transverses along I -15 to Etiwanda Avenue which forms the
eastern edge of the project site.
ORDINANCE NO. 143 (first reading) _ 67
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING
VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY P.C. 80 -01 LOCATED
SOUTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE GENERALLY NORTH OF
FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND GENERALLY WEST OF
ETIWANDA AVENUE.
B. REVISED TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11549 - LEWIS. A development 68 _
X90 lots on property locate etween t wwanda and East
Avenues + 300' south of Summit in the R -1 (single family)
zone. (Ttem continued from the April 1, 1981 City Council
meeting).
RESOLUTION NO, 81 -64 75
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11549,
City Council Agenda -7-
May 6, 1981
•
�L
1'1`
C.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHING A STREET
84
NAMING POLICY. A policy for new, public and private
streets in the city in the interest of uniformity and to
avoid confusion to the public; and a policy for changing
existing street names.
ORDINANCE NO. 144 (first reading)
85
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING
PROCEDURES FOR STREET NAMING.
D.
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. Report
89
by Lauren Wasserman.
ORDINANCE NO. 145 (first reading)
90
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE
NEED FOR A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO FUNCTION IN
THE COMMUNITY:
• E.
REVENUE SHARING. Report by Harry Empey, Finance Director.
91
F.
ADOPTION OF MUNICIPAL CODE.
93
ORDINANCE NO. 142 (second reading)
93
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE
"RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE."
6. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS.
A.
REFUSE PERMIT ISSUANCE. Staff report by Harry Empey.
96
B.
AGREEMENTS WITH CONSULTANTS FOR ENGINEERING AND LEGAL
101
SERVICES
IN CONNECTION
WITH THE INDUS
IA REA 5 SS-
MENT
DISTRICT 79 -1. Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -65
103
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
EXECUTION OF AGREEMENTS WITH ENGINEERING CON-
SULTANTS FOR THE DESIGN OF IMPROVEMENTS FOR
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 79 -01 AND FOR PROJECT
MANAGEMENT, PLAN CHECKING, AND OTHER SERVICES.
City Council Agenda -8- May 6, 1981
C. ESTABLISHING FEES FOR MUNICIPAL CODE.
The City has received several requests for copies of
the Municipal Code. The requests have come from those
who are not a part of the city and would not normally
receive the document. It is recommended that the follow-
ing fees be established for persons wishing to purchase
the Municipal Code and the annual update service.
I' t' 1 F f 1
125
n is ee or Mun cipa Code, Binder, /So
and Tabs. $100.00
Annual Supplement Update Service 25.00 /yr. SO `o
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council
adopt Resolution No. 81 -66 which adds the above fees
to our Subscription rates,
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -66 125
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SETTING
CERTAIN FEES FOR ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTIONS AND
. CODES.
D. REPORT REGARDING PROPOSED WEST END LAW AND JUSTICE CENTER/
MUNICIPAL. CI C CENTER. Nf C TER. Ora�t by Lauren Wasserman.
7. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS.
B. ADJOURNMENT. To adjourn to Budget Meeting, May 7, 7:00 p.m.
•
R867 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
G WARR 8 VEN A V E N D 0 R N A M E
01139 1033
rb
C1141 8950
01142 ?985
01143 675
G Dills 0[35
01146 4650
01147 1500
6 01148 8313
.H 01149 1200
Cllso 6550
01151 0308
' 01152 6599
o1I53 3407
01154 8.148
C1155 SZ46
r, 11156 6725
01157 7985
01153 8975
OI159 7320
01160 8532
01161 5140
CI162 9200
03163 6.10
+ (.4[Z4 8314
p Ce394 2083
665eO 5140
06640 VOID
b
G." I V010
C1:642 VOID
06643 vote
06644 0105
as 06645 0025
C•.246 0028
Coc47 0130
161,48 0319
L Cot49 0470
Ceoso 0492
-- 06657 0210
06652 1065
4G .^.6653 1201
06154 1_x3
..1655 1300
06656 1450
v 0n1.57 IT15
;Y C6658 1745
I 06659 1110
1.&660 19;:0
® 06661 1-107
01,662 1975
Oc663 2022
06664 2036
6 06665 2041
01.666 2093
06667 2200
06618 I292
06669 2300
0667L 2375
06672 2388
4 00633 2400
UL674 2520
06675 2525
00636 2575
,y 06617 2195
R 06678 2301
4 016.690 2616
06682 2641
Oo683 2650
06684 2699
0,,695 2730
06686 2731
O
1
WARRANT RECONCILIATION 5/06/81
WARR JOURNAL DISCOUNT
DATE REFERENCE
NET
254.62
170.00
1 00.00
9.205.34
25.00
132.CD
57.24
1.578.00
3.572.49
7.752.79
2.570.87
285.80
191.05
34.50
90.00
210.00
9.237.66
18.23
55.39
770.00
3.145.00
50.00
300.00
19.103.00 -
10.00-
3.915.00-
GAGE 1
R667 CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA
o WARR A VEN A V E N 0 0 R N A M E
06687
Q 06688
06689
06690
06691
• 06691
6693
C6694
06695
d 06696
d 0669
06698 8
6699
0
7 06700
06701
06702
06703 3
0 06704
06 705
0!706
06707
'
06708
06709 9
06710
06711
® 06713
Q 05714
01,715
4 06716
C6717
06718
06719
m 06T20
06721
06722
06723
06724
06725
06726
06727
i r&72B
OC729
06730
06731
a 0.732
06733
' 06T34
06735
06736
06737
06738
06739
• 06740
06741
06741
06743
G6T44
06745
06746
06747
06748
06749
06750
06751
C 06752
06753
06754
06755
SAM
06757
06758
06759
* ne760
06761
2732
2733
2734
1735
2736
2T37
2738
2739
27411
274L
2742
1743
2744
2745
2746
2747
2748
2749
2750
2751
2752
2753
2754
2755
2756
2757
2758
2759
2760
2761
2762
2763
2764
2765
2766
2767
2768
2769
2770
2771
2772
2773
2774
2775
2776
2805
3303
4oa5
4118
4130
4590
4600
4610
4700
4652
4901
4915
4975
4980
5110
5140
5275
3278
6160
6175
6191
6596
6600
66650
6783
6875
7000
7175
7188
WARRANT
RECONCILIATION
5 /D6 /81
PACE 2
MA R .1
.JOURNAL
OIS000NT NET
GATE
REFERNCE
E
i
5106/81
12.00
5/06/,1
6.00
5/06/bl
14.01
I `
s /06 /Rl
2,00
5/06/&1
16.00
51061-1
8.00
5/06/11
R.CO
6.
5/06/01
8.00
5/0.5/61
8.00
5/061,11
0.0c
5/06/dl
8.00
s7
5/06181
B. OC
'
5/06/01
8.00
i
5106181
8.00
5 /O6 /J1
8.00
(5
5/06/81
.00
8.CO
I
5/06/61
5/06/91
8.00
5 /06 /f:l
16.00
5/06/0]
16.00
5/06/51
16.00
5/06/81
16.00
5/06/91
16.00
5/06/RI
32.00
5/06/81
S.cO
5 /06 /rl
5/06/81
8.00
Q1
5/06191
B.CO
8.00
I
5/06/01
8.00
5106/RI
5106YSI
8.00
5/06/91
8.00
8.00
5 /C6 /BI
8.00
5/06/!:1
5106/61
J
5106/81
16.00
8,00
I
5/06/51
8.00
5106/91
B.00
5/06181
8.00
C%
5106/81
8.00
I
5/06/81
)4.00
5106/81
5106/1
12.00
I J
5/06/861
12,00
12.00
5106/81
12,00
/06/01
5/06/81
66.27
5106/81
15,300.00
72.50
12R
5/06/81
1,009.;0
5106/rl
19.18
II
5/06/01
447.00
C'
5/06/41
3,870.95
'
5/06181
2,151.50
5 /06 /RI
T3. 17
5/06/81
123.20
5/06/Rl
65.47
5/06/01
531.81
5 /06 /R1
121.08
5/06/81
46.42
I (.
5106181
2,349.78
5/06/81
5,071.25
5/06/81
27.25
5/06/81
135.00
G
5/06/81
20,90
I
5/06/81
25.76
5/06/81
/l
250.00
G
5 %6
0F
657.20
15.1
5/06/91
268
I1
5106/81
2,850.00
5/061al
1,593.50
5106/81
8.75
5"6181 l
6,750.00
5/06/8S1
5 /D6 /C1
1118.60
PACE
e)
3 II
f
�2
7
41
O
i
D
A 1
1
IIt
I �
R867
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
WARRANT
RECONCILIATION 5/06/81
WARR
A WEN A V E N 0 0 R N A M E
WARR
JOURNAL DISCOUNT
NET
OATCl
REFERENCE
Z
86)63
T} 2
(L
MIS STUN C RINASN
5
5/06161
06764
1320
TIT
MONAHAN. CLAUDIA
5/06/81
SD0.00
224.11
06766
7305
L
MUL IOLORYNSYf TEMS INC
5106181
46.00
PAC
2616.11
06766
1670
7FTCNROCK 6 GRAVEL
5/06181
06779Y
7793
PAT
.HOID CS SOy5NDCCNMPANY
CO
5/ /06%81
312.52
1:.123.51
TT`2
78
PR[`10EOIOLORf NESS
/O6 %8`ll
u
9
806
Z2z2205
A
OAEINC
`�5
145 2
06775
6015
UC
RGPpLiO >76C iNCHON
i�j06 %9l
5577.25
06777
07
RAVES REEEEyySCISIB AOUTERPAIR
%06 %8``111
I]'1.50
SE0.
0677 80
BLOT
9A 16F HARDSIR SP1SNGSSVC
PING
y /06/81
366.50
921.31
0678 y2
8311
SS AN BDNNR CO
AFT PARTS
6HARP
5!06161
155/06%8``1
06703
061144
83346
835885
4 G
SIGNAL NAINTE
1.989.00
1.OTT.48
}}ANSCE
5106761
7N 98DISON
0678'!
B390
SOUTHEERNNCAL39E9EF
dE
51061811
2.924.8
0678E
06790
8395
8492
SOUTHERN CAL f AS CD
SYSTEMS
510610 (l
5106181
138.91
159.72
067,
117.
06799
851
gSTANIAIAROTOFFICE
SUPER /NTENOENTPDOCUMENT
5/06187
CO
06794
06795
8675
8835
TEXACO INC
TRIAD PHO O
510618E
35.90
067966
90 0
CITY OF UPLAN
5/06/0 111
79.10
06790
9055
VRN5 NOTVIE
06799
9 90
UA0.0 LbEAS
WES END MIT D WAY
5/06/ 1
165.On 9 6:67
MESLTLpERNBH
55106181
0680
9390
IGNWY PNCOUCT
5106/21
X59.7377
z1
06003
3.
49.6C
068804
9550
9989
FOL FI'AG SONS: SALES CO 1
AP
5/06/8
5/06/311
898.24
068
ZXEROX
I
5/06/81
1521.18
06807
9999
RENNEOTL AL SERVICE
51061 BL
06808
VOID
NA TOTALS
11
1143A
8950
UPI
NIV OF CALIF REGENTS
4101181
FINAL TOTALS
155.101.14
V
S
PACE
e)
3 II
f
�2
7
41
O
i
D
A 1
1
IIt
I �
7
A
•
CITY Or RA NG -10 Cl'G \ \iCkNG\
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981 UIL_
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and
Lien Agreement for 8850 Center Avenue
The attached lien agreement is submitted by Reuben Hernandez for
off -site improvements for a single family residence located at
8850 Center Avenue. These improvements will be completed along
with the Block Grant improvements proposed for the area. It would
not be beneficial to complete these improvements at this time.
RECOtM1ENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolu-
tion authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said Real Proper--
ty Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement.
Respectfully submitted,
:BK: jaa
a //
RESOLUTION N0. 'F) -5-1
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY
IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM
REUBEN HERNANDEZ AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME.
WHEREAS, Installation of Off -site Improvements established as
prerequisite to issuance of Building Permit has been met by entry into a
Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement by Reuben Hernandez
for 8850 Center Avenue;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California does accept said Real Property
Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement, authorizes the Mayor and the
City Clerk to sign same, and directs the City Clerk to record same in
the Office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California.
n
L J
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk
n
L I
Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor
J�
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
and
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
t CITY CLERK
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
9320 -C Base Line Road
Post Office Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT
C-%
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this ` day of
, 1901, by and between Reuben Hernandez ( hereinafte
referred to as "Developer ") , and the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City "), provides
as follows:
WHEREAS, as a general condition precedent to the issuance of
a building permit for residential development, the City requires the
construction of missing off -site street improvements, including curbs,
•
gutters, sidewalks and pavement, adlacent to the property to be
developed; and,
WHEREAS, the Developer desires to postpone construction of
such improvements until a later date, as determined by the City; and,
WHEREAS, the City is agreeable to such postponement provided
that the Developer enters into this Agreement requiring the Developer
to construct said improvements, at no expense to the City, after
demand to do so by the City, Which said Agreement shall also provide
that the City may construct said improvements if the Developer fails
or neglects to do so and that the City shall have a lien upon the real
property hereinafter described as security for the Developer's performance,
and a y rapaymant due City.
NOW, T11EREFOPE, THE PARTITS AGREE:
1. Tb,, nevcloper hereby aoree,; that they will install off-
,;it,! strew i o.iprovvnenra, inc1udi,1 curbs, qutters, sidewalks and
pnv"nent, in accordance and compliance with all applicable ordinances,
msoluttons, ru1,•s and regulations of the City in effect at the time
•
of the installatina. Said improvemonts shall be installed upon and
ulonq Cent,•r Avenue adjacent to Oovcloper's pr ouerty hereinafter
descn hod.
C-%
2. The installation of said improvements shall be temple.
not later than one (1) year following written notice to the Developer
from the City to commence installation of the same. Installation of
said improvements shall be at no expense to the City.
J. In the event the Developer fails or refuses to complete
the installation of said improvements in a timely manner, City may at
any time thereafter, upon giving the Developer written notice of its
intention to do so, enter upon the property hereinafter described and
complete said improvements and recover all costs of completion incurred
by the City from the Developer.
4. To secure the performance by the Developer of the terms
and conditions of this Agreement and to secure the repayment to City
of any funds which may be expended by City in completing said improvements
upon default by the Developer hereunder, the Developer does by these
presents grant, bargain, sell and Convey to the City the following
described real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
County of San Bernardino, State of California, to -wit:
•
Lots Band 9, Block 62, Map Book 4, page B of
north Cucamonga Fruit Land Co., Records of said
County.
5. This conveyance is in trust, however, for the purposes
described above.
b, Now, therefore, if the Developer shall faithfully
perform all of the acts and things by them to be done under this
Agreement, then this conveyance shall be void; otherwise, it shall
remain in full force and effect and in all respects shall be considered
and treated a5 a mortgage on the real property and the rights and
ohlinntrons of the parties with respect thereto shall be governed by
the provi.siono of the Civil Codc of the state of California, and any
oth_r applicable statutp, pertiininq to mortgages on real property.
7. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall insure
to the benefit of thu heirs, executors, administrators, successors and
aSsiqus of oarh of the parties hereto. •
r�
R. To the extent required to give effect of this Agreement
as a mortgage, the term "Developer" shall mean "mortgagor" and the
City shall be the "mortgagee" as those terms are used in the Civil
Code of the State of California and any other statute pertaining to
mortgages on real property.
9. If legal action is commenced to enforce any of the
provisions of this Agreement, to recover any sum which the City is
entitled to recover from the Developer hereunder or to foreclose the
right of the Developer to redeem the above- described property from the
mortgage created hereby, then the prevailing party shall be entitled
to recover its costs and such reasonable attorneys' 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: DEVELOPER:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, a municipal REUAF.N NEiLN ANDE2
corporation
• BY: K. ✓
PHILLIP SCHIASBEA
Mayor
•
ATTEST:
LAUREL M. RMAN
City Clerk
lJ
CITY OF RA\Ch10 CUG\ \70 \GA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981
TO: City Council and City Manager
C�
na U Y
1977 1
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and
Lien Agreement for 8406 Orchard Street
As a prerequisite to issuance of a building permit for 8406 Orchard
Street located on the east side of Sapphire, between Banyan Street
and Hillside Road, the installation of sidewalks is required.
Mr. and Mrs. Roland Taylor have entered into a Lien Agreement for
the installation of said sidewalks because immediate construction
is not necessary for public safety and welfare.
RECOMMENDATION -
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution
and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign and accept the Lien
Agreement on behalf of the City.
Respectfully submitted,
:JS:jaa
Attachment
•
RESOLUTION NO. cl-4j
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY
IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM
ROLAND L. TAYLOR AND CAROLYN A. TAYLOR, HUSBAND
AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS, AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME.
WHEREAS, Installation of sidewalks established as prerequisite
to issuance of Building Permit has been met by entry into a Real Property
Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement by Roland L. Taylor and Carolyn A.
Tayolr, Husband and Wife as joint tenants for 8406 Orchard Street, located
on the east side of Sapphire, between Banyan Street and Hillside Road;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California does accept said Real Property
Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement, authorizes the Mayor and the
City Clerk to sign same, and directs the City Clerk to record same in
the Office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
• ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk
•
Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor
1'n
RECORDING REQUESTED RY J
and
WREN RECORDED MAIL TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF RANCHO CUCMONGA
9320 -C Base Line Road
Post Office Box 007
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
REAL PROPERTY IPIPROVEHENT CONTRACT AND LIEU AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
, 1981, by and between Roland L. Taylor and
Carolyn A. Taylor, Husband and wife as joint tenants, (hereinafter
referred to as "Developers ") , and the CITY OF RANCHO CCCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City "),
provides as follows:
WHEREAS, as a general condition precedent to the issuance of
• a building permit for residential development, the City requires the
construction of missing off-site street improvements, including sidewalks,
adjacent to the property to be developed; and,
WHEREAS, the Developers desire to postpone construction of
such improvements until a later date, as determined by the City; and,
WHEREAS, the City is agreeable to such postponement provided
that the Developers enter into this Agreement requiring the Developers
to construct said improvements, at no expense to the City, after
demand to do so by the City, which said Agreement shall also provide
that the City may construct said improvements if the Developers fail
or neglect t^ do so and that the City shall have a lien upon the real
property hereinafter described an security Ear the bevoloper's performance,
and any repayment due City.
NOW, THEREFORE, TIC PARTIES AGRD£:
1. Th, Developers hereby agree that they will install o:f-
site street improvemen L:, including sidewalks, in accordance and
compliance with all applicable ordinances, relclutrons, rules and
• regulations of the City in effect at. the time:_ of the installation.
Said improvements shall be installed upon aad along Orchard Street.
n
L
Z. The installation of said improvenents S'lall De completed
net later than one (1) year following written notice to the Developers
from the City to comrence installation of the same. Installation of
said improvements shall be at no expense to the City.
3. in the event the Developers fail or refuse to complete
the installation of said inpro,rcants in a timely manner, City nap at
any time thereafter, upon givin y- the Developers written notice of its
intention to do so, enter upon the property hereinafter described and
complete said inorovemer.ts and recover all costs of completion in-arred
by the City free, the Developers.
4. To secure the performance by the Developers of t -to
terns and conditions of this Agreement and to secure the repayment to
City of any funds which nay be expended by City in completing said
improvements upon default by the Developers hereunder, the Developers
do by these presents grant, bargain, sell and Convey to the City the
following described real property situated in the City of A.ancho
Curai,o•aa, County of San Dernardino, State of California, to-wit; 0
Lot 19, TrIet 7176, Nap Seek,, 91, Yages 95 and 96 being
a subaivision of Lot 1, Block 13 of Cucamonca Na mss toa3
Association, Records of said COVnty. (A.N 1061-701 -19)
S. This co nve }fames is in trust, toaeever, for the purposas
deseribe.l above..
6. Now, therefore, if the Developurs shall faithfully
perform all of the acts and thin,., by them to be done under this
AgremrtnL
than this conveyance shall be void; otherwise, it shall
rrr, :in in .full force .ma of feet and in all rc.seerts shall be concddored
ant tr at:d n.z a mort.lage nn the real property anel Lill rights anal
c u: i,: turns n. pnr ti ••x >;.th thergty cllall be gc111;:ud !ri
thn pr ': .. .. ,n of the Cna. C'sd,• nl the Btatg of California, amt 'nv
c •'•.nr <. ,.,., s•e.uu pa ., in: tai t.: m;ta"e,:: on rnnl pr,•:•.,r •.i
7. Thi;l hnreo-.v n: .,a.'31 ho Hi..li,, ,non and nnsll insure
co 4.v Ir,, ••fit 9f the heir:, c., ncu to rc, adriniatrn tea, ::uxaeo:s ano
as:,ignn o. n,i.;y n: the n rt 1-u Lor ^: o.
�n
r.,
• B. To the extent required to give effect of this Agreement
as a mortgage, the term "Developers shall mean "mortgagors" and the
City shall be the "mortgagee" as those terns are used in the civil
Code of the State of California and any other statute pertaining to
mortgages on real property.
9. If legal action is commenced to enforce any of the
provisions of this Agreement, to recover any sum which the City is
entitled to recover from the Developers hereunder or to foreclose the
right of the Developers to redeem the above - described property from
the mortgage created hereby, then the prevailing party shall_ be entitled
to recover its costs and such reasonable attorneys' 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. DEVELOPERS:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCLIONGA,
• CALIFORNIA, a municipal
corporation
1 '
BY:
PN Ii•Lip D. SCI1L0E5'cR
Mayor
l J
ATTESf:
I AURIiN :A. WARS F.R.HAY
City Clark
CITY OF RALNG-10 CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs,.City Engineer
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Agreement, Security and Real Property
Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for Director
Review 81 -10
The subject D.R. is located at 11711 Arrow Route. Schlosser Forge
Company, Inc. has submitted the attached agreement and security for
the improvement of Arrow Highway and a real property improvement
contract and lien agreement for future improvement of Rochester
Avenue.
Attached is a resolution for the acceptance of agreement and
security in the amount of $85,500.00.
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolu-
tion and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign and accept the
agreement security on behalf of the City.'
0
: BK: j as
Attachments
14
RESOLUTION NO. 3 I - 5
• A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TILE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AND REAL PROPERTY
IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FOR DIRECTOR
REVIEW NUMBER 81 -10.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, has for its consideration an improvement Agreement executed
on May 6, 1981 by Schlosser Forge Company, Inc. as developer, for the
improvement of public right -of -way adjacent to the real property specifically
described therein, and generally located at 11711 Arrow Route.
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. 81 -10; 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,
improvement security, and Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien
• Agreement be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby
authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Lauren HWssermn, City Clerk
•
Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor
14
NOKTI I
CITY 01" rnm 129•FL -IQ
RANCI IU CLC: "10I (Xt TITLV:_ e lar'! P1 P
PLANNING DIVISION EXlIN;IT:�_SCALE rr�_ =f�'
ooh
-Pr
we
--z°
R�
r52 - o
O T
V6
rEv
o
Doc
aoo
U-U
Nye
F_o
OaE
�rvU
4
UEo
<Ud
zE5
55'.
v'
nS^
uc2
u ='
a
a'-
z_=
€T
N
V.�
. BANKOFAIVIERIC.A Cabby Address: BankAmerica 1�;
INTERNATIONAL BANKING OFFICE 6662, P.O.BOX 3141
Place: TERMINAL ANNEX, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90051 Data APRIL 15, 1981
IRREVOCABLE
All dralls must be marked:
Ady:Snq bank reference no.
'Drawn under Brink of America
STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT
credit no SBLA- 13196'
Advising bank
For account of
SCHLOSSER FORGE COMPANY, INC.
11711 ARROW ROUTE
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730
To beneficiary
Amount
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
U.S.CY.$85,500.00 (EIGHTY FIVE THOUSAND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730
FIVE HUNDRED AND NO /100 DOLLARS)
Expiration date MARCH 31, 1982
Gentlemen, ❑ This refers to preliminary cable advice of this credit.
We hereby establish our irrevocable letter of credit In your favor available by your drafts drawn at SIGHT
on US
Nate
COVERING:
STREET IMPROVEMENTS AT 11711 ARROW ROUTE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA.
DOCUMENT REQUIRED:
YOUR SIGNED STAT TENT STATING SCHLOSSER FORGE C0HPANY, INC.
FAILED TO COMPLETE THE STREET IMPROVEMENTS AT 11711 ARROW
•
ROUTE, RANCHO CUCA:dONGA, CALIFORNIA AS PER LETTER AGREEMENT
DATED APRIL 14, 1981 BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND
SCHLOSSER FORGE COMPANY, INC.
Rkk'.: A •:sR k:t
VJq hcrrby nm,:ne with ynu thnl all <b alts Gravm bm;nr mtl in
Adyiy e•.g bin ✓s nohh,;allon
apmpkanLn vnlh 1'ln. terms If Iles -relit .'.'.I bn drily ij j od
it dralln and pmsrdted Wr paymndl A Ili v, erp -a nn pr before
the erpv,thpn d.fe 01 Ilus CreL'd
•
ah sincen::y yr,i.rs
17
r a•
.i•-e. • do n.:rl'n nnA Si•l: n v' the :i .•, .i ".n II inw
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
and
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
9320 -C Use Line Road
Post Office Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
1981, by and between Schlosser Forge (hereinaffa
referred to as "Developer ") , and the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City "), provides
as follows:
WHEREAS, as a general condition precedent to the issuance of
a building permit for commercial development, the City requires the
construction of missing off -site street improvements, including curb,
• gutter and sidewalk, adjacent to the property to be developed; and,
WHEREAS, the Developer desires to postpone construction of
•
such improvements until a later date, as determined by the City; and,
WIIEREAS, the City is agreeable to such postponement provided
that the Developer enters into this Agreement requiring the Developer
to construct said improvements, at no expense to the City, after
demand to do so by the City, which said Agreement shall also provide
that the City may construct said improvements if the Developer fails
or neglects to do so and that the City shall have a lien upon the real
property hereinafter described as security for the Developer's performance
and any repayment due City.
NOW, THEREFORE, TIIF. PARTIES ACHEE:
1. The Developer hereby agrees chat they will install off -
sitc street inprov emcnts, including cure, gutter and sidewalk, in
aecorr!ance and coraliance with all applicable ordinances, resolutions,
rules and regulations of 4,e City in ofNct at the time of the irstsllati,:
Bnid innruacmenLS shall he installed upon and along Rochester Avenue.
1 `I
2. The ir.s talla[ion of said improvomeats shall be compile
not later than one (11 year following written notice to the Developer
from the Citv to commence installation of the sang. Installation of
said improvements shall be at no expense to the City.
31 In the event the Developer falls ar refuses to ccmplete
the installation of said i.^..provenents in a timely nanner, City nay at
any ti.-..e thereafter, upon giving the Developer written notice Of its
intention to do so, enter upon the property hereinafter described and
complete said impraveaants and recover all costs of completion incurred
by the City from the Developer.
4. To secure the performance by the Developer of the terms
and conditions of this Agreement and to secure the repayment to City
of any funds which may be expended by City in completing said improvement,
upon default by the Developer hereunder, the Developer does by t}.ese
presents grant, bargain, sell and convey to the City the following
described real property sit:ated in the City of Raocba Cucamonga,
County of San Bernardino, Sate of California, to -Olt:
The westerly 438.65' of Lot 25 and 26, Tract of
Rochester, Map Boole 9 page 20 with the exception
of the westerly 50' of Lot 25 of Records of
San Bernardino County, California. APN 229- 111 -17.
5. This conveyance is in trust, however, for the purposes
described above,
6. Pow, therefore, if the Developer shall faithfully
perform all of the acts and things by them to he done under this
Agrecoont, then thin conveyance shall he void; othorwdse, it shall
remain in full farce and ofiect an,] in nil rosp.•ets shall be consid¢re,i
and as a ma r'gnge on :Jac rnal prnpnr[y and the rights and
ohl1gitlons of the rartiou with respect thereto shall be govnrard b.
N•,, pr ru ,,nm. of Hva CivG CuJ t If thq Stele of Cllitofnio' and any
... a.r .,,Jic.0tlo fl:otuSC, P- CLaininl to ncrv;aryos nn real prcr"crty.
7. 7ir. Iran ^cr or.; s.iall be binding up"n anC shall insure
to the 61..1... d tip_ brdrs, t.. :ntprs, adavn i :;t ra tox n, successors a�
assicnn o; each of t.ie parl'hs horotn.
B. To the extent re.luired to give effect of this Agreement
as a mortgage, the term "Developer° shall mean "mortgagor" and the
City shall be the "mortgagee" as those terms are used in the Civil
Code of the State of California and any other statute pertaining to
mortgages on real property
9. If legal action is co... need to enforce any Of the
provisions of this Agreement, to recover any sum which the City is
entitled to recover from the Developer hereunder or to foreclose the
right of the Developer to redeem: the above - described property from the
mortgage created hereby, then the prevailing party shall be entitled
to recover its costs and such reasonable attorneys' 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: DEt'ELOP£R:
CITY OF RANCHO CVCAMOAGA,
CALIFORNIA, a municipal
corporation (7 'CCU
•
EY:
FHILLIP D. SCHLO EE— S i
tla yoc
CJ
ATTEST;
— LAUAE:i M. WAWASSC9Melti
City Clerk
n,
c'i (�
Ll
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
KIN 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 Ranch.: Cucamonga, State of California, a municipal corporation,
hereinafter referred to as the City, by and between said City and Schlosser
Forge hereinafter referred to as the Developer.
WITNESSETH:
THAT, WHEREAS, pursuant to said Code, Developer has requested approval by the
City of, Director Review No. 81 -10 in accordance with the provisions of the
report of the Conmunity Development Director thereon, and any amendments
thereto; located at 11111 Arrow Route and,
WHEREAS, the City has established certain requirements to be met by said
developer prior to granting the final approval of the development; and
WHEREAS, the execution of this agreement and posting of improvement security
as hereinafter cited, and approved by the City Attorney, are deemed to be
equivalent to prior completion of said requirements for the purpose of securing
said approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the City and the Developer
as follows:
1. The developer hereby agrees to construct at developer's expense all
improvements described on page 3 hereof within 1 year from the date
hereof. •
2. The term of this agreement shall be I year, commencing on the date of
execution hereof by the City. This agreement shall be in default on the
day following the last day of the term stipulated, unless said term has
been extended as hereinafter provided.
3. The Developer may request additional time in which to complete the provi-
sions of this agreement, in writing not less than four weeks prior to the
default date, and including a statement of circumstances of necessity for
additional time. In consideration 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 provi-
sions to be completed by any lawful means, and thereupon to recover from
said Developer and /or his Surety the full cost and expense incurred in so
doing.
5. Encroachment permits shall be obtained by the Developer from the office
of the City Engineer prior to start of any work within the public right -
Of -way, and the developer shall conduct such work in full compliance with
the regulatinns contained therein. Ilon -conpl lance may result in stopping
of the work by the City, and assessment of the penalties provided.
6. public right-of -way improvement work required shall be constructed in
conformance with approved improvement plans, Standard Specifications, and
Standard Drawings and any special amendments thereto. Construction shall
include any transitions and /or other incidental work deemed necessary for
drainage or public safety.
is
C� I
0
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
7. Work done within existing streets shall be diligently pursued to comple-
tion; 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 from the Developer and /or his contractor by any lawful
means.
8. The Developer shall be responsible for replacement, relocation, or re-
moval of any component of any irrigation water 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 -way resulting from work done on the
adjacent property or within said right -of -way.
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 terns of this agreement shall be subject to the approval
of the City Attorney. The principal amount of said improvement security
shall be not less than the amount shown below:
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY SUBMITTED:
Faithful Performance Bond 57,000
Material and Labor Bond 28,500
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:
DEVELOPER
BY: 77 .. / %!. ✓,n��� DATE: ✓/ai/
BY: DATE:
WITNESS: _ DATE:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
a municipal corporation
BY: _ MAYOR
ATTEST: CITY CLERK
DATE:
/ GI
IMYROfEl:E'T ACREEMENT PAGE
CIV OF RANCHO CM-1'TnSGA
CO :STNUCTION ,`':0 90ND MI!PTE
ENCOOACRMF.NT PERMIT FEE SCUEDCLE •
(1t[ac1D cn "Insnertor': Copy)
DATE: 4/9/81 PERMIT NO. COMPUTED BY PUS
File Reference Director Review 81 -10 ciLy Drawing No., home Available
:ATE: Ones not include cu rtenc fee foe vrf:ing pe rm is .1 pavement replace-
ment depo51t5.
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Arrow Mtnhwav
IT °_`I
OI'ANTIt'
I MIT
I UNIT fp. T
S . ` ' \T
°'C.'.
F.C.C. car - R
677
1'. F.
6.00
4 062.00
P.C.. Ou—.,, I- i'C.F.
I. F.
A.C. Rem (5200 ai:L)
175
L. F.
4.50
517.50
4" P.C.C. Si AevalA
2700
S.F.
1.75
4,
V a A... nth
m. F,
.9" o hC. Crass Gn RUr
S.F.
tams r[edcEmban kxent
C.1'.
Prevarntlon of
16,900
S.F.
.15
2t835.00
F.
A.C. m•,�r�une one)
TON
A.C. (900 [0 1300 to nsl
1 O
r son ; OD tonal
TnR
r ed 'a" 1
4nP
Tn5
gn on
24.2eo'lo
Pn'ch A.C. nrhl
S.F.
1" @1ck .S.C`rONerlav
S.F.
42
'.de
FA.
Ad juF I Scour C.O. eo Grade
EA.
Ad ale, !, r Valre t. r,—&
EA.
err lar
i 6
E'A.
1.500.10
91,00.001
r roe, Si `uc
I 1
F.A.
200.00
Refle to rsnb OStS
IS
RIO Rao
Ion
.o.
t•i inn
1
[
>-
1
I
1
1
I
Ff."' ;T:A WATTS
6101:tIAILS I
L.F,
LANINS1, ii': f. IRNIOVIOII
I..S.
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST 51,464.50
lN.M,CTT0': FF.FS
I. TOI.`L f.:S F'!f.110:: 1'O:5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R
R. f.01R'2C;lm 'I L!{f F!' %S .................. .5
Ii 1, 10 ,1 ;OILS 4,• $ 5.1 n9
P'. OCiI c "L[ ; :i x(P) +1 7 " t l I 0.11111111,1 i.:n Cir¢ F.", ill,, . $
TOTAI.
F.li rllfnl i'••r n•o nand - e 57,000.00
M.IP -rill and
B
CI,!, .Man ®n H',p1 Depn::i, $
R;1 "4 ar
.I
0
r�L
L
CITY OF RANCI-10 Cl OMMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd S. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Improvement Agreement and Security
for Director Review 80 -39
The subject Director Review is located on the southeast corner of
Jersey Blvd. and Utica Street. Roberts Manufacturing Company has
submitted the attached agreement and security for installation of
street lights.
The attached resolution is for the acceptance of the agreement and
security in the amount of $7,500.00.
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolu-
tion and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign and accept the
agreement of security on behalf of the City.
Respectfully submitted,
LW. BK: jaa
Attachments
Cry..
RESOLUTION NO. ''% -S/'
• A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW
NUMBER 80 -39.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement executed
on May 6, 1981 by Roberts Manufacturing Company 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
Jersey Boulevard and Utica Street.
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. 80 -39; and
WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied
by good and sufficient improvement security, which is identified in said
Improvement Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Agreement and
• said improvement security be and the same are hereby approved and the
Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Lauren R-31asserman, City Clerk
•
Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor
n /
,y�
NORTH
CITY OP ITEM:D /RECTOR REVIEW ND.860-39
RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: SITE PL R IU
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT 8 SCALE: N.T.S.
CIW OF RANCHO CGCt1I0NGA •
1MPROMIENT AGREEMENT
Director Review 80 -19
KNOW ALL MEN ED THESE PRESENTS: Pat this agreement Is made and entered
into, in conformance with the provisions of the Municipal Code and Regula-
tions of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California, a municlpal cor-
Hobcror, h� Iiwxrci of Coed to as the City, by and between said City and
hereinafter referred to as the Developer.
Wi'IN'ESSF,TH:
'NAT, WEICREAS, pursuant to said Code, Developer has requested approval by
the City of, ar nevi e,a Bn - +o In accordance
with the provlslens of the report of the Community Development Director
thereon, and any amendments cherate; located southeast corner of
Jersey Blvd. and Utica street.
and.
b11ER1 S. the City has established certain requirements I. be over by said
developer prior to granting the final approval of the development; and
WHEREAS, the execution of this agreement and Tossing of improvement security
s hereinafter cited, and approved by the City Actomey, are deemed to be
equivalent to prior completlon of said requirements for the perpose of securing
said approval)
HOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the City and the Developer
as [oJ lows:
1. The developer hereby agrees to construct at developer's expense all
improvements described on pope J hereof within ..Pde.l ear
from the data hereof.
2. na tern of this agreement shall be ..oap wee commencing o n
the date of exreu [ion hereof by the City. This agreement shall be in
defovlc me the day fhllo:+it, the last env of the term stipulated, unless
said term has been extended as hereinafter provided.
J. the Developer may request additional time in which to cmnplete the pravt-
Sions of this agreement, In writing we less than four weeks prior to
the default date, and including a star ement of circumstances of nancemit,
for additional tine. In consideration of such request, the City reserves
the right to review the prnviston5 hereof, including construction standards,
asn estimate, and sufficiency of the improvement security, and to require
adfustmene5 thereto when warranted by substantial changes therein.
4. If the Developer falls or neglects to comply with the prow Lsione of this
the City sl.Jl have the right at any time to rauen said p[uvl-
sirnv th ve cum Pi yr ai by any lnviul means, and th,,v,en to recover (ten
siJ Vuvrlo Trr and /or his 5uraty TO full cost and exponxr Incurred in so
dome;.
s. Fnernachm.nt morons shall be ob,ailned by the Uvvole Der from the office
of t,e City Luglre,ir rrinr to Mart of ativ vor. within the public right
of way, .md tiro Jua lop, abnll ,neduct such work In full ccmpl feat, whit
tin• roP.ulac Lens come flaud therein. Han - compliance may result i stappioe
of it, work by the City, end a ,ewe,., of the Panalt ins Provided.
6. Valli, right of way f-.Iprnv,mrna work r euirrd shall be constructed In •
c u ntom,wrr with approved Isprrvemunt pi.ine , S[and.trd Spceificatlons,
,it,; St.vel,rd Drawlers and .mv s ,ial a .i an:as 0,,Ir. lnnstructin
n
,hall Inriiulo any t ,::I[Ian: ,nd /or oth, incidrotal work deemed n..,aary
far drainage er public sa La y.
RCF.I'A
r)'-1
•
IYFROVE. ".EST AGREEMENT
D.P. 60 -13
Pas,
IN WITNESS PEREOF, tiee parties hereto have caused these presents to be duly
esecu and Atli now I edged wi Lb all formal it lea required by law on the dates
set forth opposite their Signatures:
DEVELOPER
BY:
BY: DATE:
NITILSS: DATE:
CITY OF RANCHO CDCRIDNOA, CALIFOFNTA
a muniripal corporation
BY: MAYOR
Al Ti.S is CITY CLI:RII
DAU.;
—
]. Work done within a istiog streets stall ho diligvnLiv pursued to mnple-
tion: the City shall hove the right to resisters, aev and all work In the
event of unjustified do lay in -:pleLion, ,sued to r all vost and
expense incurred from List Developer and /or his contractor by any lawful
S. The Devtlolmr shall be tea pons ib lr for rrplacumL•n t, rolnc,stion. or re-
nroval of any compollenL of any Ir111.11itn water system is, conflict with
the required work to tlm satisfaction of the City Engineer and the owner
of rile water system.
9. The N veloper shall be responsible for removal of all Insist rock and other
debris !near the pet.lic rifle of way r e aulting from work done on the adjz-
ceet property or witlin said right efway.
10. Trm Developor shell pinae a maintain parkway trees as directed by the
CummunRy Development Director.
11. The Imp[ovemont S t curity to be furnisl.nd by list gwulnpee to gu aan he
ompletion of tilele, of this egreemcnt shill be subject to the approval
of the City Attorney. The principal amount of said improvement security
shell be not less than the annum show below:
RPROVEPTlT SECURITY SUBHUTED: Faithful Performance Bond
TYPE SURETY /AGENT PRINCIPAL AIOUNI
Time Certificate of Deposit United California Bank $7,500.00
•
Ha[cri al and Labor Bond
IN WITNESS PEREOF, tiee parties hereto have caused these presents to be duly
esecu and Atli now I edged wi Lb all formal it lea required by law on the dates
set forth opposite their Signatures:
DEVELOPER
BY:
BY: DATE:
NITILSS: DATE:
CITY OF RANCHO CDCRIDNOA, CALIFOFNTA
a muniripal corporation
BY: MAYOR
Al Ti.S is CITY CLI:RII
DAU.;
—
I� &c:o c.ri OF J 1 \TZ l!i It-11, COSSi1CII01 ::p aO:I.Q W :GA
..•u�
(Att., CItoT Pi:c.:!IT FEE SMEJCLE
/ Uttauh to ru Jectnr'; Copy ")
eEruT xo.- __CO:!?CTE.1 av tJS,n Fj/,
File Reference O. /2. C— q rip
%OT[: urns not ill �-
nt Jepuoirz,•�u currant (ac Eor vritin6 Ve Tit or pavemenr
repla<e-
CO:lSTRL'CTII%
IUTAL CO STRL'CTIO:I COS-
mt;•� ---'
FS 0
i-
r. p9:.AI. IC519XTIn'I .r : :s
.. . . . . . . .
_ . . .
.5
it
Nc:„
h 7
0
r1
L�
CITY OF RA \CI -10 CUG1:b10 \G.\
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981 `
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Improvement Agreement and Security
for Installation of Arrow Route Storm Drain
Daon Corporation, the developer of Parcel Map 6206 located on the
northside of Arrow Route between Haven and Milliken Avenues, has
submitted an agreement and security for the installation of a storm
drain in Arrow Route in the following amounts:
Faithful Performance $1,011,000.00
Labor a Material $1,011,000.00
The attached resolution is for acceptance of above referenced agree-
ment and bonds.
REC=MENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolu-
tion and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign and accept the
agreement and security on behalf of the City.
Respectfully submitted,
: BK: jaa
Attachments
t
RESOLUTION NO. S/ 3�2�
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR STORM DRAIN
INSTALLATION OF ARROW, BETWEEN HAVEN AND MILLIKEN
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement executed
on May 6, 1981 by Daon Corporation as developer, for the installation of
storm drain adjacent to the real property specifically described therein,
and generally located on Arrow Route, between Haven and Milliken.
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; and
WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied
by good and sufficient improvement security, which is identified in said
Improvement Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Agreement and
said improvement security be and the same are hereby approved and the
Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Laurens K. Wasserman, City Clerk
Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor
`% I
CITY OF %%NCIN1 NC,D!OSOA
IMPROVEENC ACREEIEST
BROW All MEN U THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is made and entered
into, in conformance with the provisions of the Municipal Cade and eegula-
eires of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, irate of California, a municipal c -
poracion, hereinafter referred to as the City, by and between said City and
he[einah cr re Ee rrea ro as the Oevclo per•
NITITSSETH:
TV,iT, WHEREAS, urseart to said Code, Developer has requested approval by
the City Of, _Attar Storm Drain in accordance
with the pewisiens of the report of the rn:wunity Development Director
thereon, and any emendmenta thereto; located
Arro. Mighnay between Maven and Milliken
and,
WHEREAS, the City has established certain requirements to be net by said
developer prior to granting the final approval of the development; and
WIIEREAs, the ex sotion 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, TIICREFOP.S, it is hereby agreed by and between the City and the Developer
es Coll...:
1. The developer hereby agrees to construct at developer's expense nil
improvements described on page 3 hereof within
from the dace hereof.
3. the term of this aCreamer, shall be yew , ct. cncing oa
the date of execution hereof by the City. This agreement shalt be in
default oa the day following the last day of the r sti,",Pd, .mess
said term has been extended as hereinafter providedrn
1. The Developer sa v request additional time En which to caplet. the pravi-
slons of this agreement, in Writing not less than four weeks prior to
the default dote, and including a statement of circumstances of necessity
for additional time. In consideration of such request, the City reserves
the right to review the pro. talons hereof, including canstr.eriun standards,
east esf Sma c, and sufficiency of the improvement security, and to requite
ad]ustnents thereto when warranted by substantial changes therein.
4. If the beveluper fails or negl. cos to rumply with the provisions of this
ago. anent, the City stall have the right at any time to cause said pn•vt-
to be tom,lot ad by any lawful moans, and the raw pan rn recover from
i, I`,e vela par .md /nr his Surety tho full east and ex Frn ae incurred In so
lain,
5. Ent .... h," prrmits shall in obtained by the Developer from the office
Of lm elty 1::,;inrrr prfn1 to start of an S' work within the pnhlic rfpht
of v and tbo deeola,el ::hell ciminCt such work in full eno,lience with
the rrgwlalluel .,tamed therein. gmn -oomph tune. may result in aL.111.,
PC thr work by the City, and as.sun.mcnt of the Penalties provided.
6. R,idic right of say lmptuv.•ment work rr,ut,rd shall be c.C,lruClod in
• conPrznaa•e sic, app. owed improeement plans, gtanda,d S,elflceli ul,
and Standard Drnwtu, and any epnci.+l ,mendmenes therota. C ustrwctlnn
sh..11 tact ode any trontitions Pai /or other (nc ld.•no4 week d.,.,d n. ca Gary
for drair,o or public safety.
REEI:A
Page I •
IMTROUM:.- ALPi:E:IL::T
i. dark donv ciNdn ..i..I ...p ntrer4 sbnll ba ,iiliBcnti': P.rnacd t0 c aple-
01
t in u: tlu pity ItI it "I I I [1311 ril:h[ [n comp l e [u a aml all III Ilk in cM1c
ml[ a( anjoatl Efare Aolay f ^.I ardl, and to r all cost .Iuf
expense lnu, rruJ free [be 0e vc lore[ and /or his ervt me mr by any lawful
means.
8. The ncve:nper III III be resronsiblo for replacvoent, relocation, or to-
Isreal ot orl olnpnncnt of a n ga tiun wn ter ey stem to conflict oil
t ➢e r,,ui,,J wn1k to the iattsfarcion of the City Engineer and the ovaer
Of thu water s /step.
9. The Deve In per shall De rvsponaf l., for f ,,vA rd all loos....P, a v oHmr
d. -brie 1"" tl1111 public right of wog res10 sing from cork done on theadda-
ant property or within said right of w
10. TIIe DcvAOp.r ,loll plans .uni m a irtain parkway trees a$ directed by the
Caslouity Development Directer.
il. The i m;mnve nlent security to Fe forninhed by the Deve:opor to guarantee
mpletlnn of the turns[ of this nxraemnnt shrill be subject to the approval
Of the Clty Attorn , The prfncipal trend' of said fmprnveneot security
shall be not less than the amount shown below:
IMPROVVIENT SECURITY SUBMITTED: Faithful Perfocrmce Bond
ME SURETY /AOF.NT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT
Faithful Performance Bond $1,011,000,00
Material and tabor Pond $1,011,000.00 •
Le IAT::I;FS Ar: x!:11 F, tho patties herolo II.lm- c.ws,d these ire znme to he July;
term and Ac1d,uwlddzvd wilh all fo anal ieles required by law on the daces
EL't for[II .....it, tltefr sil•natot-Og:
r RroPA °raI �r oevel.nrrx
DATE :- ..... iLs— illa1_
.Jack it �oi -ri yen/l tplcIrai- v:ager�"L.,rnm,i
Y'L/,P.;< DATE:_AQril 8_ 1993
,Ipaniel Liadiard, Vicc Ines idcalt, Comm,/,"d.
DATE:___
CITY OF "NcTI11 Ch'UIDIO%C.A, CALIFORNIA
a sonlclral corpora Inn
ir.rr cr u:noe., qls CY4:, }" `3"114 IXU
..... .. ale 1.B..rJ ddI and „ „. =„yr., ,, — ere,
• inn, :'r:'
1111.11 •1 •ack ii. r.0rrty ,n
..e 1 a.. „.-. ., a...om .ne ,..r.I•e ....n.� .......,re Iv ..n., .......,.
e a..e..,', on,..w.•r.,e,,I ............................ •
T x CAROL 5, a. B,,
are
c u', io .v rr
'w. IV r , ! •a/ tnTml... .... n 19. t901 .
Ca 101 S. 40rris
�77
—� EXECUTED IN DUPLICATE Bond No. 796 3025
Premium:$7,583.00
FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
State of California, and flj Mnga, AT2.1
(hereinafter designated as principal ") have entered into an
agreement whereby principal agrees to install and complete cer-
tain designated public improvements, which said agreement,
dated , 19_, and identified as
project fle,ohe znn a io,t r plan
as hereby referred to and ma a apart hereof; and,
WHEREAS, said principal is required under the terms of said
agreement to furnish a bond for the faithful performance of said
agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, we the principal and NATIOdN. FIT: INSItPX:L
M2 ?VY 0? NAgf�[;gD , as Surety, are e d and
Sirmly boun�unio the Ciiy of Rancho Cucamonga (hereinafter cal'ed
"City "), in the penal sun of Q1e Million Eleven Thouxmd--- ---- -----
- ______---- _- _- ____- -_____ —__ors l +.
Olt 019 09�_) awful
money o. the United States, for the paymerC of which sum well and
truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, execu-
tors and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly by these
presents.
• w.. The condition of this obligation is such that if the above
a trators,
1 > "s» r.ngoxw" abide
condi-
F on_�ri19a. 1981 _., ••., •.. ,f— n.....�.. e.ol.. :.,m lu ration
Richard II. Tucker to be
V.o _Petrick O. YcY<Atee Ft and
..nn,.••..ow.w_C= remtord_ Land , wn ..... . 11.1"....a.n ...,n.n.no.,,n.n,, is off icers.
and .n.nn m na m ea 11, ,.e". "m ......e ,.a .n obligation
nmal . .. man ,n,»m nm.d, .ed .. remain so
.....INyea ,. ne n..• —. ..... r.u.... a.., de .neh
...... mfn i.— e,.,.1 —.,m b..d.1 addition
,,, », included
!/7 unable at-
e
nnlss ,m nma.ne aee. ,.n, ing such
R iy judgment
Z. no•e ,. ,.n,l m.. ».. ,•+ .anal a the
..y....nwm me to the wore to he performed thereunder or the spec -
fl i)irld A
;rnr4 G4 CAI iGJit:ilA �
cru4: ry a4 Lis ! 1LC5
N.I.n1lbl—I las, ingel_s .m�lnrnesuudl Cali ?urnis _.nn
nllorwv •11ml of e
. NtlmnA pu le m
Compv of "erns
rvnn IS ......11, f"o.- to me to as the Yme action rvnow fume
• . _ 15 1111. bPlde n21nu 1,..
Pr,nn 4nd alnnnw1»4,1111..1nn%,nu `wa:M 4neee1,wee VednnrumrnFfor
and in n,Fall of the Notional Fee Inefenee consent, of Feelers, lot the urn
ene aaaawr then —vel wm. Los Angeles
- -- m Gown unUer my lulLl4y -d nolarul wel at mApril 1n 11w G1Y a1 — �a
w w.rnlvnm..... — �or D, IsI
111 N -.; +IV P,dec
EXECUTED IN DUPLICATE Bond No. 796 3025
Premium: Included in Perf.
Bond
•
LABOR AND MATERIALMEN HO::D
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
State of California, and D40N MRS vTIM
(hereinafter designated as "punc pal ") have entered into an
agreement whereby principal agrees to install and complete cer-
tain designated public improvements, which said agreement,
datedated and identified as ro-
T'ancho yca^.w,ga 'aster •N• 19_ p
is hereby referred to an made d part hereof; and,
WHEREAS, under the terms of said agreement, principal is re-
quired before entering upon the performance of the work, to file
a good and sufficient payment bond with the City of Rancho Cuca-
monga to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 13
(commencing with Section 3083) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the
Civil Code of the State of California.
NON', 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, material -
men and other persons employed in the performance of the aforesaid
agreement and referred to in the , aforesaid code of Civil Procedure
in the sum of !Fla "ialic, __
.. rn u.._ _- ___- __.......................
--"---- for mater. als
fv.nrshed cr labor thereon of any kind, or or amounts due under
the Ilnrmnl n.,.rr.,wr Tn...n.., n,. n... .....
srnll cr uurwmrn rk or labor'9
•eeeina the
coon. or __..Orange ght
( n April _9._I9H7 (thereof,
�.d•..Y. -d,, r ,.,re ra !.able at-
.as.. +,. r•••a•�h.w•.r,e_ Richard fl_Tucker n ,na such
,.anRe9ioan7 V.,p,•,� ,,,,a Patrick IlcAtee _ :o be taxed
wDirectora Lands ,,, „„r,ra,rwn=.n...,nn.....r.; .r.„ (acted.
iL seary ,. m m , • . w rm, -1. e.rta, r.. na in
110 .r r1 avmn,„. rm.rrr ...r.e, .,e ... this bm:d
•o..e a .. .. rn., w. o- ..rv. n rl..0 ranies, and
mmencinc
Sn.m..r r.•r...n..n nr L », w . r,rx.e.,r .r .w s..•e .1 Code, so
n any suit
nr,tss ^•r n„e ..,e ,sr.l ,.n.
reed, then
t shall be
I.B. Overby _
ango, ex-
acro=m'nt or the roecifi cnlinn��rr said
c co cne o
terms f
r mm�an nn bn ev...0 r <..
1 114TFol CllllORIIIA
111 • %TYOr LOS A'IGELES
Nnu,, Pm rn LOt :n1 ^r1n5 Grunly. rn me 5tneal Cait fn Yn id .ao
Ircrror r:<n,ly mel ._.. B,._._A.ler - --
Arro,rrrY rn l,rrr, rrl I f Nn, A'. Inlulino Comp.nY al rI1pC
who Is N) rvrr,.,IIY 4 o mr ro y IM1< V µ,,pi
_Is .r,l „r,�eYrl rr rn. n..rcr�, r.r ,r,mml an .m e<Ia <mmmr4 Eq�
rrrpn, and ,r4nurvl..npn IM1U1 M1r rrgrPl.3Valea , +,1 .el v<reJ Yi.l rnflrur -Inl.
and un IMYII of Ibr Nnrnnal Frr Imuran« Cemp.nY al H.nlord, for n
end m u,o .......... I „rn• a ufn
.y _. .`. n rrY<n none, mr h+ ^Eeruf .olar.ahr.yr nHr «rn m<GI Los hnaeles
VN COUnb.lnn_ Ath AZri.l A n 19,51
�! I
W
•
•
CITY OF RANCHO CUCkNIONCA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981 Uil
T0: City Council and City Manager.
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Parcel Map 6544, Agreement and Security
The subject map was approved by the Planning Commission on
December 22, 1981, for the division of 19.9 acres into three (3)
parcels for industrial use located at the northeast corner of
Haven Avenue and Sixth Street.
The developer has submitted bonds and agreement that are sufficient
in nature to insure installation of the required street improvements.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution
authorizing the City Clerk and City Engineer to sign the map and
forward it to the County Recorder.
Respectfully submitted,
LBIi:BK:jaa
Attachments
?/n
RESOLUTION NO. —e�-/ -:SF
• A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 6544,
(TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 6544)
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map No. 6544, submitted by Solen
Enterprises, and consisting of 3 parcels, located on the west side of
6th Street, east side of Haven Avenue, being a division of a portion of
Lots 13 and 14 of Section 13, T.iS., R7W, Map of Cucamonga Fruit Lands,
recorded book 4, page 9 records of San Bernardino County was approved by
the City Engineer of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on December 22, 1980; and,
WHEREAS, Parcel Map Number 6544 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 by entry into an improvement agreement guaranteed by acceptable
improvement security by Solen Enterprises as developer;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said improvement agreement and
said improvement security submitted by said developer be and the same
are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said
improvement agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the
• City Clerk to attest; and that said Parcel Map Number 6544 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 6th day of May, 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
• Lhu ren r4. 'Aasserma n', City ClerY
Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor
7"'7
A
•
•
CITY OF RANCHO Cl,'G1N10 \C
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Church street and Highland
Avenue Street Improvements
The Church Street and Highland Avenue Street Improvement
Project has been completed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer. It is recommended that the Council approve
acceptance of the project and authorize the City Engineer
to file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder
and release performance surety.
RECOMMENDATION
Council accept as complete the Church Street and Highland
Avenue Street Improvements and pass a Resolution authorizing
the City Engineer to file the Notice of Completion and
release performance bonds.
espectfully submitted,
YB blc�
Attachments
7
• RESOLUTION NO. 4i/
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCETPING THE CHURCH
STREET AND HIGHLAND AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR
THE WORK.
WHEREAS, the construction of street improvements on Church
Street and Highland Avenue have been completed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed,
certifying the work complete.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the work is hereby accepted
and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion
with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
• ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk
•
Phillip D, Schlosser, Mayor
n
u
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Post Office Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California
91730
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Post Office Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California
91730
• NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate
in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which
interest or estate is: Church St.: STA 1 +77 to STA 23 +11
Highland Ave.: STA 0 +10 to 26 +19
2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 9320 -C Baseline Road, Post Office Box
807, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730.
3. On the 20th day of April , 1981, there was com-
pleted on the hereinafter described real property the work of im-
provement set forth in the contract documents for
Church Street and Highland Avenue Improvement Project
Project No. 79 -07
4. The name of the original. contractor for the work of im-
provement as a whole was Fontana Paving, Inc.
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:
Church St.: STA 1 +77 to STA 23 +11
Highland Ave.: STA 0 +10 to 5111 2G +19
/1�
0
CITY OF RAINCHO CCGWONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981 "P
1977
TO: City Council and City Manager
FRO19: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Agreement with CalTrans for Improvements to the Railroad
Crossing of Vineyard Avenue North of 8th Street
As a part of the reconstruction project on Vineyard Avenue between
8th Street and Arrow Route, soon to be advertised for bid, improve-
ment of the railroad crossing gates north of 8th Street is necessary.
Special funding is available for this work by which 908 of the cost
is contributed by the Federal government and the railroad. The re-
maining 108 is paid by the City and, in the case of this project, the
City's share is further reduced by the Federal Aid Urban (FAU) funds
which cover 868 of the entire project. _
Federal funds for this type of work are channeled through CalTrans a
the attached agreement supplement is necessary to accomplish the
fund transfer. Receipt of these funds will increase our "left- over"
FAU funds for use this coming year.
It is recommended that the Council approve an agreement with CalTrans
to provide for fedral aid in the funding of improvements to the rail-
road crossing of Vineyard Avenue north of 8th Street.
Reppectfully yubmitted,
:PAR:jaa
Attachments
� -I
RESOLUTION NO.
• A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF LOCAL AGENCY - STATE AGREEMENT
NO. 08 -5420, PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 4.
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga wishes to take advantage
of Federal funding for the construction of the railroad crossing gates
on Vineyard Avenue, north of 8th Street.
WHEREAS, said funding requires the execution of Local Agency -
State Agreement No. 08 -5420, Program Supplement No. 4 by an authorized
agent.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga.approves the execution of Local Agency - State
Agreement No. 08 -5420, Program Supplement No. 4 and authorizes and
directs the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement on its
behalf and transmit to the State for processing.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1981.
AYES:
• NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Lauren M. Wasserman, City C erk
0
Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor
11"
City of Rancho
Local Agency Oucamonga
Supplement No. 4
• To Local Agency -State
Agreement No. 08 -5420
08- SBd- O -RCuc
P R O G R A M RRP- R194(001)
Vineyard Ave. @ ATSF
OF Xing No. 2 -98.7
LOCAL 1AGUICY FEDERAL AID SAFE I6PROWMI71fT PROJECTS
It: TIIE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA14ONGA
Local Agency
Pursuant to the Federal Highway Safety Act, the attached
"Program" of Federal Aid Projects marked "Exhibit B" is hereby
incorporated in that Faster Agreement for the Federal -Aid Program
which was entered into between the above named LOCAL ACEIICY and 7.
the STATE on December 5 1979 and is subject to all of FU
the terms and conditions thereo .
The subject program is adopted in accordance with Paragraph 2 I_5
of Article II of the aforementioned agreement under authority of ,
• City /MXAUj( Resolution No. approved by the City r
Counci1/"Nt(VM0im dM9xSaRatw xo=on ;
(See copy attached).
Approved for State
District Director of Transportation
District O
Department o Transportation
•
Form DH -OLA -431 (Rev. 3/70)
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAiMONGA
Local Agency
tle
Attest:
Clerk
'-i
Nil
L
a I
m
i b
P
n
i V
a
- a
u P
a \
r 'y
R
1`
PROGRAM
OF
LOCAL Aroicr FEDERAL SAFETY ItpRove-urrr PROJECTS
Date: March 24, 1981 PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO.: 4
TO MASTER AGREEMENT NO. 08 -5420
EXHIBIT 8
OB- SBd- O -RCuc
Local Agency: City of
Rancho
Cucamonga
l'rolec[ Jo.
Location d Oescr Lion
Est. Total cost of p_r_oj
a era un s
a t n un s
In the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, County of
San Bernardino on
Vineyard Ave. (FAU R194
at ATSF RR Grade Cross-
ing No. 2 -98.7
,
RP- R194(001)
Install No. 9 automatic
$85,250
$76,725
$8,525
gates and flashing
light signals to re-
place existing gates
and flashers by Rail-
road Force Acct.
•Local Agency Funds
unless otherwise
specified
Spec a Covenants
or Remarks: The cost
of maintenance of
the cross;nn ch.,11
ha — a77 -- -t .tea I
commission. 2. All required signing and marking at RR Xing will be completed
in accordance with the requirements of MUTCD, 1978. 3. In agreeing to the construction of
this project, the local agency agrees the payment of Federal funds will be limited to the detail
estimate amount approved by the Federal Highway Administration in the Federal -Aid Project Agree-
ment (PR -2), or its modification (PR -2A), and accepts any increases in local agency contribution.
DM -DW31 . •
•
9
CITY Of RANCI-10 CUG\ \IO \G,\
STAMP REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Approval of Contract Change Order No. Carnelian
Street Storm Drain Improvement Project
On March 30, 1981, the City received written notice from County
Flood Control per Corps of Engineers of the elimination of 50.31 ft.
(STA 10670 to STA 11 +20,31) of that portion of the Carnelian Street
Storm Drain that is to be constructed by the County Flood Control
current contract. Despite efforts by staff to pursuade the Corps
of Engineers to reconsider their position, it appears that the City
will be responsible for the construction of that 50.31 feet.
Options for construction of the additional 50.31 feet are:
• contract with County Flood Control to have their contractor
do the work per a contract change order;
• readvertise; seeking bids for the additional work;
• contract change order with the City's contractor as provided
for in the special provisions of that contract.
Because of the cost of the change, negotiations other than stated abov
are not possible. After discussions with County Flood Control,
taking into consideration the essence of time and careful evaluation
of the options available, it is desirable to effect the change by
contract change order with the City's contractor.
Although the addition is considerably less than 258 (78) of the desig
quantity, due to the difference in design radius and size, requiring
additional materials and different forms, the additional section can-
not be constructed for the same unit price of $250.00 per foot as
specified in the contract. Under the terms of the contract, extra
work can be accomplished by negotiations or force account (time
and materials). At this time, negotiations for an adjusted unit
price are taking place. If an agreement cannot be reached, then fore
account would be the City's next option.
Progress and any new information accumulated prior to Council meeting
will be presented at that time.
Continued .......
�_r r
STAFF REPORT
Approval of Contract Change Order No. 1
Carnelian Street Storm Drain Improvement Project
May 6, 1981
Page 2
Normally a contract change order would be accomplished at
staff level under the terms of the contract without the need of
Council approval. However, because of the nature of the change
and the substantial cost (Engineer's Estimate $20,000), that will
deplete the contingency, Council's awareness and approval is
desirable.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Council approve Contract Change Order No. 1
Carnelian Street Storm Drain Improvement Contract to be implemented
in accordance with contract specifications and special provisions
and authorize an additional $20,000 be appropriated for said contract
to cover cost of said change order.
Respectfully submitted,
c�/ // 7zl�
LHH:MP: jaa
Attachment
Jj��
•
•
•
7
Smtn '-nj Plvir
v 2 75 3
C, Oct: :•- 10.0 PH to Ano
nbove, :Cztn.
2. Toa PLZ;;-rQ Of 0,in D7 i. to c1-riE7 :r. :nd
-ISO to the -Lb Of ,lie ctz2b Cut.
3. 2,. %,nnt for !in I..:in Lc n falcri,i •4 Iz�?n, /A- Shoi-.i n 104, cf Sub%cc ,-7 t..:r.7i-rz:j ct
rticn contract. 1C0 ;1,-,anrcy 1,11-1• Lc rc-�:L-cj 1
the
ASO
7 r.
Sal, BernnrdrD CCU;Ily
cp�fa;a Pul,
V
b;
L
FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT
825 East Third Street • Sao Bernardino, CA 82415 - 17101 3831665
C. J. Or PIETRn. Frond Cnmrol Engineer
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P. 0. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Attention: Lloyd Hubbs
City Engineer
Gent Icr„en:
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
ENVIRONMENTAL
PUBLIC WORBS AGENCY
JOHN M. 9ERNARO
Agency Admmianator•
March 25, 1987
File: 1- 350 /1:04`;•'�U `i 17 I: F °cJ o^•;,Cfa1 CEP-,y
ha{ Pal
•SIGH �I G3�n,L;llJl user lv7 J
i
Re: Zone 1, Cucamonga Creek, Phase VI
C/E Improvement Project
Demens Creek Channel
Reference is made to telephone conversation on March 24, 7981, between Messrs
Fast and Hobbs regarding the upcoming Corps of Engineers' construction of the
Carnelian crossing of Demens Creek Channel in the above referenced project.
We have been informed by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers that the portion of
the Carnelian Storm Drain included in the Carnelian bridge across Demons Creek
Channel was inadvertently omitted from the contract bid items. Therefore a •
change order to their contractor is necessary at this time to construct this
portion.
The Corps of Engineers' guidelines indicate that Federal cost, in similar
cases, is between the channel wall and the right -of -way line (Station 10 +70),
and any extention beyond this station will be local cost. The extra length
was found to be 50.31 feet and that portion will be City of Rancho Cucamonga's
cost.
The Corps of Engineers has been instructed to eliminate the extra 50.31 foot
length from the construction in anticipation that this portion could be added
to your Storm Drain Contract with less tort to the City.
Your cooperation in this matter will be greatly appreciated, and if you have
any questions regarding the above, please call tor, Mina S. Ghaly, Chief,
Federal Projects Division, at (714) 383 -2278.
RVII:LJF:df
W VVH
u�
Very truly yours,
C. J. DI PIETRO, Flood Control Engineer
by Rub Pontes K—
Asst. Flood Control Engineer
Planning - Engineering
Gont ✓u dlan one Opeu��,� inq and Enginenwq . Fedrtral Prelecb
E
•
•
rrra "I nawr1,� III a",II
STArr REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Cooperative Agreement with the County Transportation
Department for Maintenance of Streets
Attached is a resolution authorizing execution of a cooperative
agreement with the County of San Bernardino to maintain certain
high maintennace border streets during storm conditions normally
maintained by both agencies to minimize overlapping maintenance
efforts.
The intersection of San Bernardino Avenue (Fourth Street) and
Etiwanda Avenue is 258 within the City of Ontario (Southwest
quadrant), 258 within the City of Rancho Cucamonga (Northwest
quadrant), and 508 within the County (East half).
Summit Avenue at San Sevaine Channel (0.2 miles West of Cherry
Avenue) is 508 within the City (South half) and 508 within the
County (North half) . Said intersection and said portion of Summit
Avenue are subject to heavy debris deposition during major storms
requiring traffic posting and debris removal.
In order to minimize overlapping maintenance and provide continuity
of traffic signing, it is more economical to have one agency perform
said functions.
Therefore, it is desirable for the County and City to enter into
an agreement to set forth responsibilities and obligation of each
as pertains to participation for costs and maintenance.
Because the majority of maintenance effort occurs in the County at
said intersection, because the County maintains several other
channels crossing Summit Avenue and because San Sevaine Channel
requires continuous monitoring and is far removed from other areas
in the City requiring continuous monitoring, it is desirable for
the County to maintain those areas during storm conditions.
continued ...........
);
It 4
Cooperative Agreement with the County
Transportation Department for Maintenance
of Streets
May 6, 1981
Page 2
•
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution
approving the execution of Cooperative Agreement that sets forth the
responsibilities and obligations of the City and County as pertains
to participation for costs and maintenance of said areas and authorizing
and directing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement on its
behalf and transmit to the County of San Bernardino for processing.
Respectfully submitted,
I,l
LBH:MP:jaa
Attachments
r
•
lJ
RESOLUTION NO. `6/
-- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO.� StAej 1Yic...;�
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga recognizes the benefit
to the City of minimizing Overlapping Maintenance of the areas defined
by Contract Agreement,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga approves the execution of Cooperative Agreement
and authorizes and directs the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said
agreement on its behalf and transmit to the County of San Bernardino
for processing.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
L
ATTEST:
Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk
Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor
0^I
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT coUNTNVIRON ENTAL OINo
ENVIRONMENTAL AGE;
825 East Third Street • San Bernardino, CA 92415 • (714) 383 1365 � � PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY
JOHN R SHONE, D ✓ec,o, �f!smJ Ys
• JOHN M. BERNARD
r L\
April 21, 1981
Mr. Lauren M. Wasserman, City Manager
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P. 0. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Dear Mr. Wasserman:
Attached for your review and signature are an original and three copies
of an agreement setting forth responsibilities and obligations for costs and
maintenance of the roads described in the contract.
After City Council has approved and signed this agreement please return
all copies to my office for further approval by the Board of Supervisors.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 383-100;.
•
BLI:hs
4 Atchs.
0
Very truly yours,
JOHN R. SHONE
Director of Transportation
BY p�
B. L. INGRAM
Assistant Road Commissioner -
Operations
Anport Manasamant . Planet, not Cogo% enog • Road OM,atmna
• COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
STANDARD CONTRACT
Fenewahle 'X Termmams
B. L. Ingram eh E., 1001 Dare
Budget Unit No Suh Ogecr NO. P mn No, lob m
No. ( Am,nr W Contract
580 9673 021 71HO8208
Check One 0 Eapend,noc C Revenue 1 II contract has mare than one Vaymem or r,c,.,,.
SSA = omyleu the lonra
,. Federal Number o1 Vaymenrs
Emproyer 10 = Estmaletl amount of each 5
THIS CONTRACT is entered into in the State of California by and between the County of San Bernardino, hereafter
called the County, and
hereafter called
IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
(Use spar.. he an, and reverse side of Corm if needed. Set forth service to be rendered, amount to be paid, manner m( payment,
time (or performance or completion, determination of satisfactory performance and cause for termination, other terms and
conditions, and attach plans, specifications, and addenda, if any.)
WHEREAS, the intersection of San Bernardino Avenue (Fourth Street) and Etiwanda
Avenue is 25% within the City of Ontario (Southwest quadrant) , 252 within the CITY
(Northwest quadrant), and 502 within the COUNTY (East half); and
WHEREAS, Summit Avenue at San Sevaine Channel (0.2 miles West of Cherry Avenue)
• is 502 within the CITY (South half) and 502 within the COUNTY" (North half) ; and
WHEREAS, said intersection and said portion of Summit Avenue is subject to heavy
debris deposition during major storms requiring traffic posting and debris removal; and
WHEREAS, in order to minimize overlapping maintenance and provide continuity of
traffic signing, it is more economical to have one agency perform said functions; and
WHEREAS, the COUNTY and CITY desire to enter into an agreement to set forth
responsibilities and obligations of each as pertains to participation for costs and
maintenance.
NO4l, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1.0 COUNTY AGREES
1.1 1,, place barricades, warning lights, etc., and remove debris including
:supplying labor and equipment, etc., as needed to protect the public
and maintain said intersection and said portion of Summit Avenue.
1.2 TO prepare and submit invoices to CITY for 411 labor, equipment and
matari.al costs including overhead and a 13% administrative charge
perfurlved under dhi.s agreement.
1.3 '1'u notify CCfY it and when road closure of said streets becomes
necessary.
*ny provis'Orl; On 011, nlvvreq cob` and r,;f..np." :,I dllai;nn•.inls hrr.•.if COIISi1I'.IIC a ps't of :his conl,,xt and are
incorporxed herein in full
02 12,11 anna rw..,l
2.0 CITY AGREES
2.1 To pay COUNTY within 30 days upon receiving billing from COUNTY for
labor, equipment, material, overhead and administration performed
under this agreement.
3.0 IT IS FURTHER, MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: •
3.1 In the event of major structural damage involving both agency areas,
CITY and COUNTY representatives will meet and decide on repairs needed
and method of repair and billing.
3.2 Nothing in this agreement shall preclude the CITY from doing additional
barricading or cleanup In their jurisdiction as they so desire.
3.3 Nothing in this agreement shall rescind, supersede or modify the
traffic signal maintenance agreement between the CITY and COUNTY for
this intersection.
3.4 Neither party to the agreement nor officer nor employees thereof shall
be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of any-
thing done or omitted to be done by other party to the agreement under
or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to
the parties under this agreement. It is also understood and agreed
that pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, each party shall fully
indemnify and bold the other party harmless from any liability for
injury (as defined by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by
reason of anything done or omitted to be done in connection with any
work, authority or jurisdiction delegated under this agreement.
3.5 This agreement shall terminate immediately upon receiving written •
notice requesting termination from either agency.
THIS AGREEMENT shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors
and assigns of both parties.
P: WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed
by their respective officials thereunto duly authorized.
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Chairman, Board of Suporvisors ISmfe if corporation, company, etc.l
Dated
ATTESTED
By
JAatlronted Sgnur..e)
Dated
Title _
Clerk of�tt:� go.,rU nl Su;perv;SJ�s
Address
r 1
LI
Approvejas b)ln:r/dl :o,m Fi:. u¢;ml as m nwup;t paPy..d;n.rC
County Cou lwl •f �Qnnw Ad m;n nparnn O'ricr + —
h 2 2
•
•
111 ! o.11111 !411\ I'll ' �1
M.S. 78 -0046 - located on Helms Avenue south of 9th Street
Owner: Albert W. Davies
9421 Ninth Street
Cucamonga, California 91730
Faithful Performance Bond (Road) $11,000
The street improvements have been constructed in accordance with the approved
plans and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements
and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion.
Tract 9444 - located on the east side of Amethyst at Banyan
Owner: Fox Hollow III (Nubank International)
9014 W. Olympic Boulevard
Beverly Hills, California 90211
Faithful Performance Bond (Road) $76,000.00
The street improvements have been constructed in accordance with the approved
Plans and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements
and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion.
Tract 9329 - located at west of Haven Avenue and south of Hidden Farm Road
Owner: Kenneth Kerner and Assoc.
330 Park Lane, Suite 2
Laguna Beach, California 92651
Faithful Performance Bond (Road) $158,000.00
The street inprovements have been completed in an acceptable manner at this
time and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements
and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion.
continued...
1�i
STAFF REPORT
C�
DATE:
May 6, 1981
U q
TO:
City Council and
City Manager
1977
FROM:
Lloyd Hobbs, City
Engineer
SUBJECT:
Consent Calendar,
Release of Bonds and Notices of
Completion
M.S. 78 -0046 - located on Helms Avenue south of 9th Street
Owner: Albert W. Davies
9421 Ninth Street
Cucamonga, California 91730
Faithful Performance Bond (Road) $11,000
The street improvements have been constructed in accordance with the approved
plans and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements
and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion.
Tract 9444 - located on the east side of Amethyst at Banyan
Owner: Fox Hollow III (Nubank International)
9014 W. Olympic Boulevard
Beverly Hills, California 90211
Faithful Performance Bond (Road) $76,000.00
The street improvements have been constructed in accordance with the approved
Plans and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements
and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion.
Tract 9329 - located at west of Haven Avenue and south of Hidden Farm Road
Owner: Kenneth Kerner and Assoc.
330 Park Lane, Suite 2
Laguna Beach, California 92651
Faithful Performance Bond (Road) $158,000.00
The street inprovements have been completed in an acceptable manner at this
time and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements
and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion.
continued...
1�i
Staff Report - Release of Bonds
May 6, 1981
Page 2
P.N. 4804 - located on the south side of 9th Street at Lion •
Owner: Ninth Street Industrial Park
2155 E. Garvey North, B -4
[Jest Covina, California 91791
Monument Bond $ 2,500.00
Cerification from Associated Engineers indicates that all final monuments have
been set and they have been paid in full.
Tract 9403 - located east of Mayberry and north of Highland Avenue
Owner: Olympus Pacific Corp.
2110 Katella Avenue
Anaheim, Calfiornia 92803
Faithful Performance Bond (Landscaping) $ 7,563.00
Landscaping and irrigation system have been constructed in accordance with
approved plans and it is recommended that City Council accept said improvements.
M.S. 77 -0665C - located on the north side of Foothill west of Lion
Owner: Lewis Development Co. •
P. 0. Box 670
Upland, California 91786
Faithful Performance Bond (Block Wall) $21,000.00
The low concrete black wall on the north and west boundaries are not longer
required due to the completion of the concrete Flood Control Channel located
west of the subject property.
Tract 9446 - located on the south side of 9th Street, west of Baker, north of
A T Railroad
continued...
Owner: Kingsway Construction Co.
110 W. "A" Street, Suite 590
San Diego, California 92101
Labor and Material Bond (Road) $108.000
labor and Material Bond (Sewer) 30,000
Labor and Material Bond (Water) 41,000
ti �
•
Staff Report - Release of Bonds
May 6, 1981
Page 3
•
Tract 9454 - West side of Haven, North of Southern Pacific
Railroad
Owner: Lewis Homes
P. 0. Box 670
Upland, California 91786
Labor and Material Bond (Road)
$74,000
Labor and Material Bond (Water)
17,400
Labor and Material Bond (Sewer)
20,400
Tract 9530 - located on Archibald Avenue, north of Hillside
Owner: Lewis Homes
P. 0. Box 670
Upland, California 91786
Labor and Material Bond (Road)
$75,000
Tract 9482 -2 located on the north side of Wilson at Beechwood Drive
Owner: The Deer Creek Co.
P. 0. Box 488
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701
• Labor and Material Bond (Road)
$68,OD0
Tract 9420 - located on the Northeast corner of Banyan
and Hellman
Owner: Nubank International, Inc.
9014 West Olympic Boulevard
Beverly Hills, California 90211
Labor and Material Bond (Road)
$32,000
Tract 9380 - located on the south side of Manzanita, west
of Beryl
Owner: Kenneth C. Elmore
26 East Las Flores
Arcadia, California 91006
Labor and Material Bond (Road)
$15,000
Tract 9479 - located north of Church Street and east of
Turner
(honer: Kaufman and Broad
P. n. Bo:: 19550
Irvine, California 92713
and Naterinl Bond (Road)
$86,400
,Labor/
i
{
RESOLUTION NO. ?j)- 6
• A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE ROAD P.4PROVEMENTS FOR M.S. 78 -0046,
TRACT 9444 AND TRACT 9329 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE
OF CO`PLETION FOR THE 14ORK
WHEREAS, the construction of street improvements for N.S. 78 -0046,
Tract 9444 and Tract 9329 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is 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 for N.S. 78 -0046, Tract 9444
and Tract 9329,
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of Nay, 1981.
AYES;
NOES;
• ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clark
•
Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor
0
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Post Office Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California
91730
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Post Office Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California
91730
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
• NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate
in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which
interest or estate is:
Minor Subdivision 78 -0046
2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 9320 -C Baseline Road, Post Office Box
807, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730.
3. On the 6th day of May , 1981, there was com-
pleted on the hereinafter described real property the work of im-
provement set forth in the contract documents for
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
4. The name of the original contractor for the work of im-
provement as a whole was Albert W. Davis, 9421 Ninth Street, Cucamonga.
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:
Minor Subdivision 78 -0046
L,
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Post Office Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California
91730
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Post Office Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California
91730
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate
in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which
interest or estate is:
Tract 9444
2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 9320 -C Baseline Road, Post Office Box
807, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730.
3. On the .6th day of May , 1981, there was com
pleted on the hereinafter described real property the work of im-
provement set forth in the contract documents for
STREET TMPROVF.MENTS
4. The name of the original contractor for the work of im-
provement as a whole was Fox Hollow III, 9014 W. Olympic Boulevard,
Beverly Hills, California 90211
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:
Tract 9444
LJ
0
r 1
L_J
•
0
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Post Office Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California
91730
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Post Office Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California
91730
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
• NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate
in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which
interest or estate is: Tract 9329
2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 9320 -C Baseline Road, Post Office Box
807, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730,
3. On the 6th day of May , 1981, there was com-
pleted on the hereinafter described real property the work of im-
provement set forth in the contract documents for
STREET IMPROVEMP,NTS
4. The name of the original contractor for the work of im-
provement as a whale was Kenneth Kerner and Assoc., 330 Park Lane, Suite 2
Laguna Beach, California 92651
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:
• Tract 9329
A
•
91
CITY OF ItANC110 CUCAAIONGA
ME IORANDUM
DATE: April 13, 1981
TO: Harry Empey, Director of Finance
FROM: Gary W. Richards, Code Enforcement Officer !+4"
SUBJECT: RELEASE OF T.O.P. BONDS FOR VANGUARD COMPANIES
Work for the following tract has been completed and the guarantee bond
is hereby authorized by the Planning Department for release to Vanguard
Companies, 9638 7th Street, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730.
Amount Purpose/
Tract No. Lot No, of Bond Case No. Location
9302 28 & 32 $150 78404953 Subdivision signs on
$1000 Lots No. 28 & 32, Tract
No. 9302
Thank you for your assistance; if you have any questions regarding this
bond release, please call.
GWR:kp
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 23, 1981
TO: City Council /City Manager
FROM: Harry Empey, Finance Direct_or'� _
SUBJECT: Special Funds
On June 12, 1960 a memo and several resolutions establishing new
operating and intergovernmental service funds was sent to Council
for their approval. (See attached memo only.) Of the five new
funds, only two were funded in the process. Therefore funding of
the remaining three funds is necessary. It is recommended that
$15,250 be transferred to the Insurance Fund, $205_000 be transferred
to Capital Reserve Fund and $86,162 be transferred to the Central
Service Fund. These funds are part of the overhead structure and
are self - funding; they do not generate funds of their own, but must
rely on the integrity of the costing system to survive.
•
HJ E: cam
Attachment (1)
•
1��
•
u
M1'MORANDUM
DATE: June 12, 1980
TO: City Manager /City Council
FROM: Harry Empey, Finance Directs
SUBJECT: New Fund Creation /Special Appropriations
Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's new budget requirements
is the need to create several new funds. Attached are resolutions es-
tablishing these new funds and below is a brief description of each.
(1) Capital Replacement Fund. This fund is necessary to establish the
means by which the City will be able to replace capital equipment. As
mentioned in my memo of June 9, 1980, the Capital Replacement Fund will,
in essence, rent to the using departments, the equipment. The rental
fee will be a reserve set aside each year. The reserve will be deter-
mined by using depreciation (straight line), and an inflationary factor
such as the Consumer Price Index each year. Recommend Council transfer
from reserves $205,000 already appropriated for capital replacement to
this fund.
(2) Insurance Fund. Some of the City's insurance programs carry with
then a certain deductible amount. It is this deductible amount that
needs to have a reserve set aside. The premium for all insurance will
be paid from this fund, and City insurance as an overhead factor will
become self- funded.
(3) Canital Reserve Fund. This, in essence, was approved with this
year's budget, but the resolution establishing it needs to be adopted.
This, like the insurance, is a vehicle for funding City facilities for
future use and consideration.
(h) Benefits Contingent Fund. From time -to -time, employees may be off
work for a considerable length of time due to illness, injury or a
specially approved vacation. This period of time may be of such dura-
tion so as to warrant hiring temporary replacement until the regular
employee is able to return to work. Recommend Council appropriate
$38,512 into this fund now.
(5) Central Service Fund. This fund will be used to operate a central
storys, duplication process, and provide a system for moui roriug and
rr p acing cc to in fixed as sots.
(6) Sporial_ \n,ropriatin n, In an effort to save money or interest, in
this case $118,000, would recommend appropriating $265,000 from this year's
rovinuv Lo purdmse Lhc heavy equipment to implement the street program.
In rrvieliog Lhc ].vase purchnnc agreement program previously approved by
Cuun, 11, iL was disCOVI'Yed th,1L by pnying for the equipment this year, the
CiLy will he ahlo to free up funds for noxt your that will be necessary to
iancl Lhc demindl for storm damngu related costs. Also, us a leased piece
Of oquipment, there is some qucr.Lion as to whether it can be capiLalived.
0
7
IAJ
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 6, 1981 U
To: City Council and City Manager
From: Bill Holley, Director, Community Services Department
Subject: Authorization for Director of Community Services to Attend
the California Park and Recreation Society /National Recrea-
tion and Park Association Legislative Conference May 14, 15,
1981
Request authorization for this writer to attend the above referenced
meeting in Sacramento on the above listed dates. The City has parti-
cipated in two previous legislative conferences and found them to be
of value. Funding for this particular conference would be accommodated
within the Community Service Department budget account 401- 50 -25.
If I can provide any further information, please do not hesitate to
call.
Thank you.
WL :nm
A
•
•
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
April 27, 1981
TO: City Council
FROM: Lauren M. Wasserman
City Manager
SUBJECT: Budget Meeting
Please remember to mark in your calendars the date of Thursday,
May 7th. At that meeting we will be discussing additional budget
information which we now have as well as appropriation of reserve
funds. As Council may recall, you requested that we complete the
necessary budget transfers as soon as possible and prior to the
normal budgetary procedures.
We will have information available to you prior to the May 7th
date.
A good time to meet would be 7:00 p.m. We doubt that the meeting
will take much time.
LMW:baa
0
r�L
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAN40NGA
MEMORANDUM
April 23, 1981
TO: Members of the City Council and City Manager
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner
SUBJECT: PLANNED COMMUNITY 80 -01 - VICTORIA
Because of the volume of background material involved in this
staff report, we are furnishing this to you in order to allow
sufficient time for your review. Please note that this will
be taken up at the May 6, 1981 Council meeting.
If you have any questions relative to this report, please
let me know.
f
i
�1
ORDINANCE NO. )t}3
• AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA;PAPPROVING VICTORIA PLANNED
COMMUNITY P.C. 80 -01 LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHLAND
AVENUE GENERALLY NORTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
AND GENERALLY WEST OF ETIWANDA AVENUE.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held various public hearings
on the Victoria Planned Community beginning on September 16, 1980 and
culminating with April 2, 1981; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly advertised public
hearing on the Victoria Planned Community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and Planning Commission have reviewed
the land use, circulation, parks and open space, infrastructure, design
criteria, regulations, implementation sections of the Planned Community
text for Victoria; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and Planning Commission have reviewed
the land use plan map for Victoria and required subsequent changes to
that map as a result of that review; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Division Staff is directed to amend the
Official Zoning map for the City of Rancho Cucamonga to indicate the
• subject property as "PC "; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Draft
Environmental Impact Report on the Victoria Planned Community relative
to its impacts and recommends certification to the City Council.
WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby certify the Draft FIR
as complete and final statement of the environmental effects of the
proposed project.
NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
City Council does hereby adopt P.C. 80 -01, Victoria Planned Community,
subject to the conditions contained within Planning Commission Resolution
No. 81 -37 adopted April 2, 1981 attached hereto as reference.
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 DaillL Report, a newspaper of general circulation
pulA ished in the City 0 Ontario, California, and circulated in the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1931.
AYES:
• NOES:
ABSENT:
/,-
0
•
•
CITY OF RANCI -10 CUCA:M0,NGP.
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981
TO: Members of the City Council a City Manager
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Pl�nn
BY: Otto Kroutil, Associa er
SUBJECT: REVISED TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 11549 - LEWIS
ABSTRACT: The revised 90 -lot subdivision of 20,000 sq. ft. lots located
off East Avenue in Etiwanda appears to satisfy most of the concerns
expressed by the City Council at the April 1, 1981 meeting. However,
Staff is recommending a number of minor revisions, should the Council
wish to consider approval of the revised map.
BACKGROUND: On March 11, 1981, the Planning Commission approved
Tentative Tract No. 11549, a 90 -lot subdivision of 20,000 sq.ft. lots
located between East and Etiwanda Avenues, south of Summit in Etiwanda.
However, on April 1, 1981 the City Council set aside the decision through
an appeal of the Planning Commission action; at issue were the traditional
rigid street pattern, stayed tract design, excessive windrow removal, and
a general concern that the proposed subdivision was out of character with
the Etiwanda community. As a result, the applicant was requested to
revise the subdivision, and an informal Subdivision Committee consisting
of two members of the City Council, two members of the Planning Commission,
and Staff was set up to provide direction and to outline specific areas
of concern. Subsequently, the following guidelines were established by
the Committee:
1. The revised tract map shall have no more than 90 lots, each
lot to be a 20,000 sq. ft. minimum size.
All cut -de -sacs shall be 60 -foot right -of -way, with 36 -foot
pavement, containing concrete rolled curbs, but no sidewalks.
The major east -west "S" street shall be 60 -foot right -of -way
36 -foot pavement and have a standard curb and sidewalk (the
sidewalk to use colored concrete); the north side having a
concrete rolled curb and no sidewalk. The setback on homes
along that street shall be increased to give a more open
character.
3. Lots along Etiwanda and East Avenue shall be larger than
20,000 sq. ft. and contain very deep setbacks to give a more
open character. The cul -de -sac opposite "Cassia Street"
shall side on to East Avenue with access to the lots at the
tip of the cul -de -sac from the bulb rather than from East
Avenue; however, the homes on those lots shall front on
East Avenue.
TT 11549 -2- May 6, 1981 •
4. All Eucalyptus windbreaks shall be thinned, topped and
trimmed.
5. Street trees along Etiwanda and East shall be specimen
size. The lots along the southern boundary of the sub-
division may be equestrian oriented with a feeder trail
along the south side.
6. All house plan designs shall be approved by the City prior
to the recordation of the tract map.
7. All house elevations shall incorporate a more "country"
flavor or character to reflect a non - standard tract -type
design.
8. All street names shall reflect an historical perspective,
especially in light of the Chaffey- Garcia house.
9. All remaining street trees shall have variations of one- •
gallon Eucalyptus with design features that would speci-
fically identify tree wells in order to protect future
growth of such street trees.
10. Phase the tract so that construction occurs from Etiwanda
Avenue towards East Avenue to allow the ultimate deter-
mination of East Avenue width by the Etiwanda Specific
Plan.
ANALYSIS: The revised subdivision (Exhibit "8 ") appears to satisfy
the concerns expressed by the Subdivision Committee. The basic street
pattern calls for a curvilinear arrangement, with entries into the
tract off both Etiwanda anti East Avenues. 16 foot wide median strips,
utilizing the existing windrows have been incorporated into the design
of the public streets at the entries. Along Etiwanda, Summit, and
East Avenues, all lots are slightly larger than required (21,000 sq.
ft. + ) and have been laid out to allow for homes to front on those
streets. You will also note that the design of the subdivision will
enable the developer to preserve a substantial portion of the existing
windrows.
•
i
i� (.a
• TT 11549 -3- May 6, 1981
The proposed subdivision waivers from the Committee's guidelines in
that all the cut -de -sacs call for 50' right -of -ways, rather than the
standard 60' as requested. However, since it has been agreed by the
Subdivision Committee that sidewalks would not be necessary in the
cul -de -sac areas, the reduction in the required right -of -way would
seem appropriate only if the frontyard setbacks on adjacent lots are
increased by 5 feet. The street width, curb to curb, remains 36'
whether the right -of -way is 50' or 601. The Council may also wish
to consider requesting increased setbacks along Summit and East
Avenues to encourage a more open or country look along the boundaries
of the subdivision. The 30' setbacks as proposed along Etiwanda
would appear appropriate due to the extra wide, 22' wide landscaped
parkway located between the curb and the front lot lines, for a total
of 52' of landscaping.
In addition, Staff would like to suggest two revisions for the Council's
consideration. Exhibit "C" outlines the proposed change at the south-
west portion of the project, near the Etiwanda Avenue entry. You will
note that the extra deep lot (lot No. 85) would be eliminated and that
• the suggested alternative would allow for a longer, more defined entry
into the project. Exhibit "D" indicates an alternative for the treat-
ment of the southeast corner of the subdivision. Alternative "D" would
allow all homes on the stub -ended street to front onto the cul -de -sac,
rather than on East Avenue, as is the case with the applicant's proposal.
The disadvantage of alternative "D" is the resulting increase in the
number of driveways onto East Avenue, which is less desirable from
traffic standpoint. However, the Council could consider alternative "D"
with the provision for combined driveways, circular driveways, or another
arrangement which would eliminate potential traffic conflicts. We would
suggest combining driveways to reduce the number of access points. In
addition, adoption of alternative "0" would result in the reduction of
total number of lots to 89.
RECOMMENDATION: The revised tract map has addressed the Council's
and the Subdivision Committee's concerns. It is recommended that the
revised tentative map be approved, with modifications as suggested,
and subject to the attached conditions of approval.
BKH:OK:cd
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - TT 11549 as approved by the Planning Commission
Exhibit "B" - TT 11549 as revised
Exhibit "C" - Suggested revisions at the southwest corner
Exhibit "D" - Suggested revisions at the southeast corner
• Resolution of Approval
Conditions of Approval
7a
0
r-IL
PLANNING 1)1\'ISI().N ENI IIIII-P-2 SC'Ai . I.:
IN
ee r; iF
x - ➢- e
(`ter➢{, \ \Z"jj- •._ . �- -= ']]j —' ;.:;it
_ —r_
fi ^e• pi ;
t'
•
1 '91
C
M
S!
3. 5'
ly j+ s
eI 7j719401
e� .... •
7 i if �: ; 3= ``"1111 i:2e
'• w
n
F i • -
F�1 ' e7 a ss_ =F➢i�1•�. E?] ='
\ y F
\
�,e'
u
r •,
� i���eiiivl�3:i1:F ➢eii {i:
_ i
"�
w ] :I
q
�4'
.4
(`ter➢{, \ \Z"jj- •._ . �- -= ']]j —' ;.:;it
_ —r_
fi ^e• pi ;
t'
•
1 '91
C
M
S!
3. 5'
ly j+ s
eI 7j719401
luj
0
0
CITY OF ITF
I -'() CUC'.A-Nl(),X(;-1 ei-, -lwc
PLANNING Dl\']S:O\' SCALE:
II
I
I
I
I
I I •1�. 1I�_
r+ -4
j G155IA
I
I
1 \ I I I
NORTI I
CITY OI' rrn.\I: x //549 Lt1rYa
RANCHO CL:C:1�NlO\(;:1 TITI.r•.: ° c rEV �E✓isr�l sec •
PLA\ \'I \'G DIVISION e \I uItIT: ' D" SC:\t.G: �:Tg.
RESOLUTION NO. 5) -(r,q
• A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOP,NIA, CONDITIONALLY
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11549.
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11549, hereinafter "Map"
submitted by Lewis Homes, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the
real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San
Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential subdivision
of 52 acres located on the southwest corner of Summit and East Avenues
into 90 lots, came before the City Council on appeal of Planning Commission
approval of said Tentative Map; and
WHEREAS, the City Council set aside the Planning Commission
approval at its meeting of April 1, 1981; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has revised the Tentative Map as requested.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
does hereby resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: Findings:
(a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable
interim and proposed general and specific plans;
• (6) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is
consistent with all applicable interim and proposed
general and specific plans;
,0
(c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed;
(d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury
to humans and wildlife or their habitat;
(e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious
public helath problems;
(f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict
with any easement acquired by the public at large,
now of record, for access through or use of the property
within the proposed subdivision.
(g) That this project will not create adverse impacts
on the environment and the Negative Declaration issued
is upheld by the Planning Commission.
7
Resolution No.
Page 2
SECTION 2: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Tentative Tract Map No. 11549, •
a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all f
the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: o
PLANNING DIVISION
1. The Garcia House shall be preserved by relocation
to another site at the expense of the developer.
The developer shall work with the Director of
Community Services and the City Histroic Commission
to find an appropriate location.
2. A detailed plan indicating which trees are needed
to be removed and where new windrows shall be planted,
shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner
prior to final approval of map. The developer shall
be responsible for planting new windrows where deemed
appropriate by the City Planner.
3. The Palm trees near the Garcia House shall be relocated
to the Etiwanda Avenue frontage by the developer.
This shall be shown on the datailed tree plan.
4. Combined driveways shall be required for lots with
vehicular access to Summit and East Avenues.
5. The Map shall be revisedlin substantial compliance •
with Exhibits "C" and ,f1
"9C�rLtasl4toenoe'sira-ll -Be- limned -tb
n r G 6. Front yard setbacks along Summit and East Avenues
shall be no less than 40'.
7. Front yard setbacks on interior cul -de -sac streets
shall average 35'.
8. Side yard setbacks on corner lots shall be no less
than 15', and all other setbacks shall meet the re-
quirements of the R -1 -20 Zone.
9. Phasing of the subdivision shall provide for construction
to occur from Etiwanda Avenue toward East Avenue to
allow for the ultimate determination of East Avenue.
Street width and improvements through the Etiwanda
Specific Plan.
10. All Street Names shall reflect a Historical perspective.
0
U
Resolution No.
Page 3
11. Prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map the
applicant shall submit and receive approval of a
sone change to R -1 -20 by the Planning Commission.
12. Street trees along Etiwanda, Summit and East Avenues
shall be of specimen size. A variety of 1- gallon
eucalyptus trees, 15' o.c. shall be planted along the
interior streets of the subdivision. Appropriate
tree wells to protect such trees shall also be
installed by the Developer.
13. proposedastreet R.O.W. at the b constructed of the
tract.
14. All cul -de -sacs shall be 50 -footh right -of -way, with
36 -foot pavement, containing concrete rolled curbs,
but no sidewalks. The major east -west "S" street shall
be 60 -foot right -of -way, 36 -foot pavement and have
a standard curb and sidewalk (the sidewalk to use
brushed colored concrete); the north side having a
concrete roiled curb and no sidewalk.
ENGINEERING N_ G DIVISION
15. Ultimate width of East Avenue shall be determined by
Etiwanda Specific Plan and required right -of -way per
the specific plan shall be dedicated to the City.
16. Existing damaged rock curb and gutter on Etiwanda
Avenue shall be repaired with similar type materials
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
17. Width of storm drain easements shall be per City
standards and requirements.
18. Street improvements shall be required contiguous to
those parcels which are "not a part" as shown on
tentative map.
19. The stub end street shall have a temporary cul -de -sac
bulb as per City standard.
BUILDING DIVISION
20. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed,
guaranteeing completion of all on -site drainage facilities
necessary for dewatering all parcels, to the satisfaction
of the Building and Safety Division.
Resolution No.
Page 4
21. Appropriate easements, for safe disposal of drainage •
water that are conducted unto or over adjacent parcels,
are to be delineated and recorded to the satisfaction
of the Building and Safety Division.
22. On -site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering
or protecting the subdivided properties, are to be
installed prior to issuance of building permits for
construction upon any parcel that may be subject to,
or contributes to, drainage flows entering, leaving
or within a parcel relative to which a building
permit is requested.
23. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted
to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior
to issuance of building permits. (This may be on an
incremental or composite basis.)
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk
Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor
Y�
•
•
A.
V • •
DEPARMENT OF COfomlXiT DEVELOPMENT
ST ? :4DARD CDrmlTi0N5
Sobj,, —1 1 E�+ / �
nrrlicant p,�— r���t���a��'V /'') Location:.' rGtL�try d
_y�Gn__ iy1QH� °�5�. J 0 �f3s/J7
rrnw nom n rtt etl m bands [inns or ,.pp•ova 1.
N niCtil SHALL Cr :;"Ct lad PLA:Vitz: DIVISIDN FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLNING
CV:.Di 1 WNS:
_511_e_3_1, 11,11:
I. Site shall he d ... ;aced in accordance with the approved site plans on file
In the Planning Division and the conditions contained herein.
3. Re,d sit, and huilahng elevations Incorporating all Conditions of
.ill sU 11 ?e ,.,ttbd to the Planning Division prior to issuance or
nu lamp permits. s
L%3. Npruvst of t'iis request shall not waive eomptiance with all sections of
1 -, la.nrl Ordinancm and all otna applicable City Ordinances In effect at
bse or sanding Pem:it issuance.
c. The J ^velprer shall provide .11 lots with adequate sid.,.1d area for Recreation
:,,cid starge parsuane to City standards.
5. Trash - crgtacle areas snail be enclosed by a 6 foot high ma spay wall with
v uc Ung Totes pursuant to City standards. location shall be
subject to an,roval by the planning Division.
_ 6. A If the •b of material shall to submitted to the Planning Division
for rile+ and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
2, :.I1 r,of apwvtlmnctt, including in cenditimers. Shall be architecturally
mtrg,a :e% smelded from view and Ue sound buffered frm adjacent properties
and 6trepts as reamred by the Planning and Building Divisions.
Y 8. P•inr to any use of the project site or brliml, activity being cMmneed
tnere, ill: enedl eons of a,pr..l contained Mreln Shall be emPleted to
Ue za atfac lion of the Directer of Community gt,.I. Milt.
_ 9. 1., n: oval shall Mane null and void If building Permits ae hoe issued
nor '.is Project within one year from the dam of project approval.
10. Al CCnd.tlonal use Pemit. trait project shall become null and void In
m (1.1) months inch date of aPP.,al. unless permits are Issued or
use hafP•ovm is C r lencntel.
A drra,lld 119nbn1 plan shall be submitted to and ahprmed by the Planning
Oavislon nrls, to Isidancc or building pemils. Such plan shall indicate
It'll, lllem ina clan, lgcaunn, heiqut and method of shielding. He ligl¢Ing
snail aft +ersely affect adjacent properties.
r,
Project xo.
12. All swimming pools installed It the time of Initial development shall be
solar heated.
13, lealurtaed pedestrian Railways across circulation .15315 shall be provided
througMet the devel.pme no to connect dMlline, with open Spaces and
recreational uses.
_ 16 All trash pick up shall be for Individual units with all recto [atlel Shielded
from Public vlew.
15. Standard patio cover plans shall be suhnipted to and approved by the City
Planner and Building Official prior to occupancy of the first unit.
15. All buildings numbers and individual units shall be identified in . Clear
and concise manner, including proper illumination.
�17. Solid can tattfion doors. security dead bolts and locks shall be Installed
on och un It in this project.
IB. Security devices such as window locks shall be Installed on each wit.
19. All units Within this development shall be Preplunbed to be Roadbed for a
solar water beating unit.
20. Energy conserving building materials and appliances are required to be
incorporated into this project to include such things as but not limited to
reduced I.IsmaDtino shower heads. Cotter grade of insulation, double pa.ld
windows, extended overhangs, pilotless appliances, etc.
21. This development shall provide an option to home buyer to Pu•cMSe A solar
water beating unit.
VIM Emergency secondary access shall be provided to this tract to the satisfaction
of the Foothill Fire Protection District.
—1163, Local and Master Planned Equestrian Trails shall be provided throughout the
tract in accordance with the Equestrian Trail Plan. A detailed equestrian
trail plan indicating width, ma.irum slopes, physical mndilinns. fe.sing
and weed central, In accordance with City maestri an trail standards, shall
be submitted to and approved by the City Planner prior to +PPI.vll and
recnrdat ton of the final map.
2.. This tract shall rural or mill. to a maintenance district for maintenance of
equestrian trails.
25. Street names shall be revl ewed and alPle,ed by the City Planner, in accordance
with the adopted Street Naming Policy. prior to approval and recordation of
the final map.
_26. Ir this GevNofvment Intends to restrict equestri.m o animal relnbd uses spec i rim sou or p .Kib it tem. u m en rely, then a cnPy of the C. C.. A Ns
must he snthittCJ to and reviewed by the City Planner prior to approval or
final map.
1 a
v. This project Shall provide percent of arrordaeta Music, and /or
fen U, in toot srmanee -ti, fienerxl Plan boohoo policies and the loosing
criteria salient in the Grem n bmagnrcat Ordinance. Afronlability snail
I.r determined by current nsrset rates, rents and mrdlan iuCnmo levels at
the line of c nsvuction of tho Project. In agfement to sdcb INII be
approved of the City planner prior W issuance of building permits.
e. Par4 inn t yeh3cvlai Acc_y
_ 1. All parking lot landscaped Islands Shall have A minimm outside duempai..
.I 5' and 1.11 contain An 10' walk adjacent to parking Stall.
_ E. Parking lot trees shall be a .let. 15 gallon Fiat.
5. All two -way aisle widths shall be A minlmua of 26 feet vide.
a. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum
of )a feet wide at all tines Curing construction in attordance with Foothill
Fire District requirements.
S. All parking spaces shall be double striped.
6. Ali units shall be provided with automatic garage door openers.
_ p. Designated visitor parking areas SNIT be turf blocked.
_ 9- The Covenants, Codes and Restrictions shall restrict the storage of recreational
vehicles on this Site M1eas they are the princlple Source of transportation
for the owner.
% i _ S. ho parking shall be pernitted within the Interior circulation aisle other than
in designated visitor paring areas. Covenants, Codes, and Restrictions
J shall be developed by the applicant and submitted to the City Planning
Division prior to issuance of Wilding permits.
C. Landscaping
I 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan SNI1 be submitted to and approved
by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits.
—ZI. Existing trees shall be retained wherever possible. A master plan of
existing trees sno, ng their precise location, size and type shall be
a +plated by he developer. Said Plan shall take Iota account the proposes
gradual vaet trees act to be retained, trimming methods. and where roe
trees will he planted for replacement of removed trees. The plan Is required
to be suWitted to and approves by the Planning Division prior to approval
of the final grading plan.
1 Street trees, a minimum of 15 gallon site or larger, shall be insulted in
accordance with the hister Plan of street trees for the City of Danish.
Cocawonga and still be slanted at an average of every 30' on interior
Israel.
pralett Ira.
4. A minimum of 50 trees per gross acre, tamp. SCd of the following slab.,
'moll be pro,Wes within the d,,elppecrat; 20: -24' box or larger, )0:.15
gallon, and IDt -5 gall...
S. All land3taped areas shall be maintained In a healthy and thriving conditiu,..
free Icon wands, trash, and done,,.
V6. All slope Lanka in ass of five (S) feet In vertical height and of 5:1 or
greater slope shall he Iand3caved and hated i ovdance -Eh tio;m
Planting requirements of the City of Rancho CuCIr AqL wi Such Flare Pbnting
Shall inClude but not be limited to anted ground corer and alvron isle
shrubs and trees. All Such planting and irrigation shall tr c•:ntimm,nlY
m Lelned hu a hral[dy a,d Lhrivino emnditi.m by tor drvel.N'r until an
indavldual unit is Sold and occupied by Inc Fuyrr. Prior to relrs,lnn
occupancy far those units, an in3pc[[l.n of the slepas shill be cpnpieted
by the Planning Staff to determine that it IS In Satisfactory Condition.
_ ). All parkways, open area $, and landscaping Shall be, fully maintained In, a
hwnownars association or other means acceptable to the City. Such Proof
of maintenance shall be submitted to the City prior 1. Issuance of building
Fermi s.
B. The front yard I6MSCapieg. and an apD,.p,iate irrigation system, shall be
installed by the developer in accordance with wteitted plans.
9. Th. final dealers of the perfneter parkways, walls. land area plug and Sidewalks
shall be included in the required landscape Pl sus and shall be subject to
approval by the Planning Otvision.
_ 10. A minimum of 3 of the trees DIw.tCd within the project. shall be
specimen size Vees.
_ 11. Special landscape features such a s undina, alh.rial rock, s n site
trees, reanderinq afdenatkt (Loll vertic,1 aM Imrtaontal W +nga)t ant
Intensified landscaping. IS requires along
D. Signs
1. Any signs proposed fer this devcl opment shall be designed in conformance
with the Comprehensive Sign Drdinance and shall require review and approval
by the Planning Division prior to installation of such signs.
E. A uniform Sign program for this devt•l.Mlna snail be submitted to the
Planning Division for their rear ew and approval prior to Issuance of
Duildl.g Permits.
S. The Signs Indicated an the Submitted plans are out in this
approval and will require separate sign review and approval.
E. Anditianal_npp ovals Ro un lied
1. Director Review shall be accomplished prior to the Issuance of a Building
Penal t.
of •
1.
Bire[to' Review shall be accomplished prior to retardation or the final
subdivision
3.
npp :nvat of Tentative Tract Iq. is granted subject to llo ip,rnval
cone Cnange _ -_ and /or Venance /Conditional use Permit Ito.
I-
:lift fund i L,. +dal Use rrnn,[ is granted far a period of rgPt,,(,) at
.Tic ?, ti.xr 11, Planning Coneisslon may add or delete [oM,tl ens pf fer.ke
the Comeuora? (!,I Permit.
46.
Thr developer i required to obtain the following sinned statnrcnt by
Maranon of Iv,es W„ch nave a prlv.t, or Public equestrian trail on or
adjacent to their property.
In Purchasing the Tame ?.,tied .n tot Tract
I. . 1 have real Ne C.C. FR. and
.'i [.nil �tirat sad LO[J is subject to , nu1-1 re,,praeal
casoxiont For vie Purpose of iTTgwing equestrian traffic to
gain ac_ess.
Signed
Purcl:uer
aid statement 6 w he filed by the developer with the City prior to
OCC.P.,ey.
Prior to approval and recordation of the final map, or prior to issuance of
-Z6.
bid l d i nn '!_i ts, 'Tan no wMiv isian map Is involved, written certification
free all affrrted School Districts, shall to san i[thd to the Droarnuent or
cr- '.—ity ce.elnnxent which ,taus that adequate school fecilib are rs a or
will be :arable of acconrodati., students generated by this pro,CCL. Such
letter of certification must have been issued by the School District within
sixty (6g) days prior to the final map approval In the case or the
Sai,d,visrdn Pap or issuance of permits in the case of all other residential
Projects.
T.
Prim- to apN'mal and recordation of the final map, or prior to the issuance
of huilaing Permits W,en n0 evP is involved, written certification from the
arfecad • r district, that ad,,unt, sewer xrd water facilstia are o
,,ill to availa Plc t0 serve tie proposed project, ibell be sntvn,tted to Lou
P-par tr ^nt of Cn. -..Ly DrvNOn'ent S:ah letter must have brew Issued by
the .,ter district within sixty ,60) days prior to final map approval i
If sdaiv" of M ^nib in the c of ail ntnerl
:al rrej ^cts'onrn, Pr ejerb si inq rrplie look f.zI?Wh,, allowable
M.iarnt
r l,- sww : a Pe,,.nal vale, central Board anon the eiln rl Ltle
certification of .,ccoMa':ilily. Including all supportive inrormlbpn, shall
M obtained and s :xitited to the City.
eq.
the-. a,prn:el "Pil Letrrnl null and void If the tentative subdivision prep
m•t o ':rd and r n den Or ,olio inq permits ill—a when he -In to
valved. .111.1. [„ -Iva Ml ninths Erne the approval of this project
unless he extension has been granted by the Planning Cormission.
0
Project !In.___
V-9. This snedivlsinn 1. not subnitt"t a a total Jrvrl n; +i ^nt s,<'. v;• lint "
rrriu lrr,l to n,nily for a porn[ ra li nt,; rnaU.r :n U•r d- ',rip, ...: tii :in 01
the 6. it. h Ilona" .,It or111 Pant, P, tar to f in, I a ,al .,,,.; r nrda tion of
the reap If the subdivision is 5o inq to to developed as -fact hn;e s.
APPLICA!li SHALL CONTACT THE BBILDMZ Of 11WItl FOR C9lotIMICE WITH :HE FOWN140
c0➢OITIONS: '
Site O'el'inint
�I. The applicant shall enmply with the latest abelt1n Hel eon+ P rldiel Cob :,
Uniform Ilechanical Code. Win- Pl a.ebr n9 Codr, lla Lf onal Ele<: ri: Cade, amt
All other applicable codes and .,ddin,es in effect At the tin. of isswnce
or relative permits.
�2. Prior to issuance of building ....its far c instl Me cro,buctio :, e,,Jence
Shall he acesited to the FcPthll District I,., COief that Irrponvy water
supply for fire protection is available, Pending completion of regulrrd
fire protection systems.
L 3. Prior to the issuance of a hutldi ng Posit Forw rrsl drrttnl d.rllirrl
nit(v) or major addition to in a uti n. nnit(s),nthr aqn l :c me s1b,II ear
develoiDent fees at the est0I1sceJ :ate. Such tees +' 1 i— I,d•. tut n
I
be limited to: City Beautlficamon Fee. P,,x Ern, 0,a a fee, Systems
Development Fee, Permit oho NIP Cneekizg Fens. ono SChool Ter:.
t. Prior Lo the: tzmane, or a bulldin....... Ier a 'r r
:,I o .,tr4l
develotme.1 or addition to an e„stmg denele; ••n t, t!,t,,i,e,t a,,It ;ay
develan :Pent fees at the estah :ished ra n tees :.Pay +r b +: n o ,
ln
be Iilted to: Systems Devel9loCit Fie, Drainage fee. Permit and Plan
�n Checking Fees.
--/ 6. Street addresses shall be provided by toe building IM6,Il.
Y 6. gulling units shall be constructed with fire retardint ma.ena, and non
combustible real material.
J. All corner dwellings shall have tic tuildlnn Cle-Ition fm.:mn the stre,t
upgraded with additional wood trim armed windaws and wood siding or plant -
ons where aplropnale.
6 Easstln St :tares
I. rrnvide cmplia with the uni Lwm noilding Cote Ior �ropertr line lira ra¢,
considering use, and fire -rrsis HVeness or existing buildings.
B. Existing b,dldingis/ shall on raer to Cnnply with C11—set Puildin,l and
��a Zoning regulations for the Intenerd nse or the building shill be denolislmI.
Lr 3. Existing sf.age dY.pnsal faciNties V +O1 It Ire—ed. filled -drer capped
to comply PaIt., the Uniform Plis,Mng Cade, and Uniform Dull d inq code.
i�
q
IL Lading
�1. Cu a'i ng nl tn_ Subl "rL property a:all he is accoreaye with the paiform
C.ai mg s^ane.o-es and acceptpa yralm, practices. the
[n gal nr.,a rn; else 5!. 1 sues:Jntidl can la nndnlP vi Ll! Nr
C". :.:si mam ng Via ". approved
'a"' ralrfomsal toe 11111red by J qualified engine¢, licensed by the
Pifer. such work.
anArzuu�G tad a: a[ne5 towel 0• JreW tee by a nullified engineer or 9rolo9is[
ppl i<a a oo rot gradiag plan cneck.
d (h irr;C �>"rt sec duia:� O.Itbaew�bJett to terfew and approval by the
nr:
s,.Lmrrsrn. -." or ice a c 'Pitted prior to recoraatim of the final
• ,
ay 'e of band)ng man't wI iUerer coaxes I1rst.
__ 5. •n J c•n.l . -lpt zv[•¢IV,sloe. [he following regutreelents shall be met:
posted and an a,. e,ay.,t executed. adrantyPing Car l'[ion
III ri -si [e dla i-I.., f"ilfaies n e nary for de,dtering all parcels,
s..!, s: e; oon of
t Ouildie9 and lSxfety Oivi zi on.
,. r ro', "a" for sate disposal of drains
c:IJ•nn to or user adjacent Parcels, are to be delineatrd and
re
w:aA ;a Ur z..., s.::c[inn of the Building and SJf.. O..... a,.
Ir,..... in.n over¢n ts. necessarY for devatlrin9 ar protecting
",�IJUn "i ,I.^W:p ivrr tlPS. JrP to he installed n,far to ii ua C¢ of
or [o.adr'aim l¢n flows nenterpi an9Cel a that ,a, to .;,j,.C,
,arced red a["c ca wbi cn a 1ulding penult is r¢qu¢itad. or within
e.
.!as; gr,[ding Plans for each parcel are to be suhnitted to the Ruiltlfng
^d S a for uoprovat prior [a Issuance of building permits.
(T rs� ar be on Jn .ncramen [al or duaposite basis.)
e. 'tll "%r b,mks in excess of Live (5) feet In rertital height and of
5:1 yu DIater s!c,o shall he se'e'd with native 9ra5ce, ..pan evmpleti on
I• a�rT ar San' otaa -r altar..t re el'rnne ar erosion trm snail
1 -'n to Ile satisfaction of the Ouilding Orriciol. Ire gat roe
6'vp Ie Syror,dM I, t.rrtiwe tom '.ad and maintain grout, to a point
=r lhs after g rm lad o rn.
AaeULNf p•AlL (C::fACp ➢d O HrrgCn'.r {tin';; ly; oYS tO FOR CM1pliRCE 1It5 THE f011011G
tehr[ny,r A[ar_t. .
1, RW¢aupnc sea It be wade by final map of all interior hts-
s treat ri9
ai_w,y dal all n'c'....y ',d,,a s as Shawn an the tents tree i,
• 4
projift G0. __
�2. Ctdication shall b1 made of the following rights -of -way On the following
streets:
� 4 adaiti� o�al_ff¢ct on Ei/NjLJrif. ail
- -- adds bona, r�et or'F"Sr-'rYE•:r37�:!yYEt >4�
_�]. Corner property I,,, radius will be -_-
regY irN per City stand v.l5.
J( J. an re
Of rimes f h ,r Ingss I- a 11111 fr. ,Ill Ie nedi ...I
s fnl,nws:/tom
-� 5. liecliaactl ow erea[s shall be pr'uvldcI e
over private roads, drives, or IO,,iu <unna at less to aratio, l parcels
the map or shall be ,'carded cPh,uk,',9 with thednwp.il be tl
6. Adlquete arorisionc shall be exact for the !egress, 19ress and internal
circulation of any trucks which wi it be used far delivery o! 9uotls to
the property or in the operation of the proposed dullness.
T. Private drainage easeoen LS rot cross -lot drainage shall he required
and shall be delineated or noticed on the final nap.
A/6. Atl existing eastahets lying within future right -of -way are to be
gltl tell hard or to be delineated an the map nor City Engineer's renuirpaents.
✓g- Eesencnts for sidewalk for public uses shall be aedicdteo to the City
where sidewalks meander throat, private property.
J. Street laorovmle =_ts
L Construct full street improvements including, but not limited to,
curb and gutter, A.C. pavelmnt, sidevelk, drive aPGfodflles, qqa rl "�es I
trees and street lights an all interior 1lrmt� {esetKaan ryyr�
Z. A miniamm Of 26 -fart vide payment Mtn in a all -foot wide dedicated
rlght_of.way shall be constructed rota„ half- sectich sheets.
g. Construct the following miss Leg
limited to: Inlprovemen is including, but not
.,M[
'Includes
v' S OIAY ISLh:10 OTIIER
v v v ✓ 'v -
0
1. 1— .any pfc led lecC fill, villain areas imi az z ::Mitt to
__.. n. a,i • r tt ^ ::alrm:,l Arid Ino.rance rrngram ano :s subject to
li .. r -r.al aenz nr 111, one oty Ordinance act. xi.
a. A 1-1111 food P,.tlltion wall will on r'lhirrd to
p.m -,[l ll^ z r 1t•.rrz h/ dr•erting s ee[ rynelz to [t err tz. pr to o
Y s. i•4•Inate pre,itich, l,.all be ,,h, for accept.........I di"'al nr
.url bee Jniege mitring P^ In apt rty fret adjacent arras.
E
Project no.
14 6. letter of acceptance from dowstream Property hirers shall M required
.here rec.rf fr. the tract flour onto private p:an ... I,,.
_ T. shall be designed as mmjor water Carrying
z Uee(i Mgm naCC
a binatio. of special Curb ne igntz, cn, - ^resat
type drive approaches, rolled street <onnnC[inni. Mann pros e<t mil
walla, and /or landsCaped earth herb, and ratted drto..,,S a: 9ro5e![)
line.
8. The following storm drain small be installed to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer:
_zg. Prior to retardation of the map. a broad -stele hydrologic and draidege
study far the project �shg11 be slmatted to the City Eny Inter for
red; e,t. (�ntµlY, •w L s� a✓r.•�- y^/�iF�
L. Utilities
Y 1. provide all utility seer ties to each lot including sanitary sewers,
water, electric paver, gas, telephone and cable television Conduit.
2. NI utilities within the project shall be Installed ond..ground
including util Ries along major after 4ls less than 12 Y.Y.
J. utility easme.ts'hall be provided to the siedrcation of the
serving utility Caopanies and the City Engineer.
e. Developer Shall be responsible for the relocation of existing public
utilities, as required.
S. Oevelnner shall be respon'ible for the Installation of street lighting
in accordance with Southern California Edison Cornany and City standards.
6, water and sewer plans shall be desilined and constructed to mrot
reg,i5renents of the Cacaronga County Voter D:,trict (CCI:D), [,Mill
Fire District and the Envi roman cal 11111th D,lartnent of the Co...,, of San termardina. A letter of Compliance troy CCpD will to required
/ prior to recordltion.
{� 1. Approvals have not been 'eCUred from all utilities and other interested
agcncsei involved. Approval of the final neap will be subject to any
regVirMlen Cs that may ee Y,C,iy.d fra. then,
M. femral 1Re ''m m—es J d AP va-
_ 1. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
A. Caltra„z for:
—_ D. County hit Abaa tnnenc Trevu Get inPTnTswmid'e o�
gralmg pemltI
C. Son Ilernaedino County flood Control District
o. other:
slier :n my Perk hems c rth!,,it In t1he pub, iC right- 0f -vayr fees
-1,101a.
sn ill It +ul and an ,.C++ant ce rmrt Shan be obtained rrpe the
City [naireefl Office.. in adi,tin. to any other permit, require,.
VS.
Stiert :r rat plant appYevJd by the City [ngineer and prepared
j
nn crvn o.n Pan I. rr0ui�ty. for an
-Final
. pr lee :0 i once of an one re]c1b ,tit Penni1.s
SS
i'I....'j. bail . v, Iota H On of all existing otilit,
.itn n•the rl, .�- Vf -uaY.
✓M1.
,rely :Pill Pr ,,et,d art ere Pn,,pIld to the satisfaction
of L`.- C 'i" cityeA[Mrnry, avteCmg, co :pleibn
ar V• sill lu wit, ..... to nraiogaof u:e map or Ube
rss,m.P of mai 4h ng P"riti...,,Ch,pCrC"irps first.
�).
ill ..•1 shall be instolicd to the satisfaction of the
City E „mePr,a prior to ouVJanCY.
A.
Pa., hnt aripu:q. ,rk:n,, traffic and street whe signing shall be
installed :n. 11.1 r^LLn lr'C :Cn[z Of the City [n9lneer.
Via m.
C•+'.t+ng City read r retnrstru Ctibn shall r Min open for
,:M1C a .:1 n-rsf.ilh ate detours during COni GVCtinn. A
.. + -•I1 Le r 1l ue lever the cost el grading and
t,. ,r 1, .� tall be r a cceeletion of tine Constpict :on to
Ct ,a,:s.aCt :an of the City Engineer.
- 19.
Mats..,,, span be prof adcd hetweeo Public sidewalks and en -site
-_
p =lrCnan arms.
- /
r I1.
Cm.omtr, tad or, inagr fl o.n sho 11 not .mss si decal IS. Under side.alk
S11111 shall be t +stalled to City standards.
12.
Am a My dz is i Da tnr ant /or pros ion Control mPa,YrPS Shall be installed
to m, sati,pclinn of the City Engineer, at tht• end of Stub Scree LS.
•
d letter of acceptance 0f drainage runoff Iron the downstream property
Je
n.,ers shill or required.
r
- -�It,
pre ...r;r
a,.i rinnn Ccnyrol,
11, acpi :c eat nil be responsible for Construction of all On -Site
d..v,.,c. farili Rai nn+ ,P- 1, the City Engineer.
lnI,. ,,z.mm drains .iii oP re,V Vrd at the foilo.inq locations:
1. 1— .any pfc led lecC fill, villain areas imi az z ::Mitt to
__.. n. a,i • r tt ^ ::alrm:,l Arid Ino.rance rrngram ano :s subject to
li .. r -r.al aenz nr 111, one oty Ordinance act. xi.
a. A 1-1111 food P,.tlltion wall will on r'lhirrd to
p.m -,[l ll^ z r 1t•.rrz h/ dr•erting s ee[ rynelz to [t err tz. pr to o
Y s. i•4•Inate pre,itich, l,.all be ,,h, for accept.........I di"'al nr
.url bee Jniege mitring P^ In apt rty fret adjacent arras.
E
Project no.
14 6. letter of acceptance from dowstream Property hirers shall M required
.here rec.rf fr. the tract flour onto private p:an ... I,,.
_ T. shall be designed as mmjor water Carrying
z Uee(i Mgm naCC
a binatio. of special Curb ne igntz, cn, - ^resat
type drive approaches, rolled street <onnnC[inni. Mann pros e<t mil
walla, and /or landsCaped earth herb, and ratted drto..,,S a: 9ro5e![)
line.
8. The following storm drain small be installed to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer:
_zg. Prior to retardation of the map. a broad -stele hydrologic and draidege
study far the project �shg11 be slmatted to the City Eny Inter for
red; e,t. (�ntµlY, •w L s� a✓r.•�- y^/�iF�
L. Utilities
Y 1. provide all utility seer ties to each lot including sanitary sewers,
water, electric paver, gas, telephone and cable television Conduit.
2. NI utilities within the project shall be Installed ond..ground
including util Ries along major after 4ls less than 12 Y.Y.
J. utility easme.ts'hall be provided to the siedrcation of the
serving utility Caopanies and the City Engineer.
e. Developer Shall be responsible for the relocation of existing public
utilities, as required.
S. Oevelnner shall be respon'ible for the Installation of street lighting
in accordance with Southern California Edison Cornany and City standards.
6, water and sewer plans shall be desilined and constructed to mrot
reg,i5renents of the Cacaronga County Voter D:,trict (CCI:D), [,Mill
Fire District and the Envi roman cal 11111th D,lartnent of the Co...,, of San termardina. A letter of Compliance troy CCpD will to required
/ prior to recordltion.
{� 1. Approvals have not been 'eCUred from all utilities and other interested
agcncsei involved. Approval of the final neap will be subject to any
regVirMlen Cs that may ee Y,C,iy.d fra. then,
M. femral 1Re ''m m—es J d AP va-
_ 1. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
A. Caltra„z for:
—_ D. County hit Abaa tnnenc Trevu Get inPTnTswmid'e o�
gralmg pemltI
C. Son Ilernaedino County flood Control District
o. other:
ro
vfojees ro.
3. a core of t" Covenunts, CwidiLOns ar.:J n,wict —s (Lc. A n.'s1
and .'•tlllcl If I: \COVpO'a.•u It 11.¢ liame;unefs •ts vacua [l an. sn bl\1.t
O tbn ai'r1o.11 at "', Cit, kcalaey. )hall be 'Its ..nd iti, thi, -h
and a copy prnnJCd to [be City.
J, final parcel and tract maps shall Canform to city R 'd,i'd, and
p:V<edures.
A (a,-1 map shall be KcQ,dCd prior to first Phase sub:fivisinn to
prrvent crp rtun of uvecannl[ed fartel s.
S. or+ r co r -nmaUOn, a 'n use of In[entian to lone andf, }of
1-1«1 awl Ughting Otct n cts x6.11 br ")l dwith the CRY Cn•S.61.
:h� erin) casts involved in District lo:wtlon stall be LorM
f,
All pl,'.,eter lams: aped .,'.ays are reputred to be annexed Intd the
la�svpe .•u 4r seance Eutrict.
), 01d11a11, and \ ;an ;n Brat... repu;red to be installed en nnm
;nc- o` -var •:n t^.e'n r f this t t area 'lull br Conti....,, 1,
•:ed or tae C[ae tcyrr^ont\1 accepteC " the City and arneaed
Into fhe lap d[Cppe Ira interalse distrust.
W
•
0
lJ
CITY Of RANCH0 CUCAA'IO \C.1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981
TO: Members of the City Council and City Manager
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner
SUBJECT: STREET NAMING ORDINANCE
ABSTRACT: Attached please find an Ordinance recommended by the
Planning Commission for naming streets within the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
With the opening of the Growth Management review filings, the issue
of street naming has arisen. Staff has been engaged in various
studies to compile the attached Ordinance recommended by the Planning
Commission to the City Council. The Ordinance establishes the pro-
cedure for naming streets within the City. It continues the established
pattern of naming streets in the existing Alta Loma and Cucamonga areas
after gems and vegatation. It also establishes particular suffixes
i.e. Avenue, Drive, Street, for the various streets within the City.
After the Ordinance is adopted, Staff will prepare a street naming
booklet. The booklet will contain all of the streets within the
City. It will also contain a copy of the Ordinance and the procedures
used by Staff for street naming. Additionally, we will work with the
Historical Commission to compile a list of historical names for street
naming use. We will also compile a list of gems and vegetation that
have not yet been used that may be selected for street names within
Alta Loma and Cucamonga. For street names east of Haven Avenue, we
w'll compile a list of names that are indicative to the character of
the area, i.e., natural features, vistas, vineyards, grapes, etc.
These lists do not have to be used by developers but are to act as
a guide or aid in street naming.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council adapts the Street Naming Ordinance as attached to this Staff
Report.
RRgpgctful ly, sybmi tted,
Pla
:cd
Attachment
ORDINANCE NO. /y
• AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA \ESTABLISHING
PROCEDURES FOR STREET NAITIRP . -
WHEREAS, it is necessary to establish procedures for street
naming for new public and private streets in the City of Rancho Cucamonga
in the interest of uniformity and to avoid confusion to the public; and
WHEREAS, it is desirable to establish a procedure for changing
existing street names in the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has adopted Resolution No. 81 -29
establishing Street Naming Policy for Rancho Cucamonga on March 11, 1981,
The City Council does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1 - STREET NAMES
A. That street names should be pleasant sounding, appropriate,
easy to read (so that the public, and childred in particular,
can handle the name in an emergency situation), and should .
add to the pride of home ownership and community.
• B. That the following types of street names are unacceptable:
numerical names (1st, 2nd, etc.); alphabetical letters
(A, B, C, etc.); frivolous, complicated or undesirable
names; unconventional spelling; compound names; given or
surnames of persons living or dead (Pioneer families,
historic persons, etc., excluded).
C. That streets which are continuous shall be extended in
accordance with the present street names wherever possible
and feasible.
D. That discontinuous streets shall not be given the same
name.
E. That duplication of existing or proposed street names is
prohibited. Similar sounding names are considered to
be duplication, regardless of spelling.
F. That in existing areas of the City, new street names
shall not contradict the prevailing theme of north /south
streets named after gems and east /west streets named
after trees when possible and where feasible.
G. That streets with a 90 degree or more change of direction
shall change names at a convenient and appropriate point
• as determined by the City Planner.
Ordinance No.
Page 2
H. That street designation for present and future streets •
shall be as follows:
1. Boulevard Special East -West Streets to be named
9. Loop A street which originates and terminates
on same common base street shall be designated
as a Loop (East -west or North - south)
street and named to indicate the same
common base street.
10. Frontage Frontage roads shall carry the same name
Road as the street or avenue served and shall
not be identified otherwise.
SECTION 2 - PROCEDURE
A. It is the responsibility of the applicant for development
resulting in the construction of new streets to submit
names to the City for approval.
B. The City Planner or his designee shall approve all
street names in the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
•
Y�
Boulevards.
2.
Streets
East -west streets to be named Streets.
3.
Avenues
North -south streets to be named Avenues.
4.
Road
Any diagonal street which does not conform
basically to grid to be known as Roads.
S.
Drive
East -west streets parallel to, but
between names Streets, to be called Drives.
6.
Place
North -south streets, paralled to, but
between named Avenues, to be called Places.
7.
Way
Any irregular street which cannot conform
to any grid to be known as Wes.
B.
Court
A cul -de -sac or dead -end street with
turn - around which cannot be reasonably
extended to carry the name of the preceding
street. •
or
A cul -de -sac which serves not more than
seven (7) lots shall carry the same name
as the street serving it.
9. Loop A street which originates and terminates
on same common base street shall be designated
as a Loop (East -west or North - south)
street and named to indicate the same
common base street.
10. Frontage Frontage roads shall carry the same name
Road as the street or avenue served and shall
not be identified otherwise.
SECTION 2 - PROCEDURE
A. It is the responsibility of the applicant for development
resulting in the construction of new streets to submit
names to the City for approval.
B. The City Planner or his designee shall approve all
street names in the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
•
Y�
Ordinance No.
Page 3
• SECTION 3 - CHANGING OF STREET NAMES
A. The changing of street names may be initiated by any of
the following:
1. Public request which must be in writing to the City
Council stating the justification for such a change.
2. Resolution of Intention of the Planning Commission.
3. Resolution of Intention of the City Council.
B. If change is initiated through public request, the City
may require the applicant to pay all costs incurred by
the change (including, but not limited to street signs,
public hearing notification, etc.).
C. In all cases, it shall be the duty of the Planning Division,
to prepare a report discussing the justification for such
a change, recommending a replacement name and discussing
the impact of the proposed change.
SECTION 4 - STREET NAME CHANGE PROCESS
A. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall place the
• matter on the first available Planning Commission Agenda,
and shall submit the report to the Planning Division at
that time.
•
B. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on
the proposed street name change. Said public hearing
shall be noticed to all property owners on the street
proposed for change by mail ten (10) days prior to the
hearing, or by the posting of a notice along the street
at 300 foot intervals, ten (10) days prior to the hearing.
The Post Office, County Recorder, Fire District and
Sheriff's Department shall also be sent written notice
of the proposed change.
C. The Planning Commission may recommend approval, conditional
approval, or denial to the Council by Resolution pursuant
to the findings in Section 3 of this Resolution.
D. Upon receipt of the Commission's Resolution, the City
Clerk shall enter the matter on the next available
Council Agenda, The Council shall hold a public hearing.
Said hearing shall be noticed in the manner outlined
above.
Ordinance No.
Page 4
E. Upon receiving testimony at the public hearing, the
•
Council shall announce its decision on the proposed
street name change by Resolution. The Council may approve,
conditionally approve, or deny the street name change
pursuant to the findings in Section 5 of this Ordinance.
If approved, the Ordinance shall include the date upon
which said change will become effective. This decision
shall be final. Sixty (60) days prior to the effective
date of change, the City Clerk shall send written notice
of the change to the Post Office, County Recorder, Fire
District and Sheriff's Department.
SECTION 5 - FINDINGS
Street names may be changed pursuant to the following:
A. That the proposed change is consistent with the goals,
policies and standards of the General Plan.
B. That the proposed change is consistent with the adopted
Master Plan of Streets and Highways or adopted Circulation
Element.
C. That the proposed change will not cause significant
adverse impacts upon the environment.
D. That the proposed change is deemed necessary to protect
•
the public health, safety, comfort, convenience and
general welfare.
SECTION 6 - SEVERABILITY
The invalidity of any word, section, clause, paragraph, sentence,
part of provisions of the Ordinance shall not affect the
validity of any other part of the Ordinance which can be given
effect without such invalid part or parts.
SECTION 7: 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 Dail Rep ort, a newspaper of
general circulation, pub lis ed in the City of Ontario,
California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
•
CITY OF RANCHO CUG1M0[ CA
STAFF REPORT
April 29, 1981
TO: City Council
FROM: Lauren M. Was7in'lnle
City Manager ,
SUBJECT: Redevelopment
In accordance with City Council instructions, the staff has drafted an ordinance
which creates a Redevelopment Agency for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The
ordinance follows the requirements set forth in the California Community Re-
development Law, Health and Safety Code Sections 3300 et. seq. which permit
communities to create a redevelopment agency to solve various types of com-
munity problems.
It is significant to note that the ordinance specifies that the City Council
shall serve as the community redevelopment board. The primary reason for
this decision is that because of the importance of redevelopment issues, the
City Council should have the decision making authority. In addition, by having
the Council serve as the redevelopment board, an additional layer of bureaucracy
has been eliminated.
After adoption of the proposed ordinance creating the redevelopment agency, the
next step is for the redevelopment agency to adopt By -Laws which deal with the
authority to bind the agency, contracts, payments of money, meetings, public
hearings, and similar issues. The by -laws are customarily adopted by a
Resolution. The next step in the redevelopment process is for the City Council
to designate a survey area by Resolution. The survey area is the area of the
City which is studied by the redevelopment agency and from which the final
project area will be selected. The survey process includes a detailed analysis
of existing conditions including land use and economic factors. In addition the
report concerning the survey area must identify alternatives for alleviating
deficiencies which may exist. It is anticipated that this phase of the redevel-
opment process be handled by consultants who are skilled in working with re-
development projects. Recommendations concerning the consultants will be forth-
coming at a later date.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Ordinance No.
establishing a redevelopment agency. After adoption, copies of the ordinance
will be sent to the County and other governmental agencies as set forth by law.
LMW:baa
Y.1
• ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF SHE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.MON'GA, CALIFORNIA,
DECLARING THE NEED FOR A RFDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY t0 FIE MON IN THE CONNUNIfy.
N,EREAS, Section 33100 of the Health and Safety Code of the
State of California created in each community thereof, including the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, a public body, corporate and politic, for the purpose of ex-
- ...... acclaim, the pout a granted by the Community Redevelopment Lev, known as the
redevelopment agency of the eommudit, and
HHENEAS, Section 33101 of said Code provides that said redevel-
opment agency shall not transact any business nor exercise any powers under the
Community Redevelopment Law unless the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
declares, by ordinance, etat there is need of the agency to function in the Community;
and
RHEREAS, there appears to exist within the City of Rancho
Cucamonga blighted areas causing public and private injury, all as defined in
Chapter 1, Article 3 of Part 1, Division 24 of the Health and Safety Code of the
State of California, which situations cannot be remedied by the private sector
aI.e.
NON, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLONS:
Section 1. Puroase. It in hereby found, determined and
>gCdei{d +,•?`ag".aji,:;.. °'yam+_ "wswe:.j declared, pursuant to Section 33101 of the Health and Safety Cade of the State of
California, that there is a need for the Redevelopment Agency created by Section
33100 of Bald Code to function in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and said agency
_ is authorized to transact business and exercise its powers under the Community
Redevelopeent Law of the State of California (Health and Safety Code 33000 et.
sea.).
Section 2. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 33200 of
the Health and Safety Code, the City Council hereby declares itself to be said
agency, and all the functions, rights, power., duties, privileges and immunities
vested by the Community Redevelopment Lw In said agency shall be, and they hereby
are, vested in the City Council.
Section 3. The City Council hereby appoints the City Manager
to serve as Executive Direcear of the Redevelopment Agency.
Section 4, The City Clerk shall cause certified copy of
this ordinance to be filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of the State
of California, and the Clerk of the County of San Bernardino pursuant to Section
33102 of the Health and Safety Code.
Section 5. The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City
�waMSWA'+ =.vt.H•:n =,.,n .-;r Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its
passage at least once in The Dahl R yore, a newspaper of general circulation pub-
lished in the City of Dntarlo, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this _ day of _, 1951,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
lr 1
u
•
•
..... —1 ..... ..,.v .... 1in.v,vvn
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 29, 1981
TO: City Council
FROM: Harry J. Empey, Finance Direc or
SUBJECT: Revenue Sharing
As a result of the three year extension of Revenue Sharing, there
were some changes for the City of Rancbo Cucamonga, including:
(1) A redefinition of per capita income, and
(2) Recognition of an increase in population.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga's allocation is now $396,274. This
means an appropriation of $221,272 for the current fiscal year must
be made, and a full appropriation of $396,274 must be made for next
year.
As in the past, the recommendation to Council is to continue the
appropriation of Revenue Sharing for the support of the Sheriff's
contract with the City. The continued soaring of costs has reflected
itself in the administration and operation of a police function;
the addition of Revenue Sharing as a funding source for public
safety activities has been a very welcome addition.
HJE: cam
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO } ss
I, Nancy Smith do hereby certify' that I
am the Legal Advertising clerk of THE DAILY REPORT, a daily
newspaper of general circulation, published in the City oI O
County and State aforesaid and that the attached advertisntaemrient o,
of __NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
City of Rancho Cucamonga
was published in said newspaper One time
to wit: April 24, 1981
I certify under penalty of prrjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.
IS it; no luYet
Doled at Ontario. California this Twenty- fourth
---- -- day of
April
19 81,
CITY OF RANCHO
,.CUCAMONGA
NOTICE OF =
PUBLIC HEARING
Notice Is hereby given that the City Coun-4
the City of Rancho Cucamonga will hold a public .
hearing on May 6 at 7:00 p.m. at the Lions Park
Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Ran-
cho Cucamonga, to discuss inks proposed use of
the City's General Revenue Sherin0 Funds in re-
lations to the fiscal 1981 -82 city budget. Citizens
of Rancho Cucamonga will be given the oppor-
tunity to make written and oral comments and to
ask questions concerning the entire budget and
the relationship of Revenue Sharing funds to
It.
The proposed use of the Revenue Sharing funds
(an allocated amount of $396,272 for fiscal year
1981 -82 plus $221,272 for fiscal year 1980 -81) is
to provide for the on -going operations and
maintenanco expenditures of the Sheriffs con -
Iract in providing law enforcement services in it-
scal 1981 -82.
Senior citizens and organizations representinq
the interests of senior citizens are particularly
encouraged to make use of this opportunity to
be heard and to present their views 1e91rding
the allocation of Revenue sharing funds.
A copy of the proposed budget will be available
for Inspection at the city ofhces located at 9320.
C Base Line Road. Written comments will be M.
cewed In the City Clerk's Office unlit 5.00
May 6, 1981.
Publish: April 24, 1981
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
• OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE
"RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE."
WHEREAS, the California State Legislature has provided for
the codification and publication of the permanent and general
ordinance of cities in Sections 50022.1 through 50022.10 of the
Government Code, and
WHEREAS, the Book Publishing Company, Seattle, Washington,
has compiled, edited and published a codification of the perma-
net and general ordinance of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, and
WHEREAS, there have been filed and there are now on file in��
the office of the city clerk, for public inspection, three copies
of a document entitled "Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code," together'
with three copies of each of the secondary codes therein adopted I
by references; /
Section 1. Adoption. Pursuant to the provisions of
SectYonsT662.2. 1 t r�gh 50022.8 and 50022.10 of the Government
Code, there is hereby adopted the "Rancho Cucamonga Municipal
Code" as published by Book Publishing Company, Seattle, Washington,
• together with those secondary codes adopted by reference as
authorized by the California State Legislature, save and except
those portions of the secondary codes as are deleted or modified
by the provisions of the "Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code."
•
Section 2. Title -- Citation -- Reference. This code shall
be know as tFe "Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code ", and it shall
be sufficient to refer to said code as the "Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code" in any prosecution for the violation of any pro-
vision thereof or in any proceeding at law or equity. It shall be
sufficient to designate any ordinance adding to, amending, correcting
or repealing all or any part or portion thereof as an addition to,
amendment to, correction or repeal of the "Rancho Cucamonga Municipal
Code." Further reference may be had to the titles, chapters, sections,
and subsections of the "Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code" and such
references shall apply to that numbered title, chapter, section
or subsection as it appears in the code.
Section 3. Codification Authority. This code consists of all
the regulatory and pen — finances and certain of the administrative
ordinances of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, codified
pursuant to the provisions of Sections 50022.1 through 50022.8 and
50022.10 of the Government Code.
Section 4. Ordinances Passed Prior to Adontion of the Code.
7
Ordinance No.
Page 2
Pi
Section 4. Ordinances Passed Prior to Adoption of the Code
The last ordinance included rn this code was Ordinance No. 121,
passed September 17, 1980. The following ordinances, passed
subsequent to Ordinance 121, but prior to adoption of this code,
are hereby adopted and made a part of this code:
Ordinance Nos. 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130,
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141.
Section 5. Reference Applies to A11 Amendments Whenever a
reference is made to th.vs code as the "Rancho Cucamonga Municipal
Code" or to any portion thereof, or to any ordinance of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, California, the reference shall apply to all
amendments, corrections and additions heretofore, now or hereafter
made.
Section 6. Title, Chapter, and Section Head in s. Title,
chapter, and section headings contained herein shall not be
deemed to govern, limit, modify or in any manner affect the scope,
meaning or intent of the provisions of any title, chapter or
section hereof.
Section 7. Reference to Specific Ordinances. The provisions of
this code shall not in any manner affect matters of record which
refer to, or are otherwise connected with ordinances which are
therein specifically designated by number or otherwise and which
are included within the code, but such reference shall be construed
to apply to the corresponding provisions contained within this
code.
Section 8. Effect of Code on Past Actions and Obligations.
Neither the adoption of this code nor the repeal or amendment
hereby of any ordinance or part or portion of any ordinande of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall in any manner affect the pro-
secution for violations of ordinances, which violations were
committed prior to the effective date, hereof, nor be construed as
a waiver of any license, fee, or penalty at said effective date
due and unpaid under such ordinances, nor be construed as affecting
any of the provisions of such ordinances relating to the collection
of any such license, fee, or penalty, or the penal validity of
any bond or cash deposit in lieu thereof required to be posted,
filed or deposited pursuant to any ordinance and all rights and
obligations thereunder appertaining shall continue in full force
and effect.
Section 9. Constitutionality. If any section, subsection,
sentence, clause or phrase of this code is for any reason held
to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect
the v.ilidity of the remaining portions of this code. The council •
hereby declares that it would have passed this code, and each
section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective
of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences,
Ordinance No.
— Page 3,
clauses or phrases had been declared invlaid or unconstitutional,
and if for any reason this code should be declared invalid or
unconstitutional, then the origianl ordiannce or ordinances
shall be in full force and effect.
Section 1D. Publication. The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and t}
City Clerk shall a es a same, 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, Caliiornia, and
circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
•
Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk
•
•
6A
•
DATE:
TO:
.-... v. nru v�.nv �.�e.er rvivivUn
MEMORANDUM
April 30, 1981
City Council /City Manager
Director
FROM: Harry J. Empey, Finance
SUBJECT: Refuse permits
The April 21st date set by Council as the last date by which those
refuse companies currently operating in the City must file for a
refuse permit has passed. As of April 21, 1981, four (4) companies
have filed applications for a permit: Western Refuse Hauling,
Rancho Disposal Service, Inc., M 6 M Rubbish Disposal and Yukon
Disposal Service. All are currently operating in portions of the
City, with the exception of Western Refuse Hauling, which serves
the cities of Chino and Upland. Those companies currently operating
in the City which did not file by the April 21st deadline are:
A S R Rubbish Service, Inc. and Tri- County Rubbish Company; both
companies operate in the Etiwanda area.
Attached is a copy of a log on refuse complaints which Staff has
maintained since mid - January, 1981. It is attached merely for
information, and as follow -up to direction by Council. As you
have probable noticed by reading the complaint log, during the
months of January, February and March of this year both companies
(Rancho and Yukon) continued to charge a rate higher than that
authorized by Council at their meeting of December 17, 1980.
Those people who refused to pay anything but what Council authorized
are being billed the difference between the Council- authorized
rate and the higher rate the companies were charging. Other
complaints of significance were the rudeness and poor attitude,
directed for the most part towards Rancho Disposal, an attitude
which appeared not to be in the best interest of the City residents.
Some of the more classic complaints are hi -lited in the complaint log.
There are obviously considerations Council must be concerned with
when dealing with permit issuance, suchas the status of the
litigation with the refuse companies, and the fact that Tri- County
Rubbish Company and A S R Rubbish Service, Inc. will have to
cease their operation in the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
As pert of Staff's attempt to notify all companies concerned, a
packet containing a permit application, a copy of Ordinance No. 135
(which adopts the County ordinance by reference), Resolution No.
81 -16, and Resolution No. 81 -15 (establishing refuse collection
rates) was sent to all the refuse companies operating in the City,
and to anv other refuse company which expressed an interest in
obtaining; a permit.
Attached are copies of those permit applications received by Staff
by April 21, 1981. Due to minor problems in the application process,
It is Staff's rec0mm1011d,1 Lion that any permit application approved
and issued he done so subject to complete compliance of the permit
application requirements. We recommend a time frame of ten (10) days
for this compliance.
REPOSE CqWINT LOG
DATE i NAME 6 PHONE ADDRESS COMPLAINT
COMPANY
-
r %�1' Tifl'r �fl!.1
�i•l� -. rl all"
-,I
In
•l +l'... 1.
n/.
--
rl_;f ,�,).t l:�fr
�!', ^U ai7•q, -e` Ut: YH
r'f= t,,. t!F / �1, '
/ 1
re
" -'I:
REFUSE CyWNT LOG
COMPANY
DATE
NAME 6 PHONE
ADDRESS
COMPLAINT
—
7 J,I0 llrl -A -
Al
•I
.IF'Y3- a'ci ''4 -.. i'.IrK:� .nl °. lag -`•:.I
C' `v
-
-
1E
r -r.'
-- 1.
1J -I. - Irl i> "rr, •:r -7.= -. i:. I,
rrlll rc -: -v tt '
le t- f,
:4,I
.=r5 'fl
.I .' /.r %,r
rr l:,i >J. , !1
r•(_ hl' P. ].L ,1•` —
�iIwr1
'. -1G 'll
_ - -ti
%_:; Jfl oE IrE
rnr_
drI
-.
REFUSE COMPLAINT LOG
COMPANY
DATE
NAME S PHONE
ADDRESS
COMPLAINT
Yukon
2 -4 -81
bL,s Grossman 989 -1409
7269 Mesada Ave.
At to Loma CA. 91701
Over 62- -how does he go about paying
lower rate - -Yukon does not concur.
Yukon
-4 -81
John Routs
6825 Amethyst
Alta Loma
Over 62 -- paying higher rate
Rancho
2 -4 -8L
Uehorah Taylor 989 -1008
7690 Malachite
91730
Receiving threatening letters to pay
high rate. Yukon will not come in her
are to pick up trash.
Yukon
2 -5 -81
Mr, Elwood Russell
987 -4268
6649 Eastwood
Rancho Cucamonga, CA.
Received letter at higher rate.
Yukon
L -11 -81
William Joe Morrow
987 -6918
99L1 Lomita Ave.
Received letter to pay higher rate/
Yukon
2 -1L -81
James Holland
899 -1558
13745 Victoria
2nd No Cite to pay higher rate.
Rancho
3 -5 -81
Mari[ Goldsworthy 989 -417.2
11934 Candlewood
F.tewanda
last Notice -- Sending to Collection Agen
Never has had service (advised her that
it is not mandatory to use Rancho)
'n vflr. J•i> rJ•Lq =.
c
yr %I I4�Vtia l %el
:1'
- �
d)., •iJ -
.fIE": C -P
tl `; T._Y')q
_,vr':E G)ds
(�EnFa "Fo
-
'�
_ C)rtT`c �� /( : -T CIO^ r•
j'"J� },r,J %il
.r "'At LI' . -r-
•-
FL r.�i LLA;; / }!
lilrlC
,1 --
- -/;
d.i r1 ; "ri �r1! :r %!.;.h•� -i
!'!'. ilA lrl
NFUEI: NAP •svc -
-
f LFLTErt�)J't�F - Ht#LN' i i' -r '�'1C
(Ao- ppT �r'cEa ='in fISJ3
NEdE? u•ry L'Jt_ - i'Et-r 6i �, '.1 ui::
DA.E NAME 6 PHONE ADDRESS COMPLAINT
COMPANY
rl
-
-i•
'c:, �rIP •. "r .�7: " -�7i /_
/ " %•r .Y`,C,: �:� r5 rq
Id
'r� /.t:� �: .P:. r:- _
U; V_6 ('�.T !F. rn �1,9n j.,:' ';'1•• lf6,l /i
P Vi r
7L
REFUSE COMPLAINT LOG
COMPANY
DATE
NAME 6 PRONE
ADDRESS
COMPLAINT
IF1 -/i f• •';l �_'-
). r.l "I it irl t \'� .)JL'
t -��'9 ':r
1,�, .l
.i
-.r.: .lrl •1 -.�F- ::i' -'o
At; -> r,; n^r_T., 11
CITY OF RANCHO COCA VO \G:\
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981 1��� 77
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd D. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Agreements with Consultants for Engineering and
Legal Services in Connection with the Industrial
Area Assessment District 79 -1
At its meeting of April 15, 1961 the Council adopted resolutions
establishing the industrial area assessment district and directed
staff to proceed with improvement design work.
It was understood that several consultants would be needed to further
proceed with the district and that funds would have to be advanced by
the City, with expected additional advances by developers, for the
design and administrative work between now and the sale of bonds.
• At the April 15th meeting, it was estimated that $350,000 would be
necessary for this work. Further refinements in the estimates have
resulted in a total of $402,000, distributed as follows:
1. Project Management and Plan Checking $ 60,000
2. Assessment Engineering 25,000
3. Right of Way Acquisition /Appraisal 25,000
4. Environmental Impact Report 9,000
5. Bond Counsel 15,000
6. Storm Drain Design 216,000
7. Street Design 42,000
S. Contingencies 10,000
The major items, design and plan checking, while large, are well
within the expected range for such services. The design cost is about
4.51 of the estimated construction cost and plan checking is less thar
20% of the design cost.
• In two weeks, the Council will be asked to review and approve two
additional agreements - -those for reimbursement for streets already
STAFF REPORT
Agreements with Consultants for Engineering
and Legal Services in Connection with the
Industrial Area Assessment District 79 -1
May 6, 1981 •
Page 2
built and for accelerated construction of some of the improvements.
These agreements are complex and require further legal review.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Council approve the execution of agreements
with engineering consultants for the design of improvements for
Assessment District 79 -1 and for project management and plan checking.
Respectfully submitted,
YH-PAR:jaa
Attachments
II r
L
•
r. RESOLUTION NO. 'at
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE EXECUTION
OF AGREEMENTS WM ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS FOR THE
DESIGN OF IMPROVEMENTS FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 79 -1
AND FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT, PLAN CHECKING AND OTHER
SERVICES.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, has for its consideration Agreements with Engineering
Consultants for the design of Improvements for Assessment District
79 -1 and for project management, plan checking and other services.
WHEREAS, said Agreements are specifically with the consultants
listed below for the purposes stated:
1. Willdan Associates for project management, assessment
engineering, right -of -way acquisition and plan checking.
2. Williamson b Schmid for storm drain design.
3. Lockwood Engineering for street and storm drain design.
4. Brain 6 Nazarek for Bond Council Services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Agreements are hereby
approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Agreements
on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. and the City Clerk to attest
thereto.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1931.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Phillip D. Schlosser, Kayor
ATTEST:
Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk
�r
r'
• AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered Into Mi. _ day of
Ifal, by and between Ure City of Rancho Cucamonga, a municipal corporation
located In the State of California, County of San Bernardino, hereinafter referred
to as "CITY" and Wildan Associates, Consulting Civil Engineers, with offices to-
"led at 1020 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 100, Anaheim, California, herein-
after referred bas 'ENGINEER ".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, CITY Is conlemplating the formation of an Assessment District
for 0e purW" of certain properties and the installation of certain public im-
provements in connection with certain industrial uses; aW
WHEREAS, to acmmplislt said district CITY will require "I nearing issis-
•
tance W Implement the proposed improvements as shown on the adopted proposed
Boundary Map
as amended April 1, ID#I Ian arm bounded by Deer Creek Channel,
4th Street, Interstate 1S and Arrow Highway, excluding the northwest corner of
Haven Avenue and Eth Slreel); and
WHEREAS, said engineering assistance Is m include project management,
right-of-way acquisition aM engineering, assessment engineering and assess-
ment coordination, and checking of improvement plans; and
WHEREAS, ENGINEER Is experienced with assessment district processor".
has experience in coordinating Industrial devdopmenl similar as that which Is W
be Involved, is experienced In the management of projects similar to that being
contemplated, is experienced In the acquisl lion of right-of-way and the pr"ra-
lion of necessary documents, Is experienced in checking of Improvement plans,
and has various relevant capabilities necessary for implementing said district:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions here-
Inaba. contained, the parties hereto agree" follows:
CITY does hereby retain ENGINEER In a contract capacity and ENGINEER
shall perform the functions of Assessment Engineer, Assessment Coordinator,
Project Manager, Right-of -Way Engineer and Plan -Check Engineer, as more par- •
titularly described as follows:
A. ASSESSMENT ENGINEERING
1. SCOPE OF IMPROVEMENT
In coordination with CITY's engineer and the owners or developers,
ENGINEER shall determine those improvements which would be eligible
for inclusion within the assessment district process and will incorporate
those improvements within the scope of the proposed assessment district
project: said proposed improvements are as shown on Ne adopted Pro-
posed Boundary Map as amended April 1. 1981.
II, BOUNDARY OF BENEFIT
In coordination with ClWts engineer, the developers and landowners,
ENGINEER will propose boundaries of benefit for the assessment district
that will incorporate therein the benefited properties that are W be
assessed. -
111. CONSTRUCTION PHASE
As may be requested, ENGINEER shall during the construction phase, •
assist the CITY in approving or disapproving change orders requested
by the contractor so as to conform to the assessment district proceedings.
IV. ASSESSMENT SERVICES
ENGINEER shall provide assessment engineering for me district consist -
tog of the following:
(1) Provide legal descriptions of each properly to be assessed.
(2) Obtain the proper addresses of owners and prepare required
mailings.
(1) Prepare boundary and diagram maps.
(e) Apportion the cost of the form of special assessment W be levied
upon the parcels or land within the district. Said assessment
spread shall be made in accordance with the statutes pertaining
to benefits.
(S) Fleet with and consult with the affected properly owners during
the assessment spread process to insure that those persons have •
j s /
(6)
(7)
(a)
19)
110)
• 111)
(11)
(13)
(in)
(IS)
(16)
0
an understanding of the method of assessment spread prior b
public hearing, and attend meetings as required.
Prepare an up -dated %Debt Report" and preliminary Engineer's
Report to include assessments upon and against the parcels in the
district for the total amount of costs and expenses of such work in
proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each of the
parcels.
Contract for the printing of the improvement notices and post same
throughout the district.
Upon completion of the public hearing on the assessment spread,
make such revisions as are ordered by the City Council.
Prepare the assessment diagram, assessment roll and notices for
mailing.
Prepare, present, file and record the list of such assessments and
furnish copies to the appropriate public officials and other ageh-
des as may be necessary.
Prepare, ready for recording, the notice of assessment.
Prepare, ready for mailing, lie notice of hearing.
Assist in the audit of the initial cash payments in lieu of bonds in
cooperation with the designated collection officer and assist in
compiling the initial list of unpaid assessments.
Prepare and publish final Engineer's Report of such assessments
aM assist in the filing and recording of same as regulred by
assessment district proceedings.
Assist CITY staff in ordering of bonds, bond register and billing
slips and consult with and provide information to interested bond
buyers.
All assessment engineering activities will be continually reviewed
and coordinated with the CITY district staff and legal counsel re-
sponsible for the assessment district proceedings.
I
B. ASSESSMENT COORDINATION •
In performing these services, ENGINEER shall continually coordinate
needs of the CITY, the interests of the developer, and the requirements
of law W insure Me best practical project for all concerned, but at all
times giving priority to the fundamental interests of CITY.
C. RIGHT -OF -WAY ACQUISITION AND ENGINEERING
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES
ENGINEER agrees to perform those services which are more particularly
described hereafter, which are necessary for the acquisition of right -of-
way, on b -hall of the CITY, W install those proposed improvements as
shown on the adopted Proposed Boundary Map as amended April 1. 1951.
The services consist of right -of -way acquisition and engineering services
necessary to service permanent and temporary easements for the assess-
ment district. Unless modified in writing by CITY. Me duties of -
ENGINEER shall not be censlrued W exceed Most planned services speci-
fically set forth herein. •
It. PUNNED SERVICES
(1) Provide any assistance where right -of -way information might In-
trocuce economies or efficiencies in the total project.
(1) Assist the CITY in obtaining title information and ordering title
reports as required W convey title in the manner deemed sufficient
for the assessment disiricl.
(1) Drafting of maps and preparation of legal descriptions for each
parcel of properly to be acquired and their Incorporation Into a
proper conveyance document.
(a) Preparation of Offers W Purchase. Appraisal Summarys and other
documents required by Federal and State laws and regulations
governing land acquisition activities by public agencies.
(5) Meiling of written notices of the CITY's intent to acquire to each
property owner from whom right -of -ways will be needed.
(6) Presenting each property owner with a written offer to purchase .
and an appraisal summary and explaining the acquisition process.
(y) Describing the assessment dislrict process, and the construction
of improvements in the manner proposed.
(e) Provide assistance W the appraiser, if retained, and engineer
which will be helpful in expediting their work or inlroducling
economies or improvement of design In the project.
(9) Coordination with attorneys. Including initial conferences with
legal counsel to discuss procedures and record keeping services,
and to maintain liaison in the event of condemnation.
(10) Recording and maintenance of files for each proposed acquisition
In a manner consistent with Federal and Stale laws and the recom-
mendation of the City Attorney and the special legal counsel for
the proposed assessment district, should suds special legal coun-
sel be retained by the CITY.
III. SPECIAL SERVICES
The CITY and ENGINEER agree that certain of work contemplated to be
provided by ENGINEER cannot be darned sufficiently at the time of exe-
this Agrwnent, Incidental
cution of and that work related W the project
and net covered above may be needed during performance of this Agree-
ment. It is Intended that such categories of work be classified as Special
Services. Special Services include, but are rot limited m, the fallowing:
(1) "Fair Markel Value" appraisals of Individual Parcels to be acquired
in conformance with Federal and State regulations relating W the
appralsemenl of real properly or properly Interests for the purpose
of acquisition by a government entity.
(7) Legal services required for the accuisilion of the necessary right-
of-ways in eminent domain proceedings, which are authorized by
the City Attorney.
()) Title services required to establish adequacy of the properly or
property interest conveyance to the CITY as required by the
assessment district.
(e) Third party reconveyances or subordmations. it required,
•
(5) ENGINEWs services rcyuested by legal counsel as related to
pre -trial activities and /or court appearances.
•
Special services shall be performed only upon a specific request, based
upon need.
D. PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Project 111anag Brent Includes these services necessary to provide manage-
ment and coordination among persons accomplishing the work. Services
include the following for the project:
(1) Coordinate the work and activities, on the various project tasks,
Of the project personnel, Including assessment engineering, right-
of-way engineering, design engineering arel plan checking, and
the activities of those providing auxiliary services.
(8) Establish, maintain, and control budgets and schedules.
(5) Consult with the CITY and regulating agencies, when required,
throughout the course of the protect. -
(o) Attend meetings as required to coordinate the work.
(5) Prepare specifications for the proposed improvements. Specifica-
•
tions to include Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Bid
Proposals and General Conditions.
(6) Coordinate with design consultants regarding preparation of De-
tail Specifications and incorporate such Into the final Bid Docu-
menu.
(7) Prepare title zhind for the final improvement plan package.
E. IMPROVEMENT PUN CHECKING
ENGINEER shall provide plan checking services necessary to check Im-
provement plans prepared by design consultants for the proposed Im-
provements as shown an the adopted Proposed Boundary Map as amend-
ed April 1, 1981. Plan checking services shall Include the following:
(1) Review check plans submitted for improvements to be installed
in <onjunclion with proposed assessment district. The plans will
be subjected to a thorough review to assure that facilities satisfy
11
/ J
CITY standards and that good engineering and construction
Practices are Observed.
(3) Improvement plan checking will include street and storm drain
plans. Storm drain plan check shall include checking of hydrol-
ogy studies and calculations and hydraulic calculations. ENGI-
NEER shall coordinate the design of drainage facilities with re-
gional flood control agencies.
(l) Required corrections will be noted clearly on check prints and
returned to the design engineer for his action. Corrected plans
will be reviewed upon resubmittal b assure that all noted defi-
ciencies have Imen eliminated. This process will be repeated
as necessary until the plans are doomed acceptable. It Is assumed
that the checking process will require an initial Neck and two (1)
subsequent checks.
(a) When plans are considered fully complete they will be transmitted
to the City Engineer for his approval.
• F. COMPENSATION
1. inasmuch as the scope of the work to be performed by ENGINEER consists
of establishing the work b be accomplished, it would not be practical to
fix fees on such services in advance of knowing the extent of the work to
be done. To limit tha obligations under the terms of this contract, how-
ever ENGINEER sets forth below certain maximums for portions of such
work which shall not be exceeded without separate authorization from
CITY. No work will be undertaken on those time for which a fee Is not
set forth herein without separate authorization from CITY.
II. For the services to be performed hereunder, ENGINEER shall be compen-
sated on a per diem basis at the hourly rates set forth in Exhibit "A ", Fee
Schedule, attached hereto and by reference Incorporated herein and made
a part hereof.
III. Unless separately authorized by CITY, compensation for the various work
items shall be as follows:
0
(1) For services as set forth in Section A, Paragraph IV -6, •Debt Re- •
port ", shall be a fee hot to exceed $5,000.
(0) For services as set forth In Section A, Paragraph IV (excluding
IV -6) atM Section B. Assessment Engineering and Assessment
Coordination (for an era bounded by Deer Greek Channel, 41h
Street, Interstate 15 and Arrow Highway, excluding the northwest
corner of Haven Avenue and 6th Street). S"It be a fee trot to ex-
ceed $20, 000.
(3) For services set forth in Section C, Paragraph 11, Planned Services,
shall be a fee not to exceed $19,000 except for the following:
(a) Services directly applicable b the work such as special legal
and accounting expenses, special consultants, commercial
printing and binding, and similar costs that are not applica-
ble to general overhead, shall be billed at actual cost plus
105.
(b) Identifiable outside reproduction costs shall be billed at •
actual at plus 105.
(c) Title Reports, should the CITY not desire to acquire from
Title Company directly and instruct ENGINEER to do so,
shall be billed at actual cost plus 105.
(4) For special services set forth In Section C, Paragraph 111-1,
appraisals can be perfomed, if requested by CITY, for an esti-
mated fee of $6, 000.
(5) For special services set forth In Section C, Paragraph III (except
for III -1), for a fee negotiated at the time of request by CITY.
(6) For services set forth In Section D, Pro)ecl Management, for a fee
not to exceed $ IS. 000.
(7) For services at forth in Section E. Improvement Plan Checking,
for a fee not to exceed $45.000.
IV. PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION
Charges shall be billed monthly to CITY and payment by CITY shall be •
made within a reasonable period of lime. Invoices shall include billing
for labor charges and outside direct costs incurred by ENGINEER our -
ing each month for services rendered to CITY In conformance with this
Agreement.
G. RESPONSIBILITY OF ENGINEER
The ENGINEER is employed to render a professional service only, and
any payment matle to it is compensation solely for such services as it
may render and recommendations it may make in carrying out the work.
The ENGINEER makes tw warranty, either express or implied, as to its
findings, opinions, recommendations, factual presentations or profes-
sional advice other than they were promulgated after following a prac-
tice usual to the engineering profession.
N. INSTRUCTIONS TO ENGINEERS
In the performance of the efforts set forth In this contract, ENGINEER
shall report to and receive instructions from the CITY's engineer or
such other person or officer which CITY or CITY's engineer may deslg-
cats.
• 1. TERMINATION
(1) CITY reserves and has the right and privilege of cancelling.
suspending, or abandoning the execution of all or any work in
connection with this Agreement at any time upon written notice
to ENGINEER.
(3) In the event of termination, all finished or unfinished data,
studies, maps, and reports prepared by ENGINEER, shall at the
option of CITY, become CITY's property.
(1) In the event of termination, CITY shall pay ENGINEER for all
services performed and all expenses incurred to date of termi-
nation of this Agreement on a time and materials basis in accord-
ance with ENGINEER's standard billing rates set forth in Exhibit
"A" attached hereto.
J. ANNUAL COST INCREASES
As stipulated on Exhibit 'W, ENGINEER's Fee Schedule, ENGINEER's
• hourly rates are subject to increase on August 1st of each year, Mazi-
Cam.
mum fee limits as stipulated in Section F, Compensation, take into ac- •
count projected increases as of August 1, 1981. If, however, ENGINEER
I' requested to provide service W CITY, In conformance with this Agree-
ment, after August 1, 1983, ENGINEER reserves the right to renegotiate
upper fee limits with CITY to cover increases in cost after August I,
1982, and all subsequent August 1st dates until such time Agreement is
fullfilled or mutually terminated.
K. SCHEDULE
The execution of this Agreement by the parties hereto shall constitute
an authorization W proceed whereupon ENGINEER will commence im-
mediately on the required work.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said parties have executed Nis Agreement an
the date first hereinabove written.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WILLDAN ASSOCIATES
a municipal corporation a California co. poration •
By By
Mayor William C. Stookey
Vice President
Altes l:
City Clerk
•
EXHIBIT nA"
ENGINEER'S FEE SCHEDULE
August 1, 1980
Our hourly wage rates are as follows:
CLASSIFICATION FEE RATE PER HOUR
Principal Engineer
S 55100
Division Engineer
49.00
Project Manager
45.00
Senior Project Engineer
44.00
Project Engineer
38.00
Design Engineer
31.00
Senior Designer
36.00
Designer
29.00
Senior Draftsperson
33.00
Draftsperson
23.00
Junior Draftsperson
19.00
Real Properly Agent
43.00
Assistant Real Properly Agent
36.00
Real Property Technician
19.00
Computer Calculation Analyst
36.00
Survey Analyst
29.50
Construction Observer
30.00
Delivery
•
17.00
Field Coordinator
49.00
Party Chief
43.00
Two -Man Field Party
80.00
Three -Man Field Party
118.00
Four -Man Field Party
145.00
0
It should be noted that the foregoing wage rates are effective through July 31,
1981. The rates will be adi.sled after that dale to compensate for annual labor
union negotiated adjustments and other increases in later costs.
1
AGREEMENT FOR STORM DRAIN ENGINEERING SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
19 _, by and between the CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation located in the State of California, County
of San Bernardinos hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and WILLIAMSON AND
SCHMID CIVIL ENGINEERS, with offices located at 17782 Sky Park Boulevard,
Irvine, California 92714, hereinafter referred to as "STORM DRAIN ENGINEER."
W IT NE SS ET H:
WHEREAS, CITY is contemplating the formation of an Assessment District
for the purchase of certain properties and the installation of certain public
improvements in connection with certain industrial uses; and
WHEREAS, to accomplish said district CITY will require engineering
assistance for design engineering; and
WHEREAS, STORM DRAIN ENGINEER is experienced with design of
district improvements, has experience in coordinating industrial development .
similar to that which is to be involved and has various relevant capabilities
necessary for implementing said district;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions
hereinabove contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
CITY does hereby retain STORM DRAIN ENGINEER in a contract capacity
and STORM DRAIN ENGINEER shall perform the functions of Storm Drain Design
as more particularly described as follows:
1. SCOPE OF IMPROVEMENT
In coordination with CITY'S engineer, Assessment Engineer and
Street Engineer and the owners or developers, STORM DRAIN
ENGINEER shall provide top. survey, prepare Pines. details and
special provisions for Storm Drains 5D, WA and 19D as identified on
the City's adopted .Vaster PM.n of Drainage for the Industrial Area
prepared by L. D. King, dated April, 1980.
80257 -4-23-81
III /
Iti
r
STORM DRAIN ENGINEER, when authorized, shall perform the
named work and Professional Engineering Services in conjunction
with the aforementioned project including the following:
A. Preliminary design
B. Necessary tope surveys
C. Necessary potholing of utility lines
D. Preparation of storm drain improvement plans
E. Hydrology 4 hydraulic design
F. Utility relocation
G. Attend hearings, conferences and meetings as required.
H. Specifications for storm drain system
R. COORDINATION
In performing these services, STORM DRAIN ENGINEER shall
continually coordinate needs of the CITY, the interests of the
developer, and the requirements of law to insure the best practical-
project for all concerned, but at all times giving priority to the
fundamental interests of CITY.
• III. COMPENSATION
I*
CITY shall reimburse STORM DRAIN ENGINEER for services
performed as follows:
1. Compensation for Design Engineering Services rendered shall be
at the hourly rates set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and
made a part hereof, in a total amount not to exceed $175,000.
In addition, STORM DRAIN ENGINEER shall be reimbursed for
printing and copying and for recording fees at cost to STORM
DRAIN ENGINEER plus 10 percent.
2. Optional services shall not be performed without separate
writ ter. auth.ri,ation Urn the CITY. Compensation for
Optional services authorized to be performed prior to August I,
1951 shall be at the hourly rotas set forth in Eshnbit "A" plus
reimbursement for printing and copying and for outside
servioes, respectively, at cost to STORM DRAIN ENGINEER
plus Ill percent. The hourly rates and mileage per diem rate set
forth In Exhibit "A" shall Iw subject to revision on August 1,
1981.
80757 - 4.2) -81
!s
0
d. The foregoing rates and prices shall include expenses incident
to performance of the work authorized except as above set
forth, as well as equipment and instruments, the use of office
space and minor materials and supplies.
4. STORM DRAIN ENGINEER shall bill the CITY monthly. The
billing shall be based on hourly rates as set forth in said Exhibit
eA ". Billing shall be broken down by employee classifications,
indicating number of hours worked during the billing period, the
hourly rate and the amount billed. Billing will show amount
billed to date, amount paid to date, and current balance to be
paid. Copies of Invoices to STORM DRAIN ENGINEER for
outside services for which reimbursement is requested shall be
attached to STORM DRAIN ENGINEER'S bill.
5. CITY shall retain the right to review and disagree with STORM
DRAIN ENGINEER'S billings. Any disagreement of billing shall
be reviewed with the STORM DRAIN ENGINEER. Payment
shall he made by the terms of this Agreement as far as possible..
Where this Agreement cannot be applied, payment shall be
made by mutual agreement between the CITY and the STORM
DRAIN ENGINEER. •
6. The final ten percent (10 %) of the fee stated herein shall not be
billed until STORM DRAIN ENGINEER has completed all
authorized work and the CITY has accepted said work.
7. CITY shall pay STORM DRAIN ENGINEER the amount due once
each month following approval at a regular meeting of the City
Council,
IV. INSTRUCTIONS TO STORM DRAIN ENGINEER
In the performance of the efforts set forth in this contract, STORM
DRAIN ENGINEER shall report to and receive instructions from the
CITY'S engineer or such other person or officer which CITY or
CITY'S engineer may designate.
V. TEIZ MINATION
1. QTY reserves and has the right and privilege of cancelling,
suspnnding, or abandoning the ewC,umn of all or any work m
80257 - 11-2 ).SI J •
r
0
connection with this agreeement at any time upon written
notice to STORM DRAIN ENGINEER.
2. In the event of termination, all finished or unfinished data,
studies, maps, and reports prepared by STORM DRAIN
ENGINEER, shall at the option of CITY, become CITY'S
property.
3. In the event of termination, CITY shall pay STORM DRAIN
ENGINEER for all services performed and all expenses incurred
to date of termination of this agreement on a time and
materials basis in accordance with STORM DRAIN ENGINEER'S
standard billing rates set froth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
VI. SCHEDULE
The execution of this agreement by the parties hereto shall
constitute an authorization to proceed whereupon STORM DRAIN
ENGINEER will commence immediately on the required work.
• IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said parties have executed this agreement on the
date first hereinabove written.
ATTEST:
BY:
City Clerk
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.MONGA
a municipal corporation
BY:
WILLIAMSON AND SCH.MID
CIVIL ENGINEERS
BY:
0
SW 57 - 4 -23 -S I 4
STANDARD HOURLY RATES
EFFECTIVE
AUCU51 4. 1980
ADDITIONAL CHARGES
COMPUIER PROCESSING TIME $23 1HOUR •
PLOTTER TIME $10 1MINUTE
"TOTAL STATION' SURVEY EQUIPMENT $10 /HOUR
COURT APPEARANCES AND DEPOSITIONS $100 /HOUR
BLUEPRINTS AND XEROX AT COST
EXHIBIT "A"
17782 SKY PARK BOULEVARD • IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92714 • (714; 5692222
E
OVERTIME
PRINCIPAL ENGINEER
$ 60
PROJECT ENGINEER
50
$ 60
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
42
32
DESIGN DRAFTSPERSON
36
45
DRAFTSPERSON
30
38
SECRETARY / DELIVERY
16
22
3-MAN SURVEY CREW
116
144
2 -MAN SURVEY CREW
90
110
ADDITIONAL CHARGES
COMPUIER PROCESSING TIME $23 1HOUR •
PLOTTER TIME $10 1MINUTE
"TOTAL STATION' SURVEY EQUIPMENT $10 /HOUR
COURT APPEARANCES AND DEPOSITIONS $100 /HOUR
BLUEPRINTS AND XEROX AT COST
EXHIBIT "A"
17782 SKY PARK BOULEVARD • IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92714 • (714; 5692222
E
AG=.E':i -NT FOP. ENOINEEEIIIG SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this __day of
, 198 _, by and between the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, a municipal corporation located in the State of California
County of San Bernardino, hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and
Lockwood Engineering and Surveying Con.e.any Inc, with offices located
at 380 West Foothill Boulevard, Rialto, California, hereinafter re-
fered to as "END IiI E 1.
WITNESSETH:
1. SCOPE ON IIA?RCV ;4FNT
The City Engineer, and the City Assessment Engineer, to- gother
with the owners or developers of the property, shall determine
those improvements which will be eligible for inclusion within
the assessment district process and will incorporate those im-
provemoutn uilhin the scope of the proposed assessnent dirtrict
l.roiect. As of Lhi:; dat, a "PROPPSED 9C;i t: Ci;RIi :S" plat has been
Ir ^Pm•ed, noted an 'Ansc:r:'acent Cl :tr :ct No. 79-1, 6th Strcct
Industrial" with an Rm en.ird date of April 1,1981, which rhall
he used In thla AGr eea. "nt for rrfor,,ncc to n+)r Y. to be perfo:,mcd.
Vhi s. agreement to for the design Iiniinvering of the Strcets as
,he'nn on nnld plat, and fcr the . "'.ore Arnlns indicated as 'i E.,
19P, nml two dralnn in the Southwest Imrtion of the District
WHEREAS, CITY is contemplating the formation of an Assessment
District for the purchase of certain properties and the installation
of certain public improvements in connection with certain industrial
uses; and
WHEREAS, to accomplish said district, CITY will require angin-
eering assistance for the dellgn and construction drawings; and
.
WHEREAS, ENGINEER Is experienced with design and preparation
of construction drawings and has various relevant capabilities nec-
essary for providing said service;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions
hereinabove contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. SCOPE ON IIA?RCV ;4FNT
The City Engineer, and the City Assessment Engineer, to- gother
with the owners or developers of the property, shall determine
those improvements which will be eligible for inclusion within
the assessment district process and will incorporate those im-
provemoutn uilhin the scope of the proposed assessnent dirtrict
l.roiect. As of Lhi:; dat, a "PROPPSED 9C;i t: Ci;RIi :S" plat has been
Ir ^Pm•ed, noted an 'Ansc:r:'acent Cl :tr :ct No. 79-1, 6th Strcct
Industrial" with an Rm en.ird date of April 1,1981, which rhall
he used In thla AGr eea. "nt for rrfor,,ncc to n+)r Y. to be perfo:,mcd.
Vhi s. agreement to for the design Iiniinvering of the Strcets as
,he'nn on nnld plat, and fcr the . "'.ore Arnlns indicated as 'i E.,
19P, nml two dralnn in the Southwest Imrtion of the District
0
not specifically designated on the plat, which provide for
facilities on Haven Avenue at Fourth Street and the second
for a discharge drain into Deer Creek approximately 1000
feet North of Fourth Street. Design Engineering shall In-
clude the fallow"ag items:
(1) Provide the necessary Field Surveying work to obtain
all necessary field conditions for design of the streets
and storm drains.
(2) Design the streets as per the plat noted, and provide
suitable construction drawings for bidding and con -
structlon, submitting these to the City Engineer, or
the Cities Project Coordinator for plan checking.
(3) Design the Storm drains Indicated herein, and provide
suitable constructlondrawings for bidding and censtr-
action, submitting these to the City Engineer, or the
Cities Project Coordinator for plan checking. •
(Y) Arrange for an experienced and qualified Soils Testing
Laboratory to take the necessary field tests and laboratory
tests to determ_na the roadbed structural section and re-
commendations for soil preparation for the construction
of the streets, and drainage facilities backflll.
(5) Provide any Special Provisions for the Specifications for
the street design.
(6) Provide an estimate of quantities to be included In the
bid documents by the Project Coordinator.
(7) Sat sufflalant survey monuments and temporary Pench Narks
In the field, to enable the project to be suitable controlcd
for con::tructic.n.
((') Car.rdinntc all pvro,u of the work with the City Engineer.
II. r"H(:P sF:PVTCF:6
A:: may 1'.c req',iired, ,vu: r- qucsLad by •.eparatc autbnrizallon,
....0 ,...'i(E shall provido th�•ne services that are necessary to
accu,pllnb tL1, s;r r;ner.t Th.t SPrludes such Ch
to ',hQ Flat reap nc ,. ^.1, ns deLet';a:r•d by the City F:'Chem,, as
to revinions In locatlons and scope of the streets and storm
drains.
3.
f
III. COF:EENSATIGH
(1) Unless instructed otherwise by CITY, ENGINEER shall
structure the projects such that all compensation
to be paid -ENGINEER shall be provided through the
assessment district proceedings by deposits to be
made by the developers in advance of assessments
district proceedings. Such deposits would be refunded
to the developers upon successful completion of the
assessment district proceedings.
(2) Inasmuch as the scope of the work to be performed by
ENGINEER Is subject to changed, based ore the ultimate
location of a portion or the streets and storm, drains,
it would be impractical to fix fees on services in ad-
vance of knowing the extent of the work to be done.To
limit the obligations under the terms of this contract,
however, ENGINEER sets forth below the certain maximums
•
for portions of such work which shall not be exceeded
without separate authorization from CITY. No work will
be undertaken on those items for which a fee is not set
forth herein without separate authorization from, CITY.
(3) For the services to be performed hereunder. ENCilEER shall
be compensated on a per diam basis at the hourly rates
set forth in Exhibit "A ", Fee Schedule, attached hereto
,and by reference incorporated herein and made a part hereof
billing* will be made ronthly as work progresses .
(4) Unless separately authorized by CITY, compensation for
the varlour work Stems included in this agreement shall
nnL excnrd the ::um of CIuHTY- 'II!NEE 'THOUFNIG DOLLARS
( E 831000.UG ).
IN17RUOTICNG TO HIA i;c,ER
In the, prrfc::aance of tlr efforts suL forL'u in this contract,
e:i',T:!EER shall report to and receive Instructions from the
CIS'i's englnrcr r rurh other 4 ^rsan or cf19cer which the City
or, CI'.Y'n cnyli.aer nay d^slgnate.
3.
f
v. T:,. =, :rt1raT1 eN
(1) CITY reserves and has the right and privile=ge of cancelling,
suspending, or abandoning the execution of all or any work in
connection with this agreoment at any time upon written notice
to ENGINEER.
!2) In the event of termination, all finished or unf_pished data.,
studies, maps, and reports prepared by ENGINEER, shall, at
the option of CITY, become CITY's property.
(3) In the event of termination, CITY shall pay ENSI!;E'cR for all
service, performed and all expenses Incurred to date of term-
ination. of this agreement on a time and materials basis, In
accordance with ENGINEERS's standard billing rates set forth
in Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
VI. SCHt DULE
The execution of this agreement by the parties hereto shall
constitute an euthorizatlon to proceed whereupon ENGINEER will
commence lmi:ediaterly on the required work. •
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said parties have executed this agreement
on the date first hereinabove written,
CITY Op RANCHO CUCAMONGA LOCNW00D ENCINEERIL'G AND SURVEY_
a municipal corporation ING COHP.ANY INC, a California
Corpora/tio�n
i� ayo nor
President W. LOC7;KOOdenn t d HCF'. 9101 1
Attest:
C:[y C1l erU
n`
•
0
EX"IbIT nA"
Our hourly wage rates are as , "ollows, per August 1,1580:
CLASSIFICATION
FEE RATE PER HOUR
Principal Engineer
$ 48.00
Project Designer
43.00
Draftsperson
28.00
Field Coordinator, Survey Crew
43.00
Party Chief, Survey
40.00
Two -Man Survey Party
90.00
Three -Man Survey Party
115.00
Four-Man Survey Party
le D.00
Truck 6 Vehicle milage
.25
per mile
Stakes, Lath, Monuments, Printing etc
Cost
* 10:
Soil testing will be billed at the Eame rate which is
• billed this office, without a surcharge.
0
The above rates are effactive through July 31,1081. The rates
will be adjusted after that Cate, on work provided thereafter,
to compensate for the annual labor union negotiated adJ�stments
and other Increases in labor costs. For estimating purposes, it
Is expected that the Increase will amount to approximately 10.00 }.
effective August 1,1981
It Is the normal practice by this office to use a three ran survey
crew for most work, and design to be by Project Designer and Prin-
cipal Engineer.
LOC f]LOOD FNGiNEERD:G ANTI SURCKYISG W4PANY INC
380 6cnt luothill 'r.oul,vard, PO Pax 396
Rialto, GAS for nIa 92376 (714)875 -5015
N
3"
RESOLUTION NO. 81- &Z .
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SETTING CERTAIN
FEES FOR ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTIONS AND CODES.
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 6257, a city may
impose a fee for the duplication of identifiable public records to recover
costs of duplication of public records, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 6257, a city may
impose a fee to recover the cost of duplicating identifiable public records,
and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
deems it desirable and necessary to set an annual subscription rate for those
public records that are produced on a consistent basis.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following annual charges
are established for certain public records for the City of Rancho Cucamonga:
AGENDAS:
• City Council ....... .....................$15.00 /yr.
Planning Commission .......................7.50 /yr.
Combined Council and Commission.......... 17.50 /yr.
MINUTES:
City Council ....... .....................$25.00 /yr.
Planning Commission ......................35.00 /yr.
Combined Council and Commission.......... 55.00 1yr.
MINUTES AND AGENDAS:
City Council ....... .....................$35.00 /yr.
Planning Commission ......................40.00 /yr.
Combined Council and Commission.......... 70.00 /yr.
MUNICIPAL CODE:
Initial Fee for Code ................... Mom
Annual Supplement Fee ....................25.00 /yr.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this _day of May, 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
Is ABSENT:
,'J
STAFF ~REPORT' w
DATE: May 6, 1981
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd Hobbs, City Engineer
//SUBJECT: Consent Calendar, Release of Bonds and Notices of Completion
J�/M.S. 78 -0046 - located on Helms Avenue south of 9th Street
O
Owner: Albert W. Davies �Q 1.l
9421 Ninth Street
Cucamonga, California 91730 pear v64 _ so
f_ 1
Faithful Performance Bond (Road) $11,000
The street improvements have been constructed in accordance with the approved
plans and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements
and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion.
Tract 9444 - located on the east side of Amethyst at Banyan
Owner: Fox Hollow III (Nubank International)
9014 W. Olympic Boulevard
Beverly Hills, California 90211
Faithful Performance Bond (Road) $76,000.00
The street improvements have been constructed in accordance with the approved
plans and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements
and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion.
�14ract 9329 - located at west of Haven Avenue and south of Hidden Farm Road
Owner: Kenneth Kerner and Assoc.
330 Park Lane, Suite 2
Laguna Beach, California 92651
Faithful Performance Bond (Road) $158,000.00
The street inprovements have been completed in an acceptable manner at this
time and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements
and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion.
continued...
Staff Report - Release of Bonds
May 6, 1981
Page 2
P.M. 4804 - located on the south side of 9th Street at Lion
i. Owner: Ninth Street Industrial Park
�pG 2155 E. Garvey North, B -4
` -�. West Covina, California 91791
Monument Bond
$ 2,500.00
Cerification from Associated Engineers indicates that all final monuments have
been set and they have been paid in full.
,Tract 9403 - located east of Mayberry and north (if Highland Avenue
Owner: Olympus Pacific Corp.
2110 Retells Avenue
Anaheim, Calfiornia 92803
Faithful Performance Bond (Landscaping) $ 7,563.00
Landscaping and irrigation system have been constructed in accordance with
approved plans and it is recommended that City Council accept said improvements.
ill/M.S. 77 -0665C - located on the north side of Foothill west of Lion
Owner: Lewis Development Co. 1
P. 0. Box 670 /, •
Upland, California 91786 ,LJ fc/
Faithful Performance Bond (Block Wall) $21,000.00 '1 Cg 1
The low concrete block wall on the north and west boundaries are not longer
required due to the completion of the concrete Flood Control Channel located
west of the subject property.
J /Tract 9446 - located on the south side of 9th Street, west of Baker, north of
A.T.S.F. Railroad
continued...
Owner: Kingsway Construction Co.
110 W. "A" Street, Suite 590
San Diego, California 92101
Labor and Material Bond (Road) $108.000
Labor and Material Bond (Sewer) 30,000
Labor and Material Bond (Water) 41,000
h
Staff Report - Release of Bonds
May 6, 1981
Page 3
/t/Tract 9454 - West side of Haven, North of Southern Pacific Railroad
Owner: Lewis Homes
P. 0. Box 670
Upland, California 91786
Labor and Material Bond (Road) $74,000
Labor and Material Bond (Water) 17,400
%.-; Y Labor and Material Bond (Sewer) 20,400
Tract -'. 4M located on Archibald Avenue, north of Hillside
Owner: Lewis Homes
P. 0. Box 670
Upland, California 91786
// Labor and Material Bond (Road) $75,000
1// Tract 9482 jocated on the north side of Wilson at Beechwood Drive
o-
C�Sg7• Owner: The Deer Creek Co.
P. 0. Box 488
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701
Labor and Material Bond (Road) �Da;uuu
W'Tract 9420 - located on the Northeast corner of Banyan and Hellman
Owner: Nubank International, Inc.
9014 West Olympic Boulevard
Beverly Hills, California 90211 •,�
Labor and Material Bond (Road) $32,000
JjTract 9380 - located on the south side of Manzanita, west of Beryl
Owner: Kenneth C. Elmore
26 East Las Flores
Arcadia, California 91006
Labor and Material Bond (Road) $15,000
,Tract 9479 - located north of Church Street and east of Turner
Owner: Kaufman and Broad
P. 0. Box 19550
Irvine, California 92713
Labor and Material Bond (Road) $86,400
LBH:blc /
�7
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
April 23, 1981
TO: Members of the City Council and City Manager
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner
SUBJECT: PLANNED COMMUNITY 80 -01 - VICTORIA
Because of the volume of background material involved in this
staff report, we are furnishing this to you in order to allow
sufficient time for your review. Please note that this will
be taken up at the May 6, 1981 Council meeting.
If you have any questions relative to this report, please
let me know.
cc A7..,r(, ,
O Cl'Cn.Ngn,
r
F $ Z
U j
1977
CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 6, 1981
TO: Members of the City Council and City Manager
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner
SUBJECT: PLANNED COMMUNITY 80 -01 - VICTORIA - A Planned
Community consisting of + 2,000 acres of land
encompassing residential, commercial and regional
shopping center located generally south of High-
land Avenue, north of Base Line Road and Foothill
Boulevard, east of the Deer Creek Channel at the
Edison Corridor, and west of Etiwanda Avenue.
ABSTRACT: This report contains all previous reports trans-
mitted to the Planning Commission of the Victoria Planned Com-
munity discussing the various aspects of the development, in
addition to the Environmental . Impact Report. Approval of the
plan is recommended by the Planning Commission.
DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission has held numerous meetings
on the Victoria Planned Community beginning in September of 1980
and culminating on April 2, 1981 with a recommendation of ap-
proval to the City-Council. The items that have been discussed
throughout the process are:
1. Land Use 5. Design Criteria
2. Circulation 6. Regulations
3. Parks and Open Space 7. Implementation
4. Infrastructure 8. Draft E.I.R.
Victoria -2- May 6, 1981
The approval process described on Page 2 of the first report to the
Planning Commission has been excerpted and is provided below:
Developer I Developer
Refinement! Plan
consultation w preparation of of Concept Preparation
Staff 8 City concept plan
Staff Begin P.C.
Plan Submittal review for review process
I completeness public hearings
Ccmpletion of , Begin "n C.C. Completion of
pu blip hearings trev ieo� process public hearings
and plan approval public hearings and plan
rec. to C.C. ( approval
We are now within the final phase of the review process for the Victoria
Planned Community.
As the City Council will recall, on February 6, 1981, Ordinance 94 was
adopted. This sets forth the regulations for Planned Communities. The
Victoria Planned Community, recommended by the Planning Commission to
the City Council for approval, complies with Ordinance 94. The reports
that are included in your packet for your review, provide suggested
conditions and direction in the review of the Victoria Planned Community.
The conditions suggested have been incorporated into the Planning Com-
mission Resolution of Approval.
If the City Council approves the Victoria Planned Community, the end
result will be a designation on the official Zoning Map of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, of "PC ", for the boundaries of the Planned Community.
Victoria -3- May 6, 1981
The zoning will be implemented by the Planned Community text that
accompanies the Land Use Plan. The text, in effect, is the governing
regulations for the development of any project within the boundaries
of the Planned Community. The Land Use Map is the governing map for
the distribution of various land uses within the Planned Communities
boundary.
Since this is a Zone Change, an Ordinance is required to effectuate
the Planned Community. This first public hearing is the first reading
of the Ordinance for approval of the "PC" Zoning for the Victoria
Planned Community. Included in the zoning approval will be the approval
of the Land Use Map and the Land Use Text.
Should the Council have any questions on the material that has been
transmitted, please do not hesitate to contact this office. There
have been many, many changes in both the text and the map; please
refer to the Staff Reports for the changes in the text. For the changes
in the Land Use Map contained within the previously transmitted Victoria
Community Plan Text booklet, there is a 200 scale, colored map available
for viewing at the Planning Division office.
�ctfu11 sub itted,
i
K. HOGAM
Planner V
BKH:jr:cd
Attachments
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING VICTORIA PLANNED
COMMUNITY P.C. 80 -01 LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHLAND
AVENUE GENERALLY NORTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
AND GENERALLY WEST OF ETIWANDA AVENUE.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held various public hearings
on the Victoria Planned Community beginning on September 16, 1980 and
culminating with April 2, 1981; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly advertised public
hearing on the Victoria Planned Community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and Planning Commission have reviewed
the land use, circulation, parks and open space, infrastructure, design
criteria, regulations, implementation sections of the Planned Community
text for Victoria; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and Planning Commission have reviewed
the land use plan map for Victoria and required subsequent changes to
that map as a result of that review; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Division Staff is directed to amend the
Official Zoning map for the City of Rancho Cucamonga to indicate the
subject property as "PC "; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Draft
Environmental Impact Report on the Victoria Planned Community relative
to its impacts and recommends certification to the City Council.
WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby certify the Draft EIR
as complete and final statement of the environmental effects of the
proposed project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
City Council does hereby adopt P.C. 80 -01, Victoria Planned Community,
subject to the conditions contained within Planning Commission Resolution
No. 81 -37 adopted April 2, 1981 attached hereto as reference.
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 6th day of May, 1981.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
C
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -37
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA RECOMMENDING TO THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF VICTORIA PLANNED COM-
MUNITY P.C. 80 -01 TO BE LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGH-
LAND AVENUE GENERALLY NORTH OF FOOTHILL BOULE-
VARD AND GENERALLY WEST OF ETIWANOA AVENUE
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held various public
hearings on the Victoria Planned Community beginning on September
16, 1980 and culminating with April 2, 1981; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the land
use, circulation, parks and open space, infrastructure, design cri-
teria, regulations, implementation sections of the Planned Community
text for Victoria; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the land
use plan map for Victoria and required subsequent changes to that
( map as a result of that review; and
\ WHEREAS, duly advertised public hearings were held rela-
tive to the Planning Commission review of the Victoria Planned
Community No. 80 -01; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed the Draft
Environmental Impact Report on the Victoria Planned Community relative
to its impacts and recommends certification to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga approval of Victoria Planned Community
No. 80 -01, subject to the following conditions:
GENERAL
1. The maximum number of dwelling units permitted within
the boundaries of the Victoria Planned Community shall
not exceed 8255 dwelling units except as allowed in Land 7.
2. Ali reference to Planned Community Area shall be eliminated
to the satisfaction of the City Planner throughout the text
of the Victoria Planned Community.
C
C Resolution No. 81 -37
Page 2
3. The Planned Community text shall be revised to incorporate
all conditions of approval where appropriate and to pro-
vide revisions in organization of the text from page 171
to the end of the text to the satisfaction of the City
Planner.
4. Definitions shall be added or deleted to the appendix A
to coincide with the additions and /or deletions that have
occurred as a result of the revisions in the regulations
section to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
5. Recreation vehicle storage shall be provided within each
residential land use category of low, low- medium, medium,
for 25 of the lots or units contained within those units
within the Victoria Planned Community. RV storage shall
be provided on the site of each development or within the
C boundaries of the Planned Community as a private recreation
vehicle storage lot. The percent shall be revised on an
annual basis and may be modified by the Planning Commission.
6. Recreation vehicle storage shall not be permitted in the
medium -high or high land use category and shall be
restricted by CC &Rs, subject to review and approval of
the City Attorney.
7. Affordable housing shall be provided in accordance with the
revised regulations text, page 225.
B. All tentatjve tracts shall be reviewed by the Design
Review Committee prior to consideration by the Planning
Commission and shall comply with Ordinance 86 - Growth
Management.
9. Forty -five days after City Council consideration for
approval of the Victoria Planned Community, a revised
text incorporating all of the changes and organizational
changes necessary shall be submitted to the City Planner
for review and torment prior to a final draft text being
reprinted for redistribution to the City Council, the
City Clerk, the Planning Commission and Staff.
Resolution No. 81 -37
Page 3
10. On page 248, local residential streets show a minimum
10 -foot setback, an additional 15 -foot typical setback
shall be added.
11. Page 250, section 464 shall be the same as section 5B3a
and b on page 251, i.e. instead of a building separation
of a 10 -foot minimum, building separation would be (a)
35 feet in height or less, 10 -foot minimum, or (b)
buildings greater than 35 feet, 15 -foot minimum.
12. Page 253, the word provision should be added after No.
1 General. On No. 2, the minimum lot width shall be 150
feet. No. 3, the maximum height shall be indicated at
65 feet with a conditional use permit for any heights
greater than 65 feet.
C13. Page 234, No. 1 after General, add provision.
14, P 233, No. 3 8 4 should be revised to read:
In order to provide flexibility in the development of the
Victoria Planned Community, over the 10 -15 year life of
the Plan, a maximum of 20; variation in the optimum yield
may be allowable.
Any and all variations shall be reviewed and approved by
the Design Review Committee.
The variation in the number of dwelling units within one
village may require corresponding decreases in one or more
of the other villages to insure that the total number
of units do not exceed 8255 within the Planned Community
boundary.
LAND USE
1. The development process and regional demand for the Regional
Related area shall be periodically reviewed to determine
the continued via bility of the amount of acreage proposed.
This review shall not be more than three years apart and
begin after the opening of the Regional Center.
C
C Resolution No. 81 -37
Page 4
2. Prior to consideration of specific designs for the Regional
Center a focused E.I.R. shall be prepared on the issuance
of traffic, aesthetics and long and short term impacts of
the proposed project.
3. The Village Commercial Shopping Center proposed at the
northeast corner of Milliken and Base Line Road shall be
eliminated and replaced with medium -high Land Use.
4. Prior to the approval of any tract within any of the villages
containing proposed school facilities the School District
involved must consent in writing to the need and location
for school facility. Additionally, the sites reserved for
schools shall be sufficient in size for the needs of the
school district. This does not preclude meeting any require-
ments of the currently adopted Growth Management Ordinance.
CIRCULATION
1. Rochester Avenue shall be continued from Base Line to High-
land.
2. Highland Avenue shall be constructed at a 64 -foot curb to
curb section to accommodate 5 lanes of traffic, specific
alignment, and design shall be to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
3. At the time of development at the intersections of Highland
Avenue and Milliken Avenue, and at the intersection of High-
land Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard plans shall be prepared
by the applicant coordinating the frontage road design to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Caltrans.
4. Should any of the streets that cross the Pacific Electric
rail tracks (i.e. Milliken, Rochester, Day Creek) require
grade separation, the applicant shall be required to pre-
pare preliminary design studies to determine configuration
and right -of -way requirements to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer,
A
CResolution No. 81 -37
Page 5
5. The applicant shall prepare a detailed traffic analysis
detailing the circulation elements such as street location,
freeway interchange, street size, etc., for the regional
shopping center and the regional related areas. Such
analysis shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and may be Included in the Focused EIR for the
Regional Center.
6. Precise alignment studies and rights -of -way limits will be
required to be prepared by the applicant, including but not
limited to, Victoria Parkway, local collectors, etc., to be
concurrent with with the consideration of approval of any
tentative tract maps involving significant alignment features
of any unprecised street to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
C 7. Street standards shall conform to those of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga or as may be amended to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer (Victoria Parkway shall be exempt
from standard street requirements subject to the approval
of the City Planner and City Engineer.
PARKS/OPEN SPACE
1. The lakes are approved in concept only. Further detailed
studies shall be submitted to the City prier to any tentative
tract approvals for a village that contains a lake. The
detailed studies shall indicate the construction techniques
of the lake, the details of design, the details of maintenance
of the lake, and cost estimates for maintenance.
2. The City shall approve the selection of a lake consultant to
be hired by and paid for by the applicant for the lakes
proposed in Victoria Parkway and the two proposed public
lakes, exclusive of the lakes contained within the regional
area
3. Park credit for paseos, Village Parks, Victoria Parkways
and the two northwest Lakes, excluding the Lake in the
regional center, shall be credited 100; towards park in
lieu fees at the time of building permit issuance.
Resolution No. 31 -37
Page 6
Each park area within each village shall be dedicated
to the City in a complete form including, but not limited
to, installed parking areas, seeded play areas, irrigation
and restrooms prior to the construction of greater than
200 dwelling units of the lots within the village. Park
design shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of
Community Services and consistent with the Victoria Planned
Communities and reviewed and approved by the Planning
Commission.
5. Concession stands shall be studied to determine the
economic feasibility; the economic feasibility study shall
be prepared by the applicant or their consultants and sub-
mitted to and approved by the Department of Community
Services and Planning Division prior to the construction
of any concession stands being located on or about the
lake edge.
6. The equestrian trail continued within Victoria Parkway
shall begin at Deer Creek and terminate at the Pacific
Electric right -of -way. Specific design of the trail shall
be subject to City review. Equestrian fences, grading,
soil samples, may be required.
Maintenance of dedicated areas, i.e. village parks, Victoria
Parkway and the two northwest lakes, excluding the lake
in the regional center, shall be by city -wide maintenance
district.
INFRASTRUCTURE
The developer shall participate through financial contri
butions and /or construction of storm drain facilities with-
in the Day Creek and that drainage area in accordance with
a to -be- adopted master plan for Day Creek. Development will
be allowed to take place within the drainage area so long
as flood protection is provided by the developer to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and /or the San Bernardino
Flood Control District,
2. Prior to any substantial development in any of the four
villages, a solution for sewage treatment shall be selected
Lby the City and /or the Cucamonga County Water District.
3. Adequate fire protection through either expansion of Fire
Station No. 3 or the addition of another fire station or
the relocation of the existing fire station shall be pro-
vided to the satisfaction of the Foothill Fire District.
CResolution No. 81 -37
Page 7
RESIDENTIAL SITE PLANNING
I. Page 184, add the word minimum in the setbacks paragraph
under "garage ".
2. Page 185, the paragraph setbacks under side yard, add the
words "each side ". The new phrase would read "side yard:
5-foot minimum each side."
3. Page 186, directly under the graphic, the words variable
height fence by developer an Victoria Parkway property line
should indicate that fence height shall not exceed 5 feet
from the highest finished grade.
4. Under setbacks garage, add the words "requires garage door
openers" after 5 -8 feet and add the word "minimum" after
C18 feet.
5. Under side yard indicate 5 -foot for each side Yard rather
than 10 feet between buildings.
6. On page 187 indicate in parentheses under the graphic after
the phrase developer to provide fencing on corner lots
and adjacent to community trail system "(see page 189) ".
7. Under setbacks, garage, add the words "requires garage door
openers" after 5 to 8 feet. Also, indicate what width side-
walks and location of said sidewalks.
8. Page 188, indication of minimum parking requirements may
require a change in the Rancho Cucamonga Parking Ordinance.
Should the ordinance not change, the indication of minimum
parking standard shall be amended to be consistent with
current code requirements. Also there is no indication of
the kinds of sidewalks or location of sidewalks.
9. Page 188 under setbacks garage, add "requires garage door
openers" after 5 to 8 feet.
L
CResolution No. 81 -37
Page 8
10. Page 189, the second note from the top of the page add
the words "5 -foot maximum" so the phrase will read, 5-
foot maximum back yard fence adjacent to trail by developer.
11. Page 190 under garage setback, add "requires garage door
openers" after 5 to 8 feet and add the words "or sidewalk"
after curb so the phrase will read garage setback: 5 to 8
feet (requires garage door openers) from back of curb or
sidewalk. The indication under garage setback of the parking
requirement is in excess of what current code requirements
are and shall indicate code requirements.
12. Page 193 under the graphic indicates minimum of one covered
parking space per dwelling, additional spaces as specified
in Part III. This requirement is different from the existing
parking code and shall be consistent code requirements.
13. Under the graphic there is an indication where sound at-
tenuation walls are required they may not be needed to be
continuous but may work satisfactorily when broken or
staggered. The words "however, in all cases these must
be consistent with the adopted Noise Ordinance" shall be
added,
14. Page 196 under the first graphic, the words "automatic
garage door openers required" shall be added after 5 to 8
feet,
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 2 DAY OF APRIL 1981.
PLANNING COIIDJISSION OF THE CI-TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
n
X'
ATTEST: �i �LL�.L Secretary of of the Planning Commission
C. Resolution No. 81 -37
Page 9
I, JACK. LAM, Secretary of the Planning Cormission 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 2 day of April, 1981 by the following vote to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Rempel, Tolstoy, Dahl, King, Sceranka
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
C
l
— CITY OF RANCHO CCGi,.,a\CA
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning Commission
From: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
By: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner
Subject: PLANNED COMMUNITY NO. 80 -01
s0
r
ri v
_ � Z
1977
n.Lunri L,Un LUmrnw7 - ims is a request for the establishment of
a Planned Community Zone, text and development plan setting forth
specific land uses, development standards, a circulation system
and overall design theme. The project encompasses 2,150+ acres
bounded on the north by Highland Avenue, following Deer Creek on
the west until it intersects the Southern Pacific Railroad, which
then jogs east and then south to Base Line. From Base Line the
boundary travels east past Rochester and then south until it inter-
sects I -15 which then transverses along I -15 to Etiwanda Avenue
which forms the eastern edge of the project site.
ABSTRACT: This is the first of a series of meetings that will be held on
Victoria Planned Community. The purpose of this first meeting is to set
the foundation for the review process and to begin discussion of the Victoria
Planned Community,
DISCUSSION: The Victoria Planned Community (PC) encompasses 2,150 acres of
land and includes flood control and edison easements bifuricating the property.
Also included in Victoria is a regional shopping center proposed by the Ernest
Hahn Company.
The major problem facing the developer was how to relate all of the pieces
into one cohesive plan. He proposes to do so by the use of a linear park
(Victoria Parkway) and a series of lakes. The developer will be present on
Tuesday evening to make a presentation on the development of Victoria and
his proposals for development.
This report will cover six areas of discussion - objective or purpose,
approval process, planned community relationship with existing ordinances,
planned community ordinance, statistical summary, program for review.
Plan Ob.i ective: As stated on Page 23 of the text, "The principle planning
objective of this plan is to create a total, integrated community that
responds to the goals of the General Plan and the environment ". (paraphrased)
In addition to those goals and objectives stated in the text the plan must
also meet the purposes as outlined in ordinance 94 (Planned Communities); i.e.
promote and protect the public health, safety and welfare, promote more econo-
Planned Community Ho. £ .1
Page 2
mical and efficient use of the land while providing a harmonious variety
Of housing choices, commercial activities, a high level of urban amenities,
and preservation of natural and scenic qualities of open space (see attached
ordinance for entire purpose) .
Approval Process: In order to give the Commission some idea of the approval
process the following flow chart has been prepared:
Developer - Developer
consultation w I preparation of Refinement
Staff & City concept plan of Concept
I Staff Begin P.C.
Plan Submittal review for review process
completeness public hearings
Completion of Begin C.C. Completion of
Public hearings 1ireview process public hearings
and plan approval public hearings I and plan
rec, to C.C. approval
Plan
Preparation
The end product that the developer receives from the City is a designation
of "PC" on his property, adopted development plan; i.e. a more specific
General Plan, adopted development regulations for his property.
After completion of the approval process, the developer may submit for develop-
ment of the property within the Planned Community. In the case of Victoria;
however, no development submittal may occur on the regional shopping center
until further filings are made in the way of a specific EIR for the regional
center and its ancillary features.
Planned Community Relationship with Existing Ordinances: It must be remembered
that the Planned Community, although it has somewhat different development
(zoning) regulations, it would be neither productive or desirable to create
an entirely new zoning text for each planned community. Therefore, the PC
text states what is different and should not repeat, but, instead reference
the City's Zoning Ordinance where applicable. It should also be remembered
that the regulations for the PC must be administered by the City Staff and
the intent and purpose of each and every regulation should be clear.
Specific sections of our Zoning Ordinance should be referenced; i.e. Variances,
Conditional Use Permits, Minor Deviations, Development Review, Home Occupations,
Model Home Regu'iations and Temporary Uses. What we don't want is a community
that looks good but does not work after it is built.
Planned Community No. 6 ,1
Page 3
Statistical Summary: Listed below is an excerpt from the text of the
acreages and generalized land uses within Victoria.
Acreage
Residential 1,035
Commercial (includes regional ctr.) 360
Community Facilities 70
Park, Lakes, Trails 120
Unimproved Open Space 290
Existing Uses 40
Roads 235
TOTAL 2,150
Specific breakdown of each of the abovementioned categories is listed on
Pages 100 -115 of the text.
Program for Review: We have divided the review of Victoria Planned Community
into seven parts: 1) land use, 2) circulation, 3) parks /open space, 4) infra-
structure, 5) design criteria, 6) regulations, 7) implementation. A further
breakdown of each part is provided below:
1. Land Use
Statistical summary
Analysis of land use locations
Housing analysis
SCE easement
Equestrian usage
Four villages comparisons
Amount of commercial
Flood control lands
Existing land use
Churches
Schools
2. Circulation
Streets (i.e. location /standard for development)
Trails (as a means of circulation)
Transit
3. Parks /Open Space
Victoria Lakes
City parks
Victoria linear park,Victoria Parkway
Trails - Bike /equestrian
Planned Community No. 5 .1
Page 4
4. Infrastructure
. Storm drain /flood control
Sewerage
Water
Electric
Gas
5. Design Criteria
Victoria Parkway
Landscape standards
Development standards
6. Regulations (zoning or development regulations)
7. Implementation
In order to provide the most efficient and effective review of each of the
seven parts of the whole, we suggest that the Planning Commission select
the first and second most important parts that they wish to discuss. Staff
will then schedule a special adjourned meeting for each part. As the Commis-
sion completes review of one part, another two parts should be selected and
prioritized, and so on until all of the parts have been reviewed.
It would be our suggestion that there should be at least two weeks between
each meeting. As the Commission will recall when the Interim General Plan
was reviewed, we held back to back meetings, one week after another. The
result was twofold - one we adopted an Interim General Plan; two, we were
consumed with the work on the General Plan so much so that it was difficult
to give adequate review to other Agenda items. Please remember that in the
next two months, in addition to Victoria, the Planning Commission will be
reviewing the proposed General Plan and all of the Growth Management files.
The first two suggested meeting places would be the Forum on September 29
and October 13 at 7:00 p.m. Please reserve all Mondays through October and
November for continued review of Victoria.
Res�ecctfu 11 submitted,
JACK LAM
Director of Community Development
JL:BKH:nm
CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 26, 1980
TO: Jack Lam, Director, Community Development
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Victoria Community Plan Circulation
The Engineering Division has completed its primary level of analysis on the
Circulation Plan for the proposed Victoria Community. As a result of this
analysis and the findings of the Circulation Element of the General Plan,
the proposed circulation, with some modification will be adequate to handle
the intensity of development proposed. In order to place our circulation
analysis in prospective, it is necessary to place the Victoria Plan within
the context of the overall General Plan process and in particular, the General
Plan Circulation Element.
PLANNING PROCESS
As you are aware, the overall General Plan Circulation Element and the specific
roadway linkage system was only resolved for presentation to the Citizens
Advisory Commission within the past few weeks. This plan was necessary to
provide the general background traffic network and traffic volumes upon which
to relate the Victoria Plan. Because land use parameters for the proposed
plan are at levels compatible with the Victoria proposal, the General Plan
study basically served to verify the Circulation needs of Victoria.
I would like to point out that the Traffic Analysis contained in the E.1,R.
evaluation of the Victoria proposal was prepared sometime ago and was based
properly on background traffic assumptions related to the interim General Plan
in effect at that time. In order to update the parameters of this analysis,
we were required to await the development of the General Plan Circulation
Studies and in particular, the traffic projections from the City's Traffic
Model. These results have been obtained and as stated previously, show that
the basic transportation framework proposed by Vitoria is adequate to service
the development.
DETAILED CIRCULATION ANALYSIS
Detailed analysis of the traffic needs, although not totally complete at this
time, indicate that there are several levels of concern that will require
further study. Some of these concerns should be resolved at the specific plan
level where as others will require detailed traffic operations studies related
to specific development proposals.
Jack Lam
Victoria Community Plan Circulation
September 26, 1980
Page 2
These areas of concern are summarized as follows
Detailed Collector Street Provisions
Detailed analysis of the projected collector street system requires further
study to insure that traffic volumes along Victoria Parkway are distributed
in such a manner as to maintain the rural character of that roadway system.
These further studies will likely result in the provision of additional
collector streets to augment the proposed loops now branching from the
Victoria Parkway. As a part of these modifications, Rochester Avenue should
connect through the Plan to Base Line Road. This connection is consistent
with the General Plan proposal and will serve to relieve traffic congestion on
Milliken Avenue and the intersection of Day Creek Boulevard with Foothill
Boulevard. Under the proposed Circulation Element serious traffic concerns
focus on the availability of freeway access. As a mitigation for these
problems, an interchange has been proposed at Seventh Street and Interstate 15
( Devore Freeway). The continuation of Rochester would serve to distribute
traffic to this interchange and away from potentially congested interchanges
at Foothill and the Devore Freeway and Milliken and Interstate 10 (San Bernardino
Freeway).
The Engineering Division will be meeting with the Victoria Engineers and Planners
to further work out these collector systems and should be able to resolve
connections prior to adoption of the plan.
Foothill Freeway Interface
The northerly boundary of the Victoria Community is contiguous to Highland Avenue
and the proposed Foothill Freeway. Upon completion of the freeway or other high
speed arterial system, Highland Avenue would become a frontage road. This frontage road
has not been specifically detailed at this time, but could utilize large portions
of the existing Highland Avenue with specific modifications at the interchanges
with Milliken Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard. Until the development of the
Foothill Freeway Corridor, Highland Avenue should be constructed to a 64 foot
curb to curb section to accommodate 5 lanes of traffic similar to existing
Nineteenth Street.
All development proposals at the intersection of Highland Avenue and Milliken
Avenue and at Highland and Day Creek should be required to prepare the details
of the frontage road system in coordination with Caltrans.
The details of this analysis would not be appropriate at the current level of
planning.
Grade Separation
Milliken Avenue, Rochester Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard all cross the Pacifc
pack Lam
Victoria Community Pit J rculation
September 26, 1980
Page 3
Electric tracks towards the center of the plan. Preliminary discussions with
the Public Utilities Commission indicate that these could he at grade crossings,
however, further study should be conducted on this matter. If any of these
crossings should require grade separation, preliminary design studies should
be carried out to determine right -of -way requirements.
Provision of such improvements would in the Engineering Division's interpre-
tation, be a proper purpose for systems development funds.
Regional Center Access
General Plan Circulation studies indicate that the intensity of development
including the Regional Center and regional related development will generate
significant volumes of traffic which will require detailed traffic analysis
and substantial capital improvements involving the Foothill Boulevard inter-
change to the Devore Freeway and the connection of Day Creek Boulevard to
Foothill Boulevard. The detailed traffic analysis to resolve these precise
circulation elements require precise development plans for the Regional Center
and specific proposals for regional related development. Although these
studies have begun with a consulting team, they cannot be resolved at the level
the specific plan approval.
The consultant team now working on these sensitive traffic studies is composed
of the City Engineer, DKS Associates, City Traffic Consultants, Wes Pringle
and Associates, Victoria Traffic Consultant, Donald Frischer and Associates,
Hahn Company Traffic Consultant, Caltrans, SWA Victoria Planning Consultants,
Southwest Engineering, Hahn Company Site Engineers. The results of these
studies will be a conceptual circulation plan at the freeway interchange for
submittal to Caltrans for their approval. The results of these studies will
resolve precise plans for Day Creek Boulevard, Foothill Boulevard, Miller
Avenue and the freeway interchange. Studies may also effect the operational
characteristics of Etiwanda Avenue between Base Line and Foothill.
PRECISE ALIGNMENT STUDIES
The proposed plan establishes the general alignment of streets within the pro-
ject and significant detail about design characteristics. In order to insure
the intent of these characteristics, precise alignment studies and right -of-
way limits will be required for logical design segments for specific streets.
A precise plan should be adopted for Victoria Parkway as soon as possible after
the adoption of the plan and prior to approval of Tentative Maps which may
involve significant alignment features. The precise plan will indicate exact
survey locations.
Collector systems will require precise alignment plans in logical segment prior
to or concurrent with approval of Tentative Maps.
STREET STANDARDS
Public and private street standards should be adopted for the planswhich are
in conformance with standards adopted by the General Plan. The draft standards
Jack Lam
Victoria Community Plan Circulation
September 26, 1980
Page 4
are included in the Circulation Element and differ somewhat from those proposed
by Victoria. Upon adoption, the two should be consistent.
CONCLUSION
The Circulation Plan as proposed is adequate to maintain the proposed level of
development. Further detailed analysis will be required to implement the plan
as described above.
Respectfully submitted,
LBH:jaa
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MEMORANU JAI
September 26, 1980
To: Barry Hogan, City Planner
From: Bill Holley, Director, Community Services Department
Subject: Victoria Community Plan
This memorandum addresses the above referenced project with
respect to provision of parks, open space and recreation
facilities. Comments are based upon a study of the document
The Victoria Comnuni ty Plan, by the William Lyon Company as
submitted to the City in June of 1980; discussions with Gary Frye
of the 'William Lyon Company; and, discussions with City Planning
staff.
The Requirements
Proceedina under the assumption that the population projections
cited in the Plan on page 115 are valid, the project will generate
a population of 22,895. The standards for park and recreation
facilities in subdivision, as set forth in Ordinance 105 *, applied
to this project's projected population indicate that provision of
114.47 acres of park and recreational land will be required.
22,895 x 5 = 114.47
1000
The Plan proposes, on page 110, to meet this requirement through
the provision of 110 acres of public park lands divided between
parks, 30 acres; lakes, 40 acres; linear parks, 35 acres; and
community trails, 5 acres. The Plan also lists a private member-
ship recreation facility of 10 acres.
The Plan, as proposed, satisfies 96% of the public park lands
requirement. The private membership recreation center is not
given credit toward the requirement as it falls outside the
prescribed standards in Ordinance 105, Section 3(F) (2) (3), **
being voluntary, and operated by way of initiation fees and monthly
dues. * **
The Parks_
The parks, Groves, Vineyards, and Windrows, would appear very
appropriate .... when planned and used in conjunction with school
sites as proposed in the Plan. This is pointedly demonstrated by
Windrows Park. Should the school not materialize, this park,
centered within a low medium residential setting could not support
a reasonable variety of recreational opportunities for the 5,960
residents of Windrow Village, having only the lake and it's edges
available.
memo
9/26/80
to: B.
Hogan
from:
B. Holley
subj:
Victoria Community Plan
p9 2
The Victoria Parkway
The Victoria Parkway as a concept, and as presented in the plan also appears
appropriate. The treatment of the linear park, with it's meandering bicycle/
pedestrian trails would provide a pleasant recreational opportunity to the
residents of the Plan, as well as a nice visual relief. Care must, however,
be exercised in circulation planning to insure that the Parkway would not
attract a burdensome vehicular traffic load.
The Community Trails
The Community Trail System concept as described in the Plan is satisfactory
and should benefit the Project.
The Lakes
The concept of the lakes is very interesting. It would be appropriate, however,
to have this portion of the plan studied by a firm independent of the William
Lyon Co., with expertise in the areas of lake construction and maintenance.
That expertise is not available within City staff resources. An important
factor in this portion of the Plan is recognizing that the main recreational
function of the lakes is visual not active. It must also be recognized that
36" of the project's park and recreation requirement is proposed to be met
through the lake system. From my perspective, this type of balance between
active and passive is not only acceptable, but desirable.
Meeting the City Park Requirements (page 227 V.C,P.)
The first three paragraphs are acceptable as presented. The fourth paragraph
needs a rewrite to the effect of indicating that a dollar for dollar development
credit would be given toward the park requirement, but no credit would be given
the Lyon Co. for the lands owned by Southern California Edison or San Bernardino
County Flood Control District.
Recommendations:
Recommendations would be as follows:
1. That the Lakes portion of the project be studied apart from the
William Lyon Co. with regard to construction, maintenance.
Along this same line, the questions should be specifically addressed
regarding availability of lake fill water and the reliability of
that availability.
2. The Schools and the Park should be designed as a unit with agreements
between the City and the Districts covering maintenance and use.
3. The maintenance of all public open space is to be maintained by a
special assessment district, as called for in the Plan.
l
memo
9/26/80
to:
B. Hogan
from:
B. Holley
subj:
Victoria Community Plan
pg 3
4. The 4.47 acre deficit in meeting the park requirement must be
added into the plan.
If I can provide further information, let me know.
BH /mw
* Ordinance 105, Section 2(E) Standards for Dedication. The amount of land
to be dedicated or the fees to be paid shall bear a reasonable relationship
to the use of benefits of the park and recreation facilities by the future
residents of the subdivision. The City Council hereby establishes a ratio
of five (5) park acres to one thousand (1,000) population, in accordance
with the adopted Park and Recreation Element of the City's General Plan.
** Ordinance 105, Section 3 (F) Park and Recreational Land Credit for Planned
Communities. Where private open space for park and recreational purposes is
provided in a planned community and portions of or all such space is to be
privately owned and maintained by the future residents of the planned community,
credit against the requirement of dedication for park and recreational purposes,
as set forth in Section 2(G) shall be determined through the adoption of the
planned community text provided, however, that the park standard for said planned
community is the same as for any other development and that the Planning Commission
finds it is in the public interest to do so, and that the following standards are
met:
(1) ....
(2) That the private ownership and maintenance of the open space is
adequately provided for by written agreement; and
(3) That the use of the private open space is restricted for park and
recreational purposes by recorded covenants which run with the land in favor of
the future owners of the property within the tract; and
(4) ........
* ** A COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER (page 78, V.C.P.) - At the north end of North
Victoria Lake, on both sides of Victoria Parkway, a community recreation facility
will be located.. . . Membership in this club will be open to all
Victoria residents, and will be voluntary, with initiation fees and monthly dues.
CITY OF RAi\CI -10 CI:CAAtO \G,\
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 29, 1980 V
T0: Planning Commission
FROM; Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
BY: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner
SUBJECT: P.C. 80 -01 - VICTORIA - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY: TOPIC LAND USE
ABSTRACT: As the Planning Commission will recall at your last meeting of
9- 16 -80, we established the review period of two weeks between meetings with
the first meeting to begin September 29, 1980 covering 1) land use 2) cir-
culation and 3) parks /open space. The second meeting was to be non - specific
as to topic and was to be held in the Etiwanda area on a Saturday. We have
reserved the Etiwanda Community Room on Etiwanda Avenue for Saturday, October
11, 1980 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
From our report of September 16, 1980 you can see the topics to be discussed
under the land use portion of the Victoria Review. They are:
Statistical summary
Land use analysis
Four villages comparisons
This report will analyze the specific sections of the plan and text as they
relate to land use and provide suggested conditions of approval for the
problem areas. It must be remembered that this is part of a larger whole
and should not stand alone.
DISCUSSION: The stipulations of the Planned Community Ordinance requires
the applicant to:
1. Design and develop all uses in the Planned Community in a
manner comparable with and competitive to existing and
potential development in the general vicinity.
2, All development shall relate harmoniously to the topography
and make suitable provisions for preservation of water courses,
drainage areas, wooded areas, rough terrain and similar natural
features.
3. Submit a development plan identifying areas in the plan,
indicating scheduling for development.
The applicant has provided the basic material necessary for land use in
accordance with the Ordinance.
STATISTICAL SUMMARY: Taken from page 109 -115 is the statistical summary
be of w:
Planning Commission II -a Ling
September 29, 1980
P.C. 80 -01
Page 2
These calculations are based on planimeter readings and are subject to
corrections based on an accurate survey.
LAND USE ACREAGE
1. Commercial Acres
Regional Center (including lakes within Regional
Center area only) 100
Regional Related Commercial 210
Village Commercial Centers 50
2. Community Facilities
Schools
30
Potential Civic Uses:
Fire, Police, Transit Station 30
Churches 10
3. Parks, Lakes and Community Trails
Village Parks (The Groves, The Vineyards, The
Windrows, including lake in Windrows Park) 30
Lakes and Lake Edges (Village of Victoria Lakes
only, not including lakes in Retional Center
area) 40
Victoria Linear Park (Not including paved area
of Victoria Parkway) 35
Community Trails
5
Private Community Recreation Facility 10
Planning Commission •Ling
September 29, 1980
P.C. 80 -01
Page 3
Acres
4. Unimproved Open Space
Southern California Edison Corridors 160
Day Creek Channel: Flood Control Basin 100
Southern Pacific Right -Of -Way 30
5. Roads
Day Creek Blvd., Milliken, Highland, Base Line,
Foothill 120
Local Feeder Roads 60
Victoria Parkway (pavement width) 10
Other roads: Miller, Victoria Loop, Etiwanda Ave.
Victoria Street 45
6. Existing Land Uses
Heublein, Lumberyard, Nichiren Church,
etc.
40
7. Residential Land Uses
Land Use /Density Range
Acres
Optimum Yield
"A" Windrow Residential 2 -3 du /A
165
450
Units
"B" Single Family 7 -15 du /A
530
3,150
Units
"C" Single Family 7 -15 du /A
175
2,150
Units
"0" Garden Apt. /Condominium
15 -25 du /A
105
2,100
Units
"E" Town Apt. /Condominium 25 -35
du /A
50
1,600
Units
"F" Town Center 35 -40 du /A
10
400
Units
Totals
1,035
9,850
Units
Planning Commission Ling
Septmeber 29, 1980
P.C. 80 -01
Page 4
LAND USE ANALYSIS: In order to evaluate each of the land uses proposed for
Victoria this section will proceed in the same order as the Statistical Summary.
1, Commercial: The location of the Regional Center has been established
as Planning Commission and City Council preference at previous meetings
regarding the proposed General Plan. The size of the Center is determined
by the ultimate projected service demands of the Region. In this case the
Regional Center developer, Ernest Hahn, proposes six major department stores
with related facilities on 100+ acres. The Regional Center anchors Victoria
Planned Community. The details of the specific design have not been worked
out at this point in the Planning process and will require further consider-
ation by the City at a later date.
Suggested Condition: Prior to consideration of specific designs for the
Regional Center a focused E.I.R. shall be prepared on the issues of traffic,
aesthetics dnd long and short term impacts of the proposed project.
Reaional Related Commercial: It appears that there is an in ordinate
amount of Regional Related (R /R) land use. However, in researching other
Regional Centers of this type there are large amounts of R/R useage within
close proximity. Because it is difficult to predict precisely the appro-
priate amount of R/R to designate for this area. Page 150 -156 of the Victoria
DEIR indicates a range of acreage projected based on projected future demand
i.e. 111 -246 ac.; the Plan provides 210 ac. Because this is such a unknown
area we suggest that 210 acres is appropriate at this time, but should be
reviewed periodically to insure that our projections are still accurate.
Suggested Condition: The development process and regional demand for
the Regional Kelated area shall be periodically reviewed to determine the
continued viability of the amount of acreage proposed. This review shall
not be more than three years apart and begin after the opening of the
Regional Center.
Village Commercial Centers (V.C.C.): There are four V.C.C. proposed.
1) Southwest corner of Highland and Milliken; 2) Northeast corner of Base
Line and Milliken; 3) Southwest corner of Day Creek and Highland; and 4)
Northwest corner of Base Line and Victoria Parkway. As stated in the
Interim General Plan for Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Centers or V.C.C.
draw from a population service area of 10,000+ people. In locating V.C.C.
the City should look at how best these centers will serivice Victoria and the
adjacent areas. The Center at the southwest corner of Highland and Milliken
is located well to service Victoria and areas north of Highland. The Center
located at the Southwest corner of Day Creek and Highland is located well to
service Victoria and north and east Etiwanda areas. The Center at the north-
west corner of Base Line and Victoria parkway is a smaller Center and will
service those areas missed by the Previous two and also the Etiwanda area
immediately east of the planned community. The Center at the northeast
corner of Base Line and Milliken should be elimnated for the following reasons:
Planning Commission ' -TING
September 29, 1980
P.C. 80 -01
Page 5
As the Commission is aware, there is a Planned Community proposed
by Lewis Homes south of the Victoria Planned Community. Within
Terra Vista there are approximately 2.50 Neighborhood Shopping
Centers proposed. In order to provide adequate service radius for
the shopping centers proposed in the Terra Vista area the Milliken
and Base Line site on Victoria should be reverted to a residential
land use. Whether or not Terra Vista developer the proposed General
Plan will indicate various residential land uses necessitating
service by Neighborhood Commercial Centers. At this point in time
it is known that approximately 8,000 people could reside within the
boundaries of the Terra Vista Planned Community with the present
traffic system. Additionally, because of the adjacency of Victoria,
and the adjacency of already developed land to Terra Vista Planned
Community, approximately two centers would be located on the proposed
General Plan for the Terra Vista Planned Community.
Suaaested Condition: The Village Commercial Shopping Center proposed
at the northeast corner of Milliken and Base Line Road shall be eliminated
and replaced with D. Land Use.
COMMUNITY FACILITIES
Schools: Each of the three predominant residential villages; Victoria
Groves, Victoria Vineyards, and Victoria Windrows, are anchored by
Elementary School Facilities and a park. Each of the schools and parks
are located along Victoria Parkway, which is a linear connector having
both equestrian and biking /hiking trails. The locations of the schools
and the size of the facilities are subject to the approval of the school
districts. In the case of the school in Victoria Groves it would be subject
to the approval of the Alta Loma School District. In the case of all
remaining schools they would be subject to the approval of the Etiwanda
School District. The quantity of schools required is also determined by
the School District. The Victoria Planners have verified the number of
schools desired by the School Districts based upon the projected population
to be generated from the development as proposed. Should there be any
drastic change in the number of dwelling units proposed for this develop-
ment, the number of schools proposed would have to be reevaluated by the
School District.
�Sug a tgd Condition: Prior to the approval of any tract within any of
to vii age1T s containing proposed school facilities the School District
involved must consent in writing to the need and location for school
facility. Additionally, the sites reserved for schools shall be sufficient
in size for the needs of the school District.
Potential Civic Uses: Within the Victoria area there is an existing
Fire Station located northerly of Base Line Road, near Day Creek. The
Foothill Fire Protection District provides the service to the project area.
Area "S" on the Victoria Community Plan is indicated as potential Civic
Center uses. This could be a Transit Station, a Police sub - station, or
used for expansion of fire facilities. There are two chruch sites proposed
within Victoria. One is in the Victoria Vineyards along Victoria Parkway.
Planning Commission ( ting
September 29, 1980
P.C. 80 -01
Page 6
The second site is adjacent to Heublein on Base Line Road near Day
Creek.
PARKS, LAKES, AND COMMUNITY TRAILS
There are three parks proposed. One in each of the residential villages:
Victoria Groves has the Groves Park, Victoria Vineyards has the Vineyards
Park, and Victoria Windrows has the Windrows Park. Included in the Windrows
Park is a proposed Lake. These parks are approximately 10 acres in size each.
Additionally, the plan proposes Victoria Lakes within the village of Victoria
Lakes. These two lakes encompassed 40 acres of surface area and Lake edge.
Also, a major feature of the plan, is Victoria Linear Park encompassing 35
acres. Victoria Linear Park serves as a greenbelt connector of all of the
villages within Victoria Planned Community. Additionally, all of the park
and school facilities are located along its length. Within the Planned
Community there are approximately 5 acres of trails proposed. The trails
lead to and from the various residential areas to the schools and parks. What
is depicted on the community plan are the major community trails. There may
be smaller trails that would feed into these major trails. There is a private
community recreation facility proposed at the terminus of Victoria parkway at
the northern end of the Lakes. Membership would be available to people
within Victoria and to other people additionally. It is not a mandatory
requirement of the residence of Victoria that they join the Recreation Center.
UNIMPROVED OPEN SPACE
There are two Southern California Edison corridors running north and south through
the eastern end of Victoria. They encompass approximately 160 acres and are
proposed for a variety of uses. Additionally, Day Creek Channel runs parallel
to and west of the Edison rights -of -way. It encompasses approximately 100 acres
of right -of -way. The last area of unimproved open space is the east -west Pacific
Electric right -of -way running approximately 1,000 feet north of Base Line Road,
Along this right -of -way is proposed a local trail on the proposed General Plan
for the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
ROADS
There are a number of roads proposed for Victoria Planned Community totalling
235 acres.
EXISTING LAND USES
There are approximately 40 acres of existing land uses that will most likely
remain in their present condition. They are the existing lumber yard at the
terminus of Rochester north of Base Line, the Heublein wine facility near
Victoria Parkway and Base Line Road and the Nichiren Shoshu Temple on Etiwanda
Avenue.
Planning Commission ' ting
September 29, 1980
P.C. 80 -01
Page 7
RESIDENTIAL LAND USES
The densities of residential land uses proposed within Victoria range from
a low of two units an acre to a high of 45 units per acre. There are six
different types of residential land useages ranging from "A" to "F" and
increasing in density. Of the 2,150 acres within Victoria there are 1,035
acres in residential land uses.
The "A" catagory: "Windrow Residential" encompasses 165 acres and lies primarily
along the Etiwanda Avenue frontage. This land use was proposed as a buffer and
a transition to the low density Windrow Residential land uses shown on the
Interim General Plan.
The "B" Land Uses encompass a range of three to seven dwelling units per acre
and total 530 acres of land within Victoria. The "B" Land Use varies in lot
size from 7,200 sq. ft. to 3,000 sq. ft. and in residential dwelling types
from single family residential to patio homes to O- Lotline homes.
The "C" Land Use ranges from seven to fifteen dwelling units per acre encompassing
175 acres totally and is primarily townhouse and fourplex developments.
The "D" Land Use ranges in density from fifteen to twenty -five dwelling units
per acre encompassing 105 acres and is characterized by garden apartment or
condominium development.
The "E" Land Use ranges from twenty -five to thirty -five dwelling units per
acre and encompasses approximately 50 acres of land. They are primarily
low rise apartments or condominiums.
The "F" Land Use ranges in density from thiity -five to forty -five dwelling
units per acre encompassing approximately 10 acres of land and is characterized
by high -rise apartments or condominiums.
The applicant has tried to arrange the various land uses within Victoria to
get a balance of dwelling types within each village. The "E" and "F" Land
Uses are located near the intersection of Victoria Parkway and Base Line Road
or around the north Victoria Lake. In all cases the various land uses whether
they be identical or different land uses are seperated from one another by
either a road or a trail.
As the Commission will recall, there has been much concern expressed over the
provision of affordable housing within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The proposed
Housing Element of the General Plan suggests that 157 of the dwellings within the
City of Rancho Cucamonga be within the affordable range. On page 225 of the
Victoria Text the applicant suggests that within the Victoria Community Planned
area 10'> of the dwellings will be delivered to low and moderate income families.
Additionally, these dwellings would be disbursed throughout Victoria so that
each village has approximately 30„ of the homes in the affordable range. Afford-
able housing would include a mix of attached/ detached and mobile family dwellings.
We suggest that the Victoria Planned Community increase the amount of affordable
housing to 15% within each village.
Planning Commission sting
September 29, 1980
P.C. 80 -01
Page 8
Suonested Condition: The Victoria Planned Community shall contain 15"
of its d— welling units as affordable housing as defined on page 225 of the
Victoria Planned Community text.
One of the requirements of the Planned Community Ordinance is to establish
a maximum amount of dwelling units allowable within a planned community area.
This is established by taking the boundaries of the property and delineating
those on the General Plan. The land uses are then planometer and calculations
made to produce the final dwelling unit count. Since a portion of this plan
lies within the alternative areas of the Interim General Plan, this calculation
will be forthcoming to the Planning Commission after November 1, at which time
we anticipate the proposed General Plan to be available for public review.
Staff has initially done some calculations based upon the traffic capacity
of the streets within Victoria Planned Community and can assure the Commission
that the optimum proposed by the applicant of 9,850 dwelling units will fit
within the range of allowable dwelling units for this particular area.
FOUR VILLAGES COMPARISONS: There are four villages within the community
of Victoria. Victoria Groves, Victoria Vineyards, Victoria Windrows and
Victoria Lakes. Each village is designed with a focus and a connection to
each other village. For example: the focus of Victoria Groves is the
Elementary School and park. It is connected to Victoria Vineyard via Victoria
Parkway. The focus of Victoria Vineyards is the Elementary School facilities
park and church. Victoria Vineyards is then connected to Victoria Windrows
via Victoria Parkway. The focus of Victoria Windrows is again the Elementary
School and park. It is connected to Victoria Lakes via Victoria Parkway.
The focus of Victoria Lakes is the lakes and the Regional Shopping Center.
Of the four villages three are primarily residential, ie. Victoria Groves,
Victoria Vineyards, and Victoria Windrows. The village of Victoria Lakes
is primarily the Regional Shopping Center and Regional Related uses such as
commercial and office. There are some residential land uses located adjacent
to the north Victoria Lakes. The relationship of the land uses within the
Victoria Planned Community are tied together well by use of the Victoria
Parkway. Because of the unusual L shape, it is necessary that each of the
geographic areas defined by the major streets such as Milliken, Base Line,
Highland, and the Flood Control Channel have a central focus. The problem
of relating each of the villages to the community is done through the use
of the Victoria Linear Parkway. And the introduction of the regional center
to the community is also accomplished through the use of the Victoria Lakes.
CONCLUSION
This report,while detailed,only generally covers the issue of land use. The
text presented by the applicant fully delineates each of the land uses proposed
within Victoria Planned Community in addition to each of the features and
amenities proposed,
Nip ng L ss ctng
September 24, 1980
P.C. 80 -01
Page 9
Should you have any particular questions regarding any of the details contained
within the text, please do not hesitate to contact this office. It would be the
staff's intent after the conclusion of the review of land use as described in
this report to prepare detailed conditions of approval on land use. This would
be our procedure for each of the various review areas. At the completion of the
review of all of the areas of consideration staff will present a final wrap -up
report summarizing the actions which have occured and compiling the conditions
of approval for the Victoria Planned Community. Should the Commission complete
the review of land use on Monday, September 29, 1980 we will then proceed on to
the discussion of circulation. A report sent under seperate cover is available
for your review. Staff will be prepared to discuss the various issued of cir-
culation as they relate to the Planned Community and the City as a whole. Should
the Commission complete the review of circulation on Monday, September 29, a
report prepared under seperate cover will be available for your review on the
Parks and Open Space of this plan.
Respectfully submitted Il
Jack Lam, Director
of Comnunity Development
JL:BKH:cd
DATE: October 9, 1980
TO: Planning Commission
CI 'I Y UI 11AN(;110 (;l '( ,, \IO \G.\ Cr C.�1tq
MEMORANDUM
n
J
19n I
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Citv Planner
SUBJECT: VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY
ABSTRACT: As the Commission will recall at the meeting of September 16, 1980
we discussed Lire areas of review for the Victoria Plan. !and Use has been
discussed and Circulation, and Parks and Open Space are the next two items sub-
ject to discussion. Included previously in your packet of information is a
report from the City Engineer and a report from the Director of Community
Services. Contained herein are recommended conditions for Circulation and
Parks and Open Space.
lie would request that the Planning Commission consider the next categories
for review. There are five categories left.
1. Infastructure
2. Design Criteria
3 Regulations (zoning or development regulations)
4. Implementation
5. D. E.I. R. (Draft Environmental Impact Report)
It would be our suggestion that Infastructure -and Design Criteria be the next
two items of discussion. We have reserved the Forum at the Lion's Building
for October 29, 1980 from 7:00 p.m, to 10:00 p.m. We would like conformation
of the next two items to be reviewed and of the proposed meeting date at your
October 11, 1980 review for Victoria discussion. We have reviewed the report
by the City Engineer and recommend the following seven conditions for circulation.
1. Rochester Avenue shall be extended northerly to connect with Victoria Park-
way.
2. Highland Avenue shall be constructed at a 64 foot curb to curb section
to accomodate 5 lanes of traffic, specific alignment, and design shall be
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
3, At the tine of development at the intersections of Highland Avenue and
'-!illiken Avenue, and at t'ne intersection cf -_
Doclevard pla ^s sn;1,1 rrecare2 t., th +-. c- _�'i•a'i�g ] = rav-
age road situation to tFe satisfaction of -tne City Engineer and Caltrans.
4, Should any of the streets that cross the Parifir Electric rail tracts (ie.
Milliken, Rochester, Day Crank) require grade separation, the applicant
shall be required to prepare preliminary design studies to determine con-
figuration and right -of -way requirements.
—CITY UI It: \N('110 (A ki ,. \IO, \G:\
INIF- MOR,1\DUM
DATE: October 9, 1980
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner
SUBJECT: VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY
ABSTRACT: As the Commission will recall at the meeting of September 16, 1980
We discussed the areas of review for the Victoria Plan. Land Use has been
discussed and Ci rcul ation, and Parks and open Space are the next two items sub-
ject to discussion. Included previously in your packet of information is a
report from the City Engineer and a report from the Director of Community
Services. Contained herein are recommended conditions for Circulation and
Parks and Open Space.
We would request that the Planning Commission consider the next categories
for review. There are five categories left.
I. Infastructure
2. Design Criteria
3 Regulations (zoning or development regulations)
4. Implementation
5. D.E.I.R. (Draft Environmental Impact Report)
It would be our suggestion that Infastructure and Design Criteria be the next
two items of discussion., We have reserved the Forum at the Lion's Building
for October 29, 1980 from 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 p.m. We would like conformation
Of the next taro items to be reviewed and of the proposed meeting date at your
October 11, 1960 review for Victoria discussion. We have reviewed the report
by the City Engineer and recommend the following seven conditions for circulation.
1. Rochester Avenue shall be extended northerly to connect with Victoria Park.
way.
2. highland Avenue shall be constructed at a 64 foot curb to curb section
to accomodate 5 lanes of traffic,specific alignment, and design shall be
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
3. At •he tine of development at the intersections of Highland Avenue and
1'11'ken P"e"e, and at the intersection of ui^hlar, :•�., , �,
Boulevard plans �e - - _ -_.
p <_hail ._ freca rea ^; the :p'. iCa cnr'i �;•ir; - ^-
age road situation to the satisfaction of the City Er7ine9l and raltr ans•
4. Should any of the streets that cross the Pacific Electric rail tracts (ie.
Milliken, Rochester, Day Creek) require grade separation, the applicant
shall be required to prepare preliminary design studies to determine con.
figuration and right -of -way requirements.
I:.11111-1
October 9. 1980
Page 2
S. The applicant shall prepare a detailed traffic analysis detailing the
circulation elelaents such as street location, freeway interchange,
street size, etc., for the regional shopping center and the regional
related areas. Such analysis shall be prepared to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer.
6. Precise alignment studies and rights -of -way limits will be required to
be prepared by the applicant, including but not limited to, Victoria
Parkway, local collectors, etc., prior to the consideration of approval
of any tentative tract maps involving significant alignment features of
any unprecised street.
7. Street standards shall conform to those of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
If the Planning Commission concurs with the Staff Report presented by the City
Engineer, then the above- mentioned conditions should be added to the approval.
A Staff Report has been prepared by Bill Holley, Community Services Director,
and was presented to the Planning Commission at your previous meeting. We
have prepared recommended conditions of approval for parks. They are;
1. The lakes are approved in concept only, Further detailed studies shall
he submitted to the City prior to any tentative tract approvals for a
village that contains a lake. The detailed studies shall indicate the
constriction techniques of the lake, the details of design, the details
of maintenance of the lake, and cost estimates for maintenance.
2. The applicant shall deposit an appropriate sum of money with the city to
pay for a lake consultant to be hired by the City to review the submission
material for the lake proposed in Victoria.
3. Park credit for land privately owned and maintained shall be evaluated on
a case by case basis at the time of tenta ti ve Tract approval
Credit of up to 1001: may be given. This condition applies to park land
that would be provided for public use and park land that would not be pro-
vided for public use.
4. Each park area within each village shall be given to the City in a complete
form including, but not limited to, installed parking areas, seeded play areas,
irrigation and restrooms prior to the construction of greater than 50': of the
lots within the village, Park design shall be to the satisfaction of the
Director of Community Services and consistent with the Victoria Planned
Cocuauni ties.
5. 3.47 acres of public park land rust be added to the land prior to consider-
ation of approval of any tentative tract maps ,within the plan.
1 I .. .' I __
October 9, 1980
Page 3
Should you have any questions or need clarification or, any of the suggested
conditions of approval, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Respectfully submitted,
`liarry K/ Hogan
City Planner
V
6KH:cd
CITY OF RAIICHO CCG1rvIO \GA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 24, 1980 III
U�
T0: Members of the Planning Commission lUn
FROM: Barry K, Hogan, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Victoria Community Plan - Infrastructure and Design Criteria
ABSTRACT: This report covers the topics of Infrastructure and Design Cri-
teria. Infrastructure refers to the public services that must be provided
to the project such as sewers, water, natural gas, electricity, telephone,
flood control and fire. Design Criteria encompasses Victoria Parkway, land-
scape standards, solar access, site planning standards, landscape grading
standards, and road standards. As with previous reports, after the dis-
cussion of each topic, there are suggested conditions for the Commission.
DISCUSSION - INFRASTRUCTURE
Much of the discussion of infrastructure topics are listed in the Draft
Environmental Impact Report on pages 104 -115. The Draft Environmental Im-
pact Report discusses water supply, sewage disposal, telephone service,
electrical service, gas service. Of particular concern in the past has
been the adequacy of sewer supply. The Draft Environmental Impact Report
(DEIR) discusses several alternative plans for waste treatment and disposal.
The Day Creek flood control channel traverses through the project north to
south. Currently, this channel is unimproved and no plans exist for im-
provement in the near future. Pages 47 -51 of the DEIR discusses the hy-
drology and flood control for the Victoria area. The DEIR discusses the
alternatives for accepting or diverting upstream flows, the alternatives
for providing protection from a major levee outbreak during a major storm
occurrence, alternative approaches for site drainage systems, and alter-
native methods of funding flood control and drainage. The hydrology and
flood control issues discussed within the DEIR indicate that there is a
major concern with the flood control of the Day Creek channel.
Prior to the submittal of the Victoria Plan, the City contracted with
L. D. King to prepare a study of the Day Creek channel from its source in
the foothills down its course into Riverside County. Any solution of the
drainage problem of Day Creek must be done on a regional -wide basis in-
cluding the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the City of Ontario, the Counties
of San Bernardino and Riverside, and any developers which may contribute
to the flow through the development of their property. Limited development
can occur within the drainage area of Day Creek, but there must be appro-
priate improvements to the Day Creek channel at the time of those develop-
ments. Currently no solution has been selected as yet; however, the City
Engineer is confident that a solution will be reached that is acceptable
to all parties involved. The City Engineer will be available to comment
on the flood control issue at the Monday night meeting.
November 24, 1980
Victoria Community Plan - Infrastructure and Design Criteria
Page Two
The final topic under infrastructure is fire protection. Although fire
protection is more of a community facility, its discussion fits best under
infrastructure with the topics selected for review with Victoria. Fire -
station No. 3 is located on Base Line Avenue east of Rochester Avenue in
a temporary station on County -owned property leased by the Foothill Fire
Protection District. The DEIR on page 79 indicates, under impact summary,
that new fire facilities will be planned and located based upon adopted
Plans for Victoria and adjacent properties. Fire protection will be a
major concern in this development due to the recent financial situation
which the Foothill Fire Protection District finds itself in. Special
consideration and care should be given to the provision of adequate fire
services for this development and existing development in the vicinity.
SUGGESTED CONDITIONS
1. The developer shall participate through financial contributions
and /or construction of storm drain facilities within the Day
Creek and that drainage area in accordance with a to be adopted
master plan for Day Creek. Development will be allowed to take
place within the drainage area so long as flood protection is
provided by the developer to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
and /or the San Bernardino Flood Control District.
2, Prior to any substantial development in any of the four villages,
an alternative for sewage treatment shall be selected by the City
and the Cucamonga County Water District.
3. Adequate fire protection through either expansion of Fire Station
No. 3 or the addition of another fire station or the relocation
of the existing fire station shall be provided by the Foothill
Fire District with the expansion, addition or relocation costs
paid for by the developer.
DESIGN CRITERIA
Under the discussion of Design Criteria, there are six categories: Victoria
Parkway, landscape standards, solar access standards, site planning standards,
landscape grading standards, and road standards.
VICTORIA PARKWAY
Page 127 of the Victoria Community Plan text describes fully the basic design
concept for Victoria Parkway. Victoria Parkway is the key element for the
overall plan for the planned community. It is provided as a continuous open
space element that ties together the fragmented parcels of land that currently
exist within the planning area. The parkway is a linear park that is proposed
to have a two -lane road within it. The right -of -way of the parkway varies in
accordance with the adjacent land uses. Pages 128 -129 of the text give the
basic design concepts for the parkway. Where the parkway passes adjacent to
open satires, the right -of -way will narrow. Where the parkway passes adjacent
to residential areas, the parkway right -of -way will widen. The minimum width
of right -of -way is 120 feet with the maximum width of right -of -way, 180 feet.
November 24, 1980
Victoria Community Plan - Infrastructure and Design Criteria
Page Three
The parkway includes a bike trail, hiking trail and equestrian trail
Relative to the planting concept, the plan proposes three basic trees: pines,
which will be located on the high ground, sycamores, as a transition tree,
and alders on the low ground. Of the three trees proposed, the pines are
the only evergreen. The use of the alders on the low ground will be remi-
niscent of a riparian area as would be the sycamores.
Victoria Parkway is not proposed to be a flat roadway but will be a split
level road with one direction lower than the other direction, thus providing
added interest and taking up grade at the same time. Pages 130 -131 of the
text indicate in detail the planting concept and the grading concept. For
a more precise indication of right -of -way width, please refer to pages 134 -135
of the text.
It should be noted that the median island in Victoria Parkway contains an
equestrian trail. The text does not indicate that the equestrian trail will
begin at Deer Creek, but we believe that it is the developers intent, thus,
providing a connection to the regional trail system. The equestrian trail
at each intersection transitions to the street corner for crossing within the
crosswalks to be provided at the signalized intersections. Where there are
no signalized intersections, the equestrian trail will cross mid- street.
The trail in the median will continue on Victoria Parkway to two outlets.
One will be Victoria Street outletting to Etiwanda Avenue and the other will
be the Pacific Electric right -of -way, a proposed master planned trail. The
text only indicates the outlet onto Victoria Street, but in conversations
with the developer, he indicates there is no problem in extending the trail
to the Pacific Electric right -of -way.
Pages 144 -149 illustrate the typical edge conditions and cross sections for
Victoria Parkway.
SUGGESTED CONDITIONS
1, The equestrian trail contained within Victoria Parkway shall begin
at Deer Creek and terminate at the Pacific Electric right -of -way.
Specific design of the trail shall be subject to City review.
Equestrian fences, grading, soil samples, may be required.
LANDSCAPE STANDARDS
The applicant proposes to use drought- resistant plan material where possible.
Windrow style planting to accentuate the traditional windrow character of
Etiwanda and to provide protection from wind and an Entry Hierarchy Plan
in order to provide a sense of place, and of transition from one land use
to another. The Entry Hierarchy Plan is contained on pages 156 -157 of the text.
Typical edge conditions are depicted on pages 160 -167. Particular concern
is with the Milliken - Highland -Case Line - Foothill sections and residential
land uses. There is an indication of a median within the street; however,
no indication of any trees within that median. Both the section and the
planned view lack trees within the median. We would suggest that either
November 24, 1980
Victoria Community Plan - Infrastructure and Design Criteria
Page Four
accent trees be added within the median or street trees at appropriate
spacing.
The section of land uses indicates an 8 foot minimum foot minimum for peri-
meter landscape treatment in parking areas. We suggest that 10 feet is a
more appropriate standard. Additionally, the second graphic on page 160
on the bottom right -hand corner needs to have an indication of where the
property line is.
On page 161, on the northern section of Day Creek Blvd., the street median
should depict trees. On the south section, the landscaped area from the
parking lot to the property line should be 10 feet not the 8 feet shown.
On page 162 the same comment on the Miller - Victoria loop for the median and
the parking lot. On page 163, the section depicted indicates that there
will be a natural equestrian trail in the median from Victoria Groves Park
to Victoria Street. It should indicate from Deer Creek through Victoria
Groves Park to Victoria Street and to the Pacific Electric right -of -way.
SOLAR ACCESS STANDARDS - SITE PLANNING STANDARDS
The solar access standards illustrate the desirable site plan relationships
in providing passive solar access to residential dewllings within the Vic-
toria Planned Community.
RESIDENTIAL SITE PLANNING STANDARDS
Pages 180 -196 depict the various types of A, B, C, D. E, and F, Residential
Land Uses. Each are typical examples and do not necessarily represent the
precise development for any particular area but a concept. Page 184, B land
use, minimal lots 7200 square feet, indicates a 4 -foot walk on one side only
within that land use. Throughout the B land uses there is listed a 4 -foot
walk on one side only. The Commission may wish to consider this issue to
determine whether or not sidewalks should be on both sides or only on one
side of the street. Additionally, you may want to make your decision in
accordance with the minimum square footages proposed. Throughout pages
184 -196, we have suggested additions and changes to add consistency in each
of the typical concepts rather than list these twice for the Planning Com-
mission, we will list them in the suggested conditions.
Some additional items which the Commission may wish to consider are the re-
location of these Paritcular graphic concepts to the Part III Regulations
and Standards section. The reason for this suggestion is that many of the
explanations detailed on each of the pages contained within the residential
site planning standards are repeated in Part III of the text.
SUGGESTED CONDITIONS
1. Page 184, add the ward minimum in the setbacks paragraph under
"garage ".
2. Page 185, the paragraph setbacks under side yard, add the words
"each side ". The new phrase would read "side yard: 5 -foot minimum
each side,"
November 24, 1980
Victoria Community Plan - Infrastructure and Design Criteria
Page Five
3. Page 186, directly under the graphic, the words variable height
fence by developer on Victoria Parkway property line should indicate
that fence height shall not exceed 5 feet from the highest finished
grade.
4. Under setbacks garage, add the words "requires garage door openers"
after 5 -8 feet and add the word "minimum" after 18 feet.
5. Under side yard indicate 5 -foot for each side Yard rather than
10 feet between buildings.
6. On page 187 indicate in paratheses under the graphic after the
phrase developer to provide fencing on corner lots and adjacent
to community trail system "(see page 189) ".
7. Under setbacks, garage, add the words "requires garage door openers"
after 5 to 8 feet. Also indicate what width sidewalks and location
of said sidewalks.
8. Page 10.8, indication of minimum parking requirements may require
a change in the Rancho Cucamonga Parking Ordinance. Should the
ordinance not change, the indication of minimum parking standard
should be amended to be consistent with current code requirements.
Also there is no indication of the kinds of sidewalks or location
of sidewalks.
9, Page 188 under setbacks garage, add "requires garage door openers"
after 5 to 8 feet.
10. Page 189, the second note from the top of the page add the words
"5 -foot maximum" so the phrase will read, 5 -foot maximum back yard
fence adjacent to trail by developer.
11. Page 189, the second note from the top of the page add the words
5 -foot maximum" so the phrase will read, 5 -foot maximum back yard
fence adjacent to trail by developer.
12. Page 190 under garage setback, add "requires garage door openers"
after 5 to 8 feet and add the words "or sidewalk" after curb so
the phrase will read garage setback: 5 to 8 feet (requires garage
door openers) from back of curb or sidewalk. The indication under
garage setback of the parking requirement is in excess of what
current code requirements are and should indicate code requirements.
13. Page 193 under the graphic indicates minimum of one covered parking
space per dwelling, additional spaces as specified in Part III.
This requirement is different from the existing parking code and
should be consistent.
14. Under the graphic there is an indication where sound attenuation
walls are required they may not be needed to be continuous but may
work satisfactorily when broken or staggered. The words "however,
in all cases these must be consistent with the adopted Noise Or-
dinance" should be added,
November 24, 1980
Victoria Community Plan - Infrastructure and Design Criteria
Page Six
15. Page 196 under the first graphic, the words "automatic garage
door openers required" should be added after 5 to 8 feet.
LANDSCAPE GRADING STANDARDS
The applicant proposes contour grading and grading of open space to create
views.and take up grade. All of the graphics illustrated on pages 202 -206
are of excellent depiction of the kinds of grading standards that are pro-
mulgated by the Grading Committee and the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga.
ROAD STANDARDS
On pages 212 -215 the applicant proposes road standards for Victoria Planned
Community. Except for Victoria Parkway, the road standards for Victoria
should be consistent with the road standards for other areas within Rancho
Cucamonga. The City Engineer will present at the Monday night meeting, the
proposed standards for roads within Rancho Cucamonga.
SUGGESTED CONDITION:
All road standards shall conform to those of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
except for Victoria Parkway.
CONCLUSION
As a reminder to the Planning Commission, the suggested conditions contained
within this report are not refined to the point where they can be specifically
applied to Victoria Planned Community. They are to be used as a guide for
staff in preparing final conditions for consideration by the Planning Com-
mission when the review process culminates. In order for staff to have ade-
quate direction to proceed on to the next categories and to prepare final
conditions for consideration, we would recommend, if the Commission concurs
with the suggested conditions, that they be adopted to provide for staff's
preparation of final conditions for consideration. Should you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
i "�
Respectful,ry, mitted,
v ��
BARRY K. 0GA
'City, tanner
BKH:jk
CITY OF RAI:CI -10 CUCA(..,aNGA
STAFF P_EPORT
DATE: February 2, 1981
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner, Ib,
j
SUBJECT: VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY - P.D. 80 -01 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
Review of project to date
ABSTRACT: As we all are aware, the Victoria Planned Community text and
map has been with us for some time. Either under submittal or through an
informal review process within the Community. As a reminder, there have
been six meetings on Victoria. The dates are listed below:
9 -16 -80 -
9 -29 -80 -
10 -11 -80 -
10 -29 -80 -
11 -10 -80 -
11 -24 -80 -
General kickoff meeting - establishment of review process
Discussion of Land Use
Discussion of Victoria and the Etiwanda Area
Discussion of Circulation
Discussion of parks and open
Discussion of review process
to January 1981,
space
and continuation of review
This memo contains a listing of the items which has arisen at each of these
meetings on Victoria. Also please find attached, all of the reports that
have been prepared for the Victoria Planned Community. Recommendation will
be to review all of the items listed to verify that all of the issues have
been considered and to give guidance to the applicant as to the additional
information required. We have also attached a proposed schedule to con-
sideration for approval of Victoria Planned Community which the Commission
should indicate their desires for finalization.
DISCUSSION: To date, we have reviewed land use, circulation, parks and
open space and have presented reports on infrastructure and design criteria.
At each of the meetings on land use, circulation, parks and open space,
there were suggested conditions included. The Commission, after reviewing
each of the topics, then discussed each of the conditions suggested. In
some cases, the conditions were modified and in others, conditions were
added. In each of the meetings on the topics there were additional issues
raised that were not answered by the text covered by conditions suggested
or answered by the map. We have complied for the Commission's information
and use, those issues that have been raised that have not yet been answered.
Victoria Planned Con.. .city -2- February 2, 1981
LAND USE
- Commercial usage along Etiwanda Avenue (already addressed by the Sedway/
Cooke General Plan)
- More detailed and regional related uses i.e. types
- Victoria Street not to connect to Etiwanda Avenue
- Regional related uses to Etiwanda Avenue (some examples should be shown
relative to site plans)
- Buffering along Base Line Road, i.e. residential uses and commercial uses
(example: site plans should be shown)
- Landscape buffer at the Temple (mention was made when land adjacent to the
Temple was thought to be within the planned community that there should be
landscape buffering from any new use to the Temple. Now the Temple land
is only contiguous to the planned community boundaries on the western
property line)
- Phasing of regional related uses from Foothill Boulevard north to Base
Line Road
- Treatment of Highland Avenue relative to architectural character and land-
scape character to simulate the "rural atmosphere"
- Precise planned community boundaries showing all property that is owned
by William Lyon Company within the planned community and any other property
that is consented to be a co- applicant
- Adjustment of densities and land use patterns within the planned communities
relative to General Plan changes
- Density bonuses and affordable housing percentages
CIRCULATION
- Treatment of the emergency lane of traffic for Victoria parkway
- Indication of what streets would be used for regional shopping center access
- Efforts should be made to minimize traffic through the Etiwanda Community
- Indicate a loop street plus or minus 1,000 feet from Etiwanda Avenue in
order to take traffic off of Etiwanda Avenue
Victoria Planned Cod ,lity -2- February 2, 1981
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
- Indicate areas of lake usage for boating, fishing, etc. What about "con-
cession stands" around the lake. How will these be handled?
- Will there be any trails to Etiwanda Avenue and from Etiwanda community
to the lake edge? Where will they be? Show examples.
- How much land is contained within the lake edge and the lake itself.
What about the issue of radiation from the power lines (this should be
discussed in the draft environmental report).
- What about the active parkland versus passive parkland? Advantages, dis-
advantages of each.
- What credit should be given for the lakes, for the trails, for any other
open space usage.
- Where should the additional five acres of park land go to, if still
necessary after adjustments in the General Plan densities?
- Where will the developer obtain the water to fill the lakes and to keep
them at a reasonable level?
We hope that we have gathered together all of the items which were discussed at
the various meetings on Victoria Planned Community. The Commission should
review each of the items listed above in the three categories, to determine if
they are accurately represented and if all of the issues raised by the Commission
are contained within the list. Our anticipation would be that at the February
26, 1981 meeting the applicant would have answered most, if not all of the
issues contained within this report and Staff would have the opportunity to
make recommendations on the applicant's proposals.
We still have Infrastructure and Design, and Implementation and DEIR to review.
It would be one suggestion that the Planning Commission reserve March 12, March
26, and April 9 to complete the Planning Commission reivew of the Victoria
Planned Community. These meetings would be on Thrusday night beginning at 7:00
p.m.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission reivew the
list contained within this report. Add or subtract to those lists as may be
necessary, and clarify the items they wish to have brought back to them in
the way of answers or solutions for the February 26 special meeting. Also, it
is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt March 12, March 26, and April
9 as review dates for the completion of the review of Victoria Planned Community.
BKH:cd
Attachments
CITY OF RANCM CUCArv1ONCA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: February 25, 1981 c
F
TD: Members of the Planning Commission L
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner
SUBJECT: VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY - 80 -01 - FOLLOW -UP ON PREVIOUS
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION UNDER LAND USE AND CIRCULATION
ABSTRACT: As the Planning Commission will recall at the previous Victoria
Planned Community meeting we discussed the issues that had been raised un-
der land use, circulation and parks and open space. The applicant was to
come back with answers to the 'issues raised at the last meeting. Staff
recommendations will be made at the Planning Commission meeting.
DISCUSSION: The applicant proposes to discuss five different topics under
land use, i.e., General Plan densities, boundary changes, new population
distributions, regional - related uses, and Base Line at Victoria Parkway,
commercial center. Under circulation there are five areas which will be
discussed: regional perspective, Victoria circulation, circulation on
Etiwanda Avenue, circulation via Rochester Avenue and circulation via
Miller /Church Avenue. The applicant will make his views and reasons known
for each of the above - mentioned items. We would suggest that the Planning
Commission review and consider these items and act on them only if the
Commission feels that adequate information has been presented to satisfy
the concerns previously expressed.
At the last Planning Commission meeting, new boundaries for the Victoria
Planned Community were presented to the Planning Commission. Questions
were raised as to what the revised dwelling unit count is for Victoria
Planned Community. We have generated the new General Plan number for the
Victoria Planned Community revised. Allowable within the V ictoria Plan-
ned Community as defined by the new boundaries under the General Plan
is 9,452 units. When the Victoria Planned Communities boundaries are
revised on the plan presented by the William Lyon Company, the new "op-
timum yield" that the Wm. Lyon Co. proposes is 9,040 dwelling units.
R pectfu y ¢Gbmitted,
G
ry K. H dpan I
City Planner
/SKHUk
cc: Jack Lain
Gary Frye, Wm. Lyon Co.
Don Tomkins, SWA Group
w SFAFFYREPORT
DATE: March 12, 1981
TO: Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner
William Holley, Director of Community Services
SUBJECT: VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY - 80 -01 TOPICS - LAND USE AND CIRCU-
LATION, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE, INFRASTRUCTURE AND DESIGN CRITERIA
ABSTRACT: As the Commission will recall, the Planning Commission meeting
of Thursday, February 26, 1981 was cancelled by request of the developer
in order to allow him additional time to prepare responses to the Commission's
concerns. We have attached the previous memorandum on land use, circulation,
parks and open space and the Staff Report on Infrastructure and Design Cri-
teria. Recommendations will be to resolve the issues of land use, circulation,
parks and open space and discuss infrastructure and design criteria.
DISCUSSION: The February 2, 1981 Staff Report beings up a number of items
under Parks and Open Space i.e., indicate the areas of lake usage for boating,
fishing, etc.; concession stands around the lake; trails along Etiwanda Ave-
nue from the lake edge, where will they be; what are the advantages of having
the lake as active or passive park land; what credit should be given for the
lakes, for the trails or other open space usage; where should the additional
5 acres of park land go; and where will the developer obtain the water to fill
the lakes and to keep them at a reasonable level. The Director of Community
Services and the City Planner have met to discuss the issues relative to
parks and open space. The following resolutions have been reached:
- Fishing in the lake is acceptable and will cause no potential
problems for the City.
- The issue relative to concession stands should be studied to
determine its economic feasibility; an economic feasibility
study should be prepared by the Wm. Lyon Co. or their con-
sultants and submitted to the Department of Community Services
and Planning Division prior to any concession stands being
located on or about the lake edge.
The issue of passive versus active open space was discussed
at length by the Planning Commission during the last meeting
on Parks and Open Space with no particular conclusion reached.
It is the concurrence of the City Planner and Director of Com-
munity Services that both passive and active recreation have
value and that value cannot necessarily be equated on a scale
of one to ten. it is a discretionary decision as to whether
of not passive open space or active open space has more re-
lative value. Therefore, we feel that to pursue discussion on
passive versus active open space is an exercise in futility.
- Credit for open space provided was discussed. There are a
March 12, 1981
Victoria
Page Two
variety of open space areas in which credit is sought. Trail
credit is sought, Victoria Parkway credit is sought, Edison
and Flood Control credit is sought, lake edge and lake surface
credit is sought. It is the opinion of the City Planner and
Director of Community Services that 1= credit should be given
in all categories except for the Edison and Flood Control ease-
ments. The two questions which we had to ask ourselves in making
a recommendation were: Does the amenity provided give public
recreation opportunities? The answer to the question is yes.
Is it necessary for the Victoria Community Plan to have these
amenities to have the plan work well? In our opinion we believe
that it is necessary. The lakes provide a vital connection from
the commercial area to the residential area and provide for a
very good transition of an active commercial area to a more
quiet, less active, residential area. The trails and Victoria
Parkway help to tie the entire planned community together as a
single entity.
The last issue that arose was the lake design and maintenance it-
self. We suggest that the lake design and maintenance be considered
as a separate topic after the planned community has been approved
by the Planning Commission and City Council. The approval that
would be given under the planned community review would be for
the concept of lakes to be approved but the precise design and
maintenance studies would come at a later date. We have an ex-
ample of a typical maintenance manual on another lake prepared
for the City in another community for your review at the Planning
office and it will be available at the March 12 meeting.
We have also attached a report dated November 24, 1980, which discusses the
next two topics for review: Infrastructure and Design Criteria. As you will
will recall, infrastructure talks about those public services that must be
provided such as sewers, water, natural gas, electricity, telephone, flood
control and fire. Design Criteria encompasses the Victoria Parkway, landscape
standards, solar access, site planning standards, landscape grading standards
and road standards. As with previous reports on the Victoria Planned Com-
munity, the report of November 24, 1980 discusses the issues of infrastructure
and the issues of design criteria and lists suggested conditions for the Com-
mission to consider as possible conditions of approval for the planned community.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission:
1. Consider the comments and responses on land use, circulation, parks
and open space by the applicant and the staff and make the appro-
priate decision.
2. Consider and review infrastructure and design criteria and adopt
suggested conditions of approval to be brought back in a master
resolution of approval after the Victoria Planned Community has
*an d its review.
R t ,
rr lanner
BKM: jk
— CITY OF RANCHO Cl,'C( 3NGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: April 2, 1981 FH ri'C
T0: Members of the Planning Commission 19;
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Pla r
SUBJECT: VICTORIA PLANNED COM NITY -01 - FINAL REPORT - REGULATIONS
IMPLEMENTATION, EIR, AND — CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Final Report - For consideration by the Planning Commission of the Planning
Regulations, Implementation, EIR, and Conditions of Approval
for recommendation to City Council on the Victoria Planned
Community.
ABSTRACT: This report will discuss the attached revised regulations and
standards for development of the Victoria Community Plan, the Implementation,
the Draft Environmental Impact Report, and the attached proposed conditions
of approval and Sesolution. Approval of the Plan to the City Council will
be recommended.
DISCUSSION: As the Planning Commission will recall, there have been reports
presented and discussion occurred on: Land Use, Circulation, Parks and Open
Space, Infrastructure, and Design Criteria. This report will discuss the
regulations (zoning and development of the Planned Community), implementation,
the Draft Environmental Impact Report, and the recommended Resolution of
Approval containing all the conditions which have been previously reviewed
by the Planning Commission and additional conditions as a result of the review
of the last remaining sections of the Victoria Planned Community Text.
REGULATIONS: Attached to this report, please find hand - numbered pages begin-
ning with 221 and ending with 266. These are revisions of the Regulations
and Standards for Development Section of the Victoria Planned Community en-
compassed by pages 221 -267 of the previously submitted text. Staff and the
developer have over a number of months and many meetings revised the Regu-
lations and Standards for Development. The attached encompasses these
revisions. Please do not refer to the Renulatinnc and Ctandardc fnr navalnn-
finis report will not go into detail of any of the areas of change that have
occurred throughout the revised text. We will, however, indicate in general
the revisions that have occurred. The revisions are as follows:
- Text reference has changed from the old A,B,C,D,E, and F land
uses to the proposed General Plan designations of low, low -
medium, medium, medium -high, and high density. ,
- The applicant has also removed any reference to parking regulations.
- Planning boundaries have been delineated more precisely.
Victoria - Final Report -2- Planning Commission 4 -2 -81
- Dwelling unit count per village have been adjusted for
property not a part of the Planned Community.
Flexibility in managing the plan, page 233, has been revised
to indicate the appropriate General Plan land uses.
Pages 239 -246 have been added to pictorially depict examples
of the various lot square footage, developments that are
desired within the Victoria Planned Community.
Pages 248 -249 indicate pictorially cluster housing standards
in various situations.
Road standards have been modified to be consistent with City
Road Standards.
There are areas within the proposed revised text that Staff feels still
needs some additional clarification. We provide the following suggested
conditions to give that clarification.
1. On page 248, local residential streets show a minimum 10
foot setback. We feel that an additional 15 foot typical
setback should be added.
2. Page 250, section 4B4 should be the same as section 5B3a
and b on page 251, i.e. instead of a building separation
of 10 foot minimum, building separation would be:
(a) 35 feet in height or less, 10 foot minimum, or
(b) Buildings greater than 35 feet, 15 foot minimum.
3. Page 253, the word "provision" should be added after No. 1
General. On No. 2, the minimum lot width should be 150
feet rather than 100 feet minimum. No. 3, the maximum
height should be indicated at 65 feet with a conditional
use permit for any heights greater than 65 feet.
4. Page 234, No. 1 after General, add provision.
5. Page 233 No. 3 8 4 should be revised to read:
In order to provide flexibility in the development of the
Victoria Planned Community, over the 10 -15 year life of
the Plan, a maximum of 20,5 variation in the option yield
will be allowable.
Any and all variations shall be reviewed and approved by
the Design Review Committee.
The variation in the number of dwelling units within one
village may require corresponding decreases in one or more
'lot yYl
yrd th �r CN ka90
t� °�Idd Y� Ymp� the P cePd to
'v~PSdCr mbP rthP PU'Pnttekt ss B2 So^
hdt
�t.Yh het d)F��FnmPnt �d �doF ��� �YthYn
°)'
h al th P f he
y thPdP"P�dnchwthyeJOpnd r IrteS to Plc ^A Pldi
StjCGFS e tl PmPn 04cd1d9PnthW dPS.s dhe p ^q• °^dtP
dq)) ^ TFO C t mOSt n9 ent'th �9n ^Wo"sted�^e 04. d
C ^04,t "OlYsnrJ�NOON dlso codd�t �ncP`tc �.d app ^OCP P6 Pnt Pn
IAI. Mandhd!)al FY m°Iy °ndI dS. ° ^id °�d SS Y the dPp� d
• I d P I n
Ot
d hn°' P s
C, pep y
° or
o m dn0
CYC PS
P n F ^ nY y y nn tFP • sP
o 9 �hY^^9 O, dCC
^ OYP^En aS ^dSmd i Y)n Y O n YC °a")N YO �
n f t°.dh %n P
a t maah°
1L c
Op d O '01 y
ItS� CP• DdP
O ces P F rr p aP „ n
4oh ',7'°COm� )Is Ito
, Y 99p"
0' F ) N0
ct t eO ^elSe A)^aSrt I n °°h4 ^o an^Y d 86
a PS e v de. a °_ p n.
BkH.. e C t aS °)Ot> rr to °a?t/mh ) r °�dnoP �dyp `t M O,A d� P^NS Crg°mP gPd pt d2y S T. �A Pl PP9Y p mnYr^0 N^n hPydo �C n . y0' ! r, i�ac t )oPcha mnd hP ) P t, t Ana Y " OpIt^ ^ Y W haa r e °'Y Fm t � F t ehCF NP 1W '170 N't9,m � Fa� � nNP et O l naPqnd r Pat l .Y° ta t ^nph ad • P )y9 p nC +dt nnJ ' 9C tt S Yh t£nnRh FAyP� O Y ^ P O I O tm Ot P e n s t a9tt^t pw- yCrYO^ PS� �cc �
. Y d O I
Attachm �opn�i� olh
Res0/
°tYOn
Victoria - Final Report -2- Planning Commission 4 -2 -81
- Dwelling unit count per village have been adjusted for
property not a part of the Planned Community.
- Flexibility in managing the plan, rage 233, has been revised
to indicate the appropriate General Plan land uses.
- Pages 239 -246 have been added to pictorially depict examples
of the various lot square footage, developments that are
desired within the Victoria Planned Community.
- Pages 248 -249 indicate pictorially cluster housing standards
in various situations.
- Road standards have been modified to be consistent with City
Road Standards.
There are areas within the proposed revised text that Staff feels still
needs some additional clarification. We provide the following suggested
conditions to give that clarification.
1. On page 248, local residential streets show a minimum 10
foot setback. We feel that an additional 15 foot typical
setback should be added.
2. Page 250, section 4B4 should be the same as section 5B3a
and b on page 251, i.e. instead of a building separation
of 10 foot minimum, building separation would be:
(a) 35 feet in height or less, 10 foot minimum, or
(b) Buildings greater than 35 feet, 15 foot minimum.
3. Page 253, the word "provision" should be added after No. 1
General. On No. 2, the minimum lot width should be 150
feet rather than 100 feet minimum. No. 3, the maximum
height should be indicated at 65 feet with a conditional
use permit for any heights greater than 65 feet.
4. Page 234, No. 1 after General, add provision.
5, Page 233 No. 3 8 4 should be revised to read:
In order to provide flexibility in the development of the
Victoria Planned Community, over the 10 -15 year life of
the Plan, a maximum of 20; variation in the option yield
will be allowable.
Any and all variations shall be reviewed and approved by
the Design Review Committee.
The variation in the number of dwelling units within one
village may require corresponding decreases in one or more
VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN: REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS
FOR DEVELOPMENT
This section is established to provide specific regulations and
standards that all development in the Victoria Community Plan
Area must meet. It is to be used in tandem with the Urban Design
Criteria illustrated in Part Two, which complement these
regulations and standards. To make use of this section more
convenient, an outline is provided below.
A. General Standards and Regulations CITY OF RANCHO CCCAPduPIGA
COM11!HUNI (Y DEYEl.0P61iNT DEPT.
B. Affordable Housing P44R %0 ?991
C. Project Phasing ' AM rPM
,»
111213
D. Community Facilities and Open Space:
Construction and Maintenance
E. Provisions for Meeting City Park Requirements
F. Distribution of Residential Dwelling Units
G. The Planning Area and Planned Community Boundary
H. Legal Description of the Planned Community
I. Flexibility in Managing The Plan
J. Residential Development Standards
1. General to all residential areas: setbacks, fences,
temporary uses, garage and carport placement
2. Low Density Residential
3. Low - Medium Density Residential
4. Medium Density Residential
5. Medium - High Residential
6. High Density Residential
K. Commercial Standards
1. General to all commercial Land Uses: setbacks site
development standards
2. Regional Center
Y �'
3. Regional - Related Land Uses
4. Village Commercial
L. Community Facilities
M. Road Standards
1. Introduction and Intent
2. Standard Road Cross- Sections Reference Plan
3. Standard Road Cross- Sections
a. Milliken, Highland, Baseline, Foothill
b. Day Creek Boulevard
C. Etiwanda
d. Victoria Street
e. Miller, Victoria Loop
f. Victoria Parkway
g. Local Residential Streets
h. Neighborhood Streets
222
GENERAL STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS
1. Whenever the regulations contained herein conflict with
the regulations of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, the regulations contained herein shall
take precedence. Where an issue is not covered (i.e.,
variance, temporary use, signs, home occupations, etc.),
refer to the Rancho Cucamonga Zoning Ordinance.
2. Within the Planned Community Boundry, the continued use
of the land for agricultural purposes with uses,
structures, and appurtenances accessory thereto shall be
permitted, subject to the provisions of the Agricultural
Zone Regulations set forth in the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Zoning Ordinance.
3. Grading will be permitted within the Planned Community
area outside of an area of immediate development upon
the securing of a grading permit.
During site development, preparation, and construction,
the hours of operation shall be limited to the period
between 7:00 a.m. and dusk Monday through Saturday. No
activities will be permitted outside of these hours
including maintenance work that might be required on any
equipment used in grading and /or construction unless a
temporary waiver is granted by the Building Offical. No
such waiver will be granted where such work is to be
conducted adjacent to existing and occupied dwelling
units except in cases of emergency as determined by the
Building Official.
4. Regardless of the provisions of this text, no
construction shall be allowed within the boundaries of
the Planned Community area except that which complies
with all provisions of applicable building codes and the
various mechanical codes related thereto.
5. Any land use proposal not specifically covered by this
plan and its text shall be subject to the regulations of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan.
6. Model homes and their garages and private recreation
facilities may be used as offices for the sale of homes
within a recorded tract and subsequent tracts utilizing
these same architectural designs. They may be occupied
for a maximum of three years, with one year extensions
subject to the approval of the City Planner.
�j,2:
7. With respect to all residential developments within this
Planned Community, developer will display a copy of the
adopted Community Land Use Plan in all sales offices and
will provide a copy of the Land Use Plan to all buyers
at their request.
8. At such time as the site plans are considered, the
developer shall submit plans demonstrating conformance
with the Rancho Cucamonga Noise Ordinance and the Noise
Element of the General Plan. The plans are subject to
the approval of the City Planner.
9. Dedication and improvements of all rights -of -way shall
meet with the approval of the City Engineer and be
consistent with the adopted Circulation Element of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan.
10. Prior to the approval of any tract map, geologic
investigation reports may be required by the Director of
Community Development.
224
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
"Affordable" housing will be provided throughout Victoria to meet
the housing needs of families with low and moderate incomes. For
the purposes of this discussion, two definitions are important:
An "affordable dwellinc unit" is any residential
dwelling purchased or rented by a low or moderate
income family.
A low or moderate income family is one whose gross
annual income is from 80% to 1208 of the median family
income for the region. The index used to determine
median family income should be representative of the
area in which the "affordable" housing will be built.
Within the Victoria community Plan Area, fifteen Percent (15 %) of
dwellings will be delivered to low and moderate income
famililes. They will be dispersed throughout Victoria so that in
each Village, approximately fifteen percent (15 %) of the homes
will be "affordable ". "Affordable" housing will include a mix of
attached, detached, and multi - family dwellings. The actual
percentage of affordable dwellings within a Village, and the
specific mix of units may vary somewhat from Village to Village.
It is the intent of this plan that "affordable" housing be
delivered to the original occupants. Providing these dwellings
at the time Victoria is developed assures that a large stock of
"affordable" housing will be maintained through time.
Each landowner will be responsible for contributing his fair
share of the total "affordable" units to be built in Victoria.
To accomplish this, 15% of the units assigned by the Density
Distribution Plan to landowner's property will be "affordable ".
If a landowner is not able to provide these units on his
property, he may arrange with other landowners to have them
supply his share of the "affordable" dwellings. This should not,
however, preclude the dispersal of "affordable" housing
throughout Victoria, nor does it mean that each development
project must contain fifteen percent "affordable" dwellings.
As an incentive to build this housing, a bonus of one dwelling
unit will be awarded to each landowner for every "affordable"
dwelling he delivers. This bonus would be added to the number of
units assigned to a landowner's property by the Density
Distribution Plan.
22 S
C C
PROJECT PHASING
Construction of Victoria will begin in Victoria Windrows, and
development is Currently planned to proceed went along Victoria
Parkway into Victoria Vineyards and Victoria Groves. When
construction of the Regional Center begins, development will
proceed south along Victoria Parkway into Victoria Lakes.
It is presently anticipated that, in the short term, demand for
single family detached dwelling units will outpace demand for
attached multi - family residences. Therefore, residential
development in the Low - Medium Density Residential category may
begin in Victoria Vineyards before Victoria Windrows is
completely developed. As demand for attached and multi - family
homes increases relative to detached homes, development of these
types of residential products will begin in Victoria Windrows and
is currently planned to proceed west into Victoria Vineyards and
Victoria Groves. Development in Victoria Lakes will begin at the
same time as the regional center.
The construction of open space including parks, schools, lakes
and parkways will be phased to coincide with residential
construction so that increments of open space will be developed
coincidentally with increments of housing.
COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND OPEN SPACE:
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
Generally, the maintenance of all facilities designed for
community wide public use such as parks, paseos, parkways and
roadside planting belts, and other facilities will be maintained
by the city wide assessment district. Facilities that are within
attached residential projects that are intended for residents of
that project only will be maintained by a homeowners
association. Land belonging to othe private, public and quasi -
public agencies, such as the San Bernardino Flood Control
District, Southern California Edison and the Southern Pacific
Railroad will be maintained by those landowners.
jib
PROVISIONS FOR MEETING CITY PARR REQUIREMENTS
Victoria Linear Park, Victoria Groves Park, the parks in Victoria
Vineyards, Windrows Park, the two northern lakes in the Village
of Victoria Lakes, and Paseos will be dedicated public land and
will be maintained by a city wide assessment district. They will
receive 100% credit toward meeting the park requirements of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Privately owned and maintained open space that is provided for
the use of the general public may receive up to 100% credit
toward meeting the park requirements of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
Privately owned open space that is not provided for the use of
the general public may receive up to 100% credit toward meeting
the park requirements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and shall
meet the requirement of Ordinance 105 of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
v�l
DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS
The plans on the following pages show the proposed distribution
of the residential dwelling units within the four villages of
Victoria. The actual number of residential dwellings within each
village may vary somewhat according to the formula discussed in
the next section, "Flexibility in Managing the Plan ".
The total number of units shown for Victoria Lakes does not
include any dwellings that may be placed in the area designated
by an "S" on the Land Use Plan. If that area is developed as a
Medium Density Residential Land Use or as a mobile home park, the
maximum number of units permitted in Victoria Lakes within the
Planned Community Boundary will be increased by an additional 100
units. Such increases in dwelling units pursuant to either, or
both, of the above mentioned cases are in addition to the 8,255
dwelling units planned within the Planned Community Boundary.
PLANNING AREA AND PLANNED COMMUNITY BOUNDARY
The planning area is described and located on pages 5 and 6. The
Planned Community is the area that is legally included within the
Planned Community and a legal description of the Planned
Community follows in the next Section.
The planninr area includes approximately 280 acres of privately
held land that is not a part of the Planned Community. These
areas are shown graphically on p. 229. The dwelling units
assigned to each village on p. 229 apply only to land within the
Planned Community and do not include any dwellings that may be
developed on parcels within the planning area that are not
included within the Planned Community. Development of these
parcels is controlled by the City of Rancho Cucamonga General
Plan. However, for informational purposes and to assist in the
planning and design of the whole planning area, some assumptions
were made about the number of dwellings which might be developed
on this land. Those assumptions are shown on the Density
Distribution Plan, pp. 230 and 231, and are suggested as a guide
for the City in planning these parcels. Based on these
assumptions, the optimum yield for the entire planning area is
8865 dwelling units. 8255 dwellings are within the Planned
Community Boundary, however.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PLANNED COMMUNITY
(egal description of the Planned Community to be inserted here.)
rA
VICfGFtA
6Kovrrs
rd
i150G1M
Y Nfs�y RDt
Ia0'�
3100da
or5smNTION OF
VeSIPONTIM, cwsu lN&s
Opf1MUM Niimo "VILLA&&
UM YAw-vm lM mooNvit,
7~ Per A Ph►( vV
PL*P?,� GoMMUIV"
* rp*w A4
— — P A. f owlda -j
PI.V4W4�0 AVea
YIG'fol4)k
W%Nv9vwc
040 du
yyA*
VIG101GA
I.Ar6s
29 A.*-
2i85.tM
22 Il
TOV4, MOL /MN *WA DOS 4M° 4MV JWJ 1150 100'6
TK' NOT W 4'-c.j LANV MC WS16NAnoN^MA POT PmAL MASS TPANQr Star, R PmHCLopop
p+NEWNb VNrt CovM MRINFORMATiqo AS R6sIGCNf1AL AM 447YN w V=114A&A"
WRPOSCS 0%" As W WRNIA) Rci 1°0� °v IPS,
2:0
J
A
2
VICIOpIA6P�V6s
Ifi
p� °° pto
°
0
I 150
VMIC VINiy/RQS
6�3g
0'Ph �0'10 boo
6
VIoTORIA MKs3
4f'041
°
\ 14y
S
TeT/+ ou IN pa
f�S
le vo to loo
910
NOT W PC.
M°
310 - _
Ott
TOV4, MOL /MN *WA DOS 4M° 4MV JWJ 1150 100'6
TK' NOT W 4'-c.j LANV MC WS16NAnoN^MA POT PmAL MASS TPANQr Star, R PmHCLopop
p+NEWNb VNrt CovM MRINFORMATiqo AS R6sIGCNf1AL AM 447YN w V=114A&A"
WRPOSCS 0%" As W WRNIA) Rci 1°0� °v IPS,
2:0
4o.w 7Pa, rse„
-�
T"" -�
.F 141111,11
_,. r.. 1{. 1""'j yN 4�5,ord«�I INM1 �► .."'� L _ _.
IDS Al �
fM
JAL, /
,� vii
FLEXIBILITY IN MANAGING THE PLAN
In the future, conditions may arise that suggest rearrangements
in the Land Use Plan designations for individual sub - planning
areas as shown on the Land Use Plan and the Density Distribution
Plan. The Community Plan is designed to provide flexibility in
trading the residential densities in one sub - planning area for
densities in other sub - planning areas to be developed in the
future. The Community Plan must also accommodate change caused
by political, economic, or market conditions, without
detrimentally affecting the ability to construct the total
Victoria community. By utilizing the Optimum Yield Approach in
determining residential densities, such flexibility can occur
within the design intent of this Community Plan without changing
either the character and quality of each Village, or the total
numbe of units designated for the Communfty Plan Area. Each
Village can accommodate some change by increasing or decreasing
the number of residential dwelling units in that Village without
altering the intent of this plan.
Accordingly, the Optimum Yield Approach allows a landowner,
within certain limitations, to redesignate the Land Use Plan
designations for sub - planning areas he owns. In other words, a
landowner may increase the number of dwelling units in one sub -
planning area if he decreases the number of dwelling units in
another sub - planning area he owns as long as he maintains the
total number of dwelling units assigned by the Density
Distribution Plan to his property. Additionally, density can be
transferred from one landowner to another by mutual agreement,
provided that other requirements set forth in this section are
met.
To provide flexibility which maintains the integrity of the
Community Plan and which promotes the goals and desires of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, the following guidelines shall apply to
the transfer of density within the Community Plan Area.
The number of dwelling units proposed on the Density
Distribution Plan may be increased for any sub - planning
area. However, such increases should not alter the
intent of this plan to provide a variety of residential
housing types and densities throughout each Village and
the entire Community Plan Area. Additionally, the
number of units proposed for any subplanning area may be
decreased without a corresponding increase in another
subplanning area.
2. The Land Use Plan designation for any sub- planning area
may be redesignated as follows:
"L" Land Use designations can be redesignated to
"LM" land use designations for any subplanning
area.
I'Ss'
b. "LM" land use designations can be redesignated to
either a "M" or "MR" land use designation for any
sub - planning area.
C. "M" land use designations can be redesignated to
"MH" land use designations for any sub - planning
area.
d. "MH" land use designations can be redesignated to
"H" land use designations for any sub - planning
area.
3. To protect character of each village, the allowable
increase in the total number of dwelling units within a
Specific Village would be limited according to the
following regulations:
a. Village of Victoria Lakes: no more than 258
greater than the optimum yield for the village
b. Village of Victoria Windrows: no more than 15♦
greater than the optimum yield for the village
C. Village of Victoria Vineyards: no more than 209
greater than the optimum yield for the village
d. Village of Victoria Groves: no more than 258
greater than the optimum yield
The percentage limitations in this section are based on
an empirical test estimating the increase that might be
accommodated by the specific village without altering
its character. The optimum yield for each village is
shown on page 229.
4. The increase in the number of dwelling units within one
Village may require corresponding decreases in one or
more of the other Villages to insure that the total
number of units does not exceed 8,255 within the Planned
Community Boundary.
ti��
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1. General To All Residential Areas
a. Building setbacks from common Areas:
Structures which abut a plaza, park, mall,
greenbelt or other permanent open space may abut
the common property line but have no openings onto
such uses.
b. Fences, Hedges and Walls:
Fences, hedges and walls constructed as acoustical
barriers shall have no height limit. All other
fences shall be limited to 8 feet unless they are
attached to a main building and are an
architectural design element, in which case they
can exceed 8 feet subject to design approval.
C. Trellis:
Open trellis and beam construction shall be
permitted to attach the garage or carport to the
dwelling and may also extend from the dwelling to
the property line in the side, rear yards or front
yards.
d. Garage and Carport Placement:
(1) Where garages or carports are entered directly
from an alley, the setback may be zero (0)
feet, provided at least 26 feet of clear area
is provided directly behind the garage or
carport to allow for adequate back -up
clearance.
(2) See typical site plan diagrams, p. 248 and
Garage Setback Standards, p. 247.
e. Minimum lot width:
The minimum lot width on cul -de -sacs or knucklerS
shall not be less than 20 feet.
Z3'r
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (continued)
2. Low Density Residential ( "L" Land Use Plan designation):
Land designated as Low Density Residential is intended
for residential development that has a range of from 2
to 4 dwellings per adjusted gross acre. The following
regulations apply:
a. Uses Permitted: Detached or attached residential
dwellings not exceeding four dwellings per adjusted
gross acre, including, but not limited to:
(1) Single family detached dwellings
(2) Single family attached dwellings, including,
but not limited to, duplexes and triplexes
(3) Cluster housing
(4) Community facilities as specified on p. 259.
b. Accessory Uses Permitted:
(1) Garages and carports, in compliance with site
development standards provided herein
(2) Fences, walls, trellises
(3) Swimming pools with a minimum 5' high fence
enclosing pool
(4) Accessory uses and structures necessary or
customarily incidental to a principal use as
permitted by the Rancho Cucamonga Zoning
Ordinance
C. Site Development Standards:
(1) Subdivisions:
(a) Building site area: see typical lot
plans, pp. 245 and 246.
(b) Building site width: see typical lot
plans, pp. 245 and 246.
(c) Building coverage: see typical lot
plans, pp. 245 and 246.
(d) Building setbacks: see typical lot
plans, pp. 245 and 246.
(e) Building height: 35 feet maximum
2? c
(2) Cluster Housing
(a) Building site area: 3 acres minimum
(b) Building site coverages 508, maximum
(c) Building setbacks and building separation
no minimum subject to Development
Approval Process (Part III, Section II -A)
buildings should be situated in a manner
that provides adequate visual clearance
at intersections
(d) Building height: 35 feet, maximum
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (continued)
3. Low- Medium Density Residential ( "LM" Land Use Plan
designation):
Land designated as Low- Medium Density Residential is
intended for residential development that has a range of
four to eight dwellings per adjusted gross acre. The
following regulations are applicable to these areas:
a. Uses Permitted: detached or attached residential
dwellings not exceeding eight dwellings per
adjusted gross acre, including, but not limited to:
(1) Single family detached dwellings
(2) Single family attached dwellings, including,
but not limited to, duplexes and triplexes
(3) Cluster Housing
(4) "zero lot line" homes
(5) Community Facilities as specified on p. 259.
b. Accessory Uses Permitted: any of the following
uses and structures
(1) Garages and carports, in compliance with the
site development standards provided herein
(2) Fences, walls, and trellises
(3) Swimming pools with a minimum 5 foot high
fence enclosing pool
(4) Accessory uses and structures necessary or
customarily incidental to a principal use as
permitted by the Rancho Cucamonga zoning
ordinance.
C. Site Development Standards:
(1) Single Family Detached dwellings
(a) Building site area: 3,000 square feet
minimum. It is the intention of this
plan to provide lot sizes varying from
3,000 to 10,000 square feet to reflect
future market demands.
v"' %
(b) Building site width: 35 feet minimum.
It is intended that site widths will vary
according to lot size.
(c) Building site coverage: varies according
to lot size, see typical lot plans.
pp. 239 to 246.
(d) Building setbacks: varies according to
lot size, see typical lot plans.
(e) Building height: 35 feet maximum
(2) Cluster housing
(a) Building site area: 2 acres minimum
(b) Building site coverage: 509 maximum
(c) Building setbacks: See diagrams for
typical building setbacks (pp. W to
249). 8
(d) Building separation: See diagram for
typical building separation distances
(pp. 247 to 249).
(e) Building height: 35 feet, maximum.
�E
30°o ;b ►-ter �-r• ��NE
PUILDIN&
A13uTs
LINE
'ac
GAtsA6&
?Acv-or - �
Gvv-g cv s.
WRL.14
N�AIN BvIUDINc� Epf��
SIpE� /kFp
OFT ONE-Sipe
to P( miti OP('�ITE
s lip
MAXIMUM cOYePOI6E: (00% OF� A PC-A VVnrrAIN PRo%32T'y �iNES
t2P�C�E StF:FsAc ks : sea P. 2
�,'9
3000 ;6 loT, cs-"Sa PLar
s I��yR-a -ps
5 F'C MIN,
UO'fN SIDES
M—A, rlh V
(2 Ff� •
Mlnl
tc
see p ter/
I. 3o Pf L
MIN.
W)XIMVM GoVeS2A6E: (o% of Al2EA WITH-10
ppt7p627y LINe5
2 G;
aoc � �o�- � ZE�•L.oT• I.)NE
15 FT. AA IN
C- Al2AC,E
5EE P ;,>>
S Iv�yhi�DS
OFT 0]7E 51TsoM01
�O F( MIFF GPP05lT6
Z
s
i�
MAXIIAW coVc- 9-A&e: 6o7a OF AReA wr-K(O PRop€12TY LINSs
V,
4,000 0 L.aTS - CENTS PWr
sln���tz -vs
t �iET M1N,.EptGH SIDE
15 fT) MiN
Z
1 �
I 4 �
C�AizAC�
SEE
40 f MIN•
lx\A 4MUM SITE CoV-55�6E: 60% OF AF-6,A WITHIN
Mope?" LIINES
2�'y.
5000 - 6000 0 "Ts t ZUPO-"T- WNE
-I- EAfzyM
15 er M'
GFtp -A6
SEA R
�ByAl2P :
0 FT ONe SIDE- 4�6(
10 FT M IN OP"-rE slr6
MAXIMUM sire CoVBRAec -- do% OF A1-EP, WITKIN
FF�OPqzTy UN .Fs
24 �
6000 - (0000 l" t Orsc • bErlr£�z PLor
SIpB�P�I2i�s � 5 FT MIN, EAoH SIVE
15 FT MIti
I � 2
0 5
Woo QS: 4,S pr MIN
bVoo_ toM
MAXIMUM SITE COVE-f =ham: 6ogo DF APe-A WITI+I>
rpopewy UN>`s
V,C�
7200 - col 000 bot5 - ceNTte FLoT
SIDe�k12P5 5Pr MIN, EAtH sips-
15 FT. MIN
;�-FcNTyAtp:
16r-G MIN:
VA12y �p12
�Yi�ETscAF�
INTe►�s7
f
0
MAXIMUM 55 %0K AF,EA WITMN
4ve;f�Ty t,INeS
�iA'f�l� 7FFi4N j0�000 LOTS
FEWYAIO-P
20 rr. MIN
�IONTytk?p
W,om I?hUc. a
Cups op wp LK
f4rS ir.��r�s:
5P' MWIFAC-F1sIPIE-
MApMLiM srre COVa✓pA&E-
5o% o(r APCE WITWO
PPoP+ -T� I.wties
vv
7yplcAt, 6Aiz &E SOTRAcr --S
4: °q
5 Pr MIN
OFT MAK
1=12om cvg,5 --,o( wAtv-
c-.7wAalc-
H7
mm
NO 4)ALir FEFgUIlRW
C�APhC-*- DOOM OPENL S "UIP -GW IN ASDOEE GA5$S
MAN
wR�K�
ate � � c -�rzAi
!81'r MIN
I N1Tarr;
SITE
plScovl7A� TRF S DfzA
Or A r0W0FIt.ES IN A MAANNM
-W R51Pe 7ft Rw6k- TWf7 f'Vt3ta
P-CA9WAr' 09- WAL -.
r,J
r
CLurrW. IHOUslx& Sero4C*s: oM�P�c
STANR^lZPs FOR- LM I M a,d M R
1�sic�-nM- I,AIJD uses ��'`
enrnv
•
plEslpeNlvd, w Commeru4Ati
w" ice av WAu. aK F L. 10 1'( MIN 161 T7P
WTR5uT FeNC& pv WAL4. avI P L-• 10 Pr MIN, 15, Tip
• OMN sPACV (etc VlL(OF -iA FV -WAy) ID rr. M)N-
• NV6vRF oA44wP STREET wntlour
1=AuNC- 6A PA&e A6c*s.T t0 fir MIN •
(See F25,12- G� sereAl --yS)
• LOCkL t�E51p�N11N- S7tZE�'CS 10 Pr MIN
• f PMPAI. POAPs
wiTM F�E1VGE ov WAU, oN P L-. 10 Pr MIP) 6 F'r. TYP.
wrrHOV'r OIL wAu oN P L-• 20 FT, MIN.
• W4DPb iA pAp.KWky : 66;E p• 144 - 1I►
2K'
C
'I�t�cf2�1MzP
— seT>3�cK
Iri Pr MIN .
lr rT mik).
Pfi RN -i-IO
FW6U- May 05Vr
PeofqVt2ry WrJs
Ir,CT MIN
qo pT MIN
25 p( MI N
to Pr MIN .
In P'r MIN
S PT MIN-
(OPT- MIN
15 Ft MIN
25 �T MItJ
s i9EYA"
5rr MM.
5FT MIN•
S1-T MIN.
5 F-r M I IJ To
PAUL or cUR-81WkI.K
to PT MIN
25rr MIN
?,r1
N
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (continued)
4. Medium Density Residential ( "M" Land Use Plan
designation):
Land designated as Medium Density Residential is
intended for residential development that ranges from 5
to 14 dwelling units per adjusted gross acre. The
following regulations are applicable for these areas:
a. Uses Permitted: detached or attached residential
dwellings not exceeding fourteen dwellings per
adjusted gross acre, including, but not limited to:
(1) Single family dwellings - attached or
detached, including, but not limited to
townhouses, triplexes, fourplexes and
condominiums
(2) Cluster housing
(3) Community facilities (see p. 259).
b. Site Development Standards:
(1) Building site area: 3 acres minimum
(2) Building site coverage, 508 maxiumum
(3) Building Setbacks: See building setback
diagrams, pp. 248 and 249 for typical
setbacks.
(4) Building Separation: 10 feet minimum
(5) Building Height: 40 feet, maximum
2 1�0
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (continued)
5. Medium Nigh Density Residential ( "MH" Land Use Plan
designation):
Land designated as Medium High Density Residential
housing is intended for residential development that
ranges from 14 to 24 dwellings per adjusted gross
acre. The following regulations are applicable for
these areas:
a. Uses Permitted:
(1) Multiple - family dwellings, including, but not
limited to, apartment projects, condominium
projects, and cooperative apartment projects.
(2) Accessory buildings, structures and uses where
related and incidential to a permitted use.
(3) Community Facilities (see p. 259).
b. Site Development Standards:
(1) Building site area: 3 acres, minimum
(2) Building Setbacks: see building setback
diagrams, pp. 248 and 249.
(3) Building separation:
(a) buildings 35 feet or less in height, 10
feet minimum
(b) buildings greater than 35 feet, 15 feet
minimum
(4) Building height: 40 feet maximum
r-!
l i
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (continued)
6. High Density Residential ( "H" Land Use Plan
designation):
Land designated as High Density Residential is intended
for residential development that ranges from 24 to 30
dwellings per adjusted gross acre. The following
regulations are applicable for these areas:
a. Uses Permitted:
(1) Multiple family dwellings, including, but not
limited to, apartment projects, condominium
projects and cooperative apartment projects.
(2) Accessory building structures and uses where
related and incidental to a permitted use.
(3) Community facilities (see p.259)
b. Site Development Standards:
(1) Building site area: 3 acres, minimum.
(2) Building site coverage: 60%
(3) Building setbacks, see setback diagrams, pages
247 to 249.
(4) Building separation:
(a) Buildings 35 feet in height or less:
10 feet minimum
(b) Buildings greater than 35 feet: 15 feet
minimum
(5) Building height: 50 feet, maximum
.257.
COMMERCIAL STANDARDS
1. General to land uses designated as Regional Center, Regional -
related Commercial and Village Commercial.
a. Site Development Standards:
(1) Building site coverage: No maximum subject to
Development Approval Process, Part III, Section
II -A
(2) Building site width: 100 foot minimum
(3) Building height:
(a) For Regional Center and Regional - Related land
uses, no maximum subject to Development
Approval Process as specified in Part III,
Section II -A.
(b) For Village Commercial land uses, 40 feet,
maximum
b. Uses not permmitted within the Planned Community:
Massage Parlors
"Adult" Movie Theaters
"Adult" Bookstores
25?
COMMERCIAL STANDARDS (continued)
2. Regional Center
a. The following general categories of uses shall be
permitted:
(1) Retail businesses, including, but not limited
to:
department stores
drug stores
jewelry stores
book stores
record stores
hi- fidelity equipment sales
clothing stores
musical instrument sales
shoe stores
candy stores
photography equipment sales
(2) Sevice businesses, including, but not limited
to:
watch and jewelry repair
beauty parlors
travel agencies
locksmiths
banks and financial institutions
movie theaters
(3) Administrative and professional offices
(4) Commercial recreation
(5) Institutional and governmental uses
(6) Restaurants
(7) Preschools and day -care centers
(8) Nurseries and garden supply stores, provided
that all equiipment, supplies, rentals and
merchandise other than plants, shall be kept
within a completely enclosed building and that
fertilizer of any type shall be sold and
stored in packaged form only.
(9) Public utility offices
?,54.
r
(10) Wholesale business offices with samples on the
premises, but not to include general storage
(11) Accessory structures and uses necessary or
customarily incidental to the above uses as
permitted by the Rancho Cucamonga Zoning
Ordinance.
C. Uses permitted subject to specific approval of
Conditional Use Permit
(1) Animal care facilities, not including kennels
(2) Parking lots and parking buildings
(3) Automobile service. stations and car washes
(4) Automobile sales and service
(5) Electric distrih,,ticn switch stations
(6) Communication equipment buildings
(7) Public utility booster stations
(8) Commercial recreation, Public Parks and
Playgrounds
(9) Accessory structures and uses necessary or
customarily incidental to the above uses as
specifically provided for by the use permit
and the zoning ordinance of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
25`'
COMMERCIAL STANDARDS (continued)
3. Regional Related Land Uses
a. The following general categories of uses shall be
permitted:
(1) Retail business, including but not limited to:
department stores
furniture
automobile sales
pet stores
motorcycle sales and service
building supplies
- hardware
grocery
clothing
meat market or delicatessen
(2) Service business, including but not limited
to:
automobile repair
blueprinting and photostating
cleaning and pressing business
laundries
locksmiths
mortuaries
mechanical auto wash
plumbing supply
movie theaters
photography
equipment rental
(3) Administrative and professional offices
(4) Restaurants
(5) Governmental uses
(6) Recreational
(7) Automobile service facilities
(8) Nurseries and garden supply stores, provided
that all equipment, supplies, rentals and
merchandise, other than plants, shall be kept
within a completely enclosed building and that
fertilizer of any type be stored and sold in
packaged form only
254,
(9) Public utility offices
(10) Hotels and motels
(11) Self- service laundry and self - service dry
cleaning facilities
(12) Accessory structures and uses necessary or
customarily incidental to the above uses as
permitted by the Rancho Cucamonga Zoning
Ordinance
C. Uses permitted subject to a Conditional Use Permit
(1) Animal care facilities
(2) Parks and playgrounds, public and private
(3) Public utility booster stations
(4) Parking lots and parking buildings
(5) Public utility exchange and substations
(6) Public buildings
(7) Accessory structures and uses necessary or
customarily incidental to the above uses as
specifically provided for by the use permit
�cj
(- C
COMMERCIAL STANDARDS (continued)
4. Village Commercial
a. The following general categories of uses shall be
permitted subject to Development Approval Process
as provided for by Part III, Section II -A.
(1) Retail businesses, including but not limited
to:
grocery stores
meat markets, delicatessens
produce markets
drug stores
dry goods stores
hardware sales
pet stores
clothing stores
florist shops
(2) Service businesses, including but not limited
to:
banks, financial institutions
barber shops, beauty parlors
locksmiths
laundry and dry cleaning establishments
self - service laundry and dry cleaning
(3) Administrative and professional offices
(4) Governmental offices
(5) Automobile service stations
(6) Restaurants
(7) Accessory structures and uses necessary or
customarily incidental to the above as
provided for in the Rancho Cucamonga Zoning
ordinance.
W6
+,. COMMUNITY FACILITIES
The Community Facilities section of the Victoria Community Plan
is established to provide for community support uses and those
additional uses which are found to be compatible with the basic
permitted uses by the Site Plan Review Process procedure.
1. Uses Permitted: The following uses shall be permitted
within Residential and Commercial Land Use Areas in
Victoria subject to Development Approval Process as
provided in Part III, Section II -A.
a. General open space uses
b. Schools, churches, and libraries
C. Public and private recreation facilities
d. Establishments for care of children
e. Fire stations and other public and quasi - public
facilities
F. Accessory structues and uses necessary or
customarily incidental to the above as provided for
in the Rancho Cucamonga Zoning Ordinance
2 r7
ROAD STANDARDS
This section contains specific criteria for the roads within
Victoria. The Standard Road Section Reference Plan shows
the entire planning area and the location of the various
kinds of roads. The Standard Road Cross- Sections follow and
they contain information such as the width of the right -of-
way, pavement width, number of travel lanes, and the
location of walks, bicycle lanes and medians. Each road has
been examined individually and the design of the cross -
section reflects not only the need for efficient automobile
circulation, but also the goals of the plan with respect to
land use and urban design. The designations used for the
various types of roads should not be confused with the
interim Land Use Plan of 1975. Also, all road sections are
schematic and do not show any grade conditions that may
exist where the roads are built.
kkrnd• Mena. 1
i
S �
aulinv Rand-
STANDARD ROAD CROSS - SECTIONS
REFERENCE PLAN
Mon REGIONAL CIRCULATION
Hujhla", M9410x; b" Ulm., Fxdta
Day Cmk &ukyani
co MILLER S VICTORIA LOOP
00000 ETIWANDA & VICTORIA STREET
•••••• 1.o 0(l. I SID lAcL
VICTORIA PARKWAY
rorc: •lealiLe ib�b
a /k�orhood SrdA
old iwiPo�c
am nb sha.
t�
E
r
L
r
r
L
i
Stnat
..MM
� r , Mn
57A�Nbht�P �� Gt20 SS -SG-ci (off
MII,I.IK1511JA4seliINe) PwTIf(LLI p4y ape: K
4o FT 114-' I 40 Pr I
mm
AV-;c SSE PeSIEaV C -RTC=-V-1,B, . PVtz C- #VPS4,ArPF
TpsA-rm 6PT
R&H LOAN a
MEDNN
14' I q
I, 64 FT. I,
'14 F7.
I 1,3
BTIWAJJDA AvC—.
77777-
MII.I.CzkVlCTOFHA LoOPP
7771+' 32Pr �_ R o w
A-L-5o sew L-#P o s4a, E t c{z -roz1A
VICrOWA Pokg*WAy
sec-
Yep1 � 6 Pr BlcycLe SRN e
Ep � Sipe
20 Pr ?o Pr I
69 IJO Igo P?
2p4.
two �,�L -ESIC ANT 1+°L- STP6157:
wtk `
WALK .
77=7
vEFIO tI OI24 oV si p-6trS Alm FUBUc OP- FR UA-TE
STt THAT MA :AVM A SP�Fe4AL- CP9s&- 5ECTION
PIrS)64 -) TD F- eSPoPP To A PARTIeULAio- woJD loP W THc-
}l,A�)PSb COAAMOPTY. TRr- Ft?"wIN6 WPWPL49 Aim
TyPIC.AL- Or TIC CROSS- secTIOPs TF+AfT MAy BE USEYj
IQ -j RV PLkppeD COMAIIUNIiy I SVS ,j; LT To Thar
Pev ESP MOT APPPOV%K- PRoCESs
GUizBSIDEI. ^t*1 ONE SIDE
VT1LITy �ASEMEfJT BOTIA SIDE
7 1-r
�.o.w
' wkUWi BUt HSItS
;!C
WACL*l OPE SIPS pAi2v-l)jbl o}JE SE
M\)A,T& P C- IC-AOop#ioop
wJN L*-
2b rT
NO PAI -IN6
W14LV. NO eAv4c�Io&
S4r-WIN& rOui2 PWELj -W6S OR- LESS
2b4-
KENNETH A. REYNOLDS, A.I.C.P.
9421 LEILANI DRIVE
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92646
17141 9624271
^. "
7'
: "icn3r4,;
r 0-
-,4 1
t c a c n
rt
i^ -,y ur 1 P, r ct n�- n - e, C thri R
F r 7
K'i It
cc: 'iry
7r,,-
1) Audible Noise and Electrical Effects
a) Construction
During the construction phase of the Transmission Line,
ambient noise levels will be exceeded for short periods of
time. Typical noise levels expected from construction equip-
ment range between 80 and 100 dBA at a distance of 50 feet
from the source. Noise in excess of the ambient noise level
will be held to a minimum. The short duration of this noise
is not expected to have any deleterious effect on the
environment.
b) Operation
1) Audible Noise
Audible noise emitting from transmission lines is
strongest during inclement weather such as heavy rain, fog
or snow. During fair weather, the conductors normally
operate below the corona - inception level and very few
corona sources are present, resulting in audible noise
being at or near ambient levels (30 -50 dBA). During
inclement weather, however, water droplets collect on the
conductors and produce a large number of corona discharges,
each causing a small burst of acoustical noise.
r
Transmission line audible noise has two characteristic
components; namely, (1) broadband or random noise, which has
a bacon - frying or hissing characteristic, and (2) pure -tone
components at frequencies of 120 hertz and multiples. The
pure -tones are superimposed over the broadband noise with
the most noticeable tone being the 120 -hertz "hum ". Different
1V -19
weather conditions will dictate the relative magnitude of
random noise compared to "hum ".
Audible noise levels can be expected to increase between
10 and 20 dHA during inclement weather.
Although audible noise levels increase substantially
during inclement weather, they are often times masked by
ambient noise sources. During heavy rain, the actual audible
noise level of the line is masked by higher ambient levels
caused by the wind and by raindrops hitting trees, roofs,
asphalt, etc. Audible noise levels during fog, drizzling
rain, or snow conditions are generally 6 d8A below heavy
rain levels, but may actually prove to be more noticeable
because of the low ambient levels existing under these wet -
conductor conditions. Fog requires a number of hours for the
audible noise levels to reach maximum and noise in snow varies
over a wide range and depends on the snow conditions and
intensity.
Sound pressure levels vary inversely with the square
root of the distance from the conductors. Audible noise
has been found to decrease at the rate of 3 to 4 d0A for
each doubling of lateral distance from the outside phase
conductors after 50 feet. However, the attenuation of sound
in air also depends on the relative humidity and frequency.
Typical noise levels predicted for the 500 kV lines
to be constructed can be summarized as follows:
IV -20
Lateral Distance Noise Levels (dB(A))
from Outer Conductor
(feet) Fair Weather Rain Fog
0 (outer conductor) 43 60 52
I
68 (edge of R/W) 41 58 50
i
100 39 57 49
200 37 55 47
300 36 52 44
Ambient Noise 36 So 42
During operation, the proposed Transmission Line
will not normally generate noise exceeding the ambient
levels at the property line. The project is remote from
residential areas and noise levels at this property line
-- will not affect the human environment.
2) Electrical Effects
A characteristic of an energized conductor is an electric
field formed in the air surrounding the conductor. When
the intensity of this electric field exceeds the dielectric
breakdown strength of air, approximately 15 kV /cm RMS, the
air is ionized and a high - voltage phenomenon known as corona
discharge forms at the conductor surface. A number of con-
ditions control the breakdown strength of air. Some of these
are air pressure, electrode material, presence of water vapor,
incident photoionization, and type of voltage. Conductor sur-
face conditions, the number of conductors and spacing per phase,
the shape of hardware and other factors control the localized
IV -21
intensities of the electric field. on the conductor surface,
an irregularity such as a contaminating particle or water
droplet will become the point source for a discharge. Corona
discharges on high - voltage transmission lines are the main
cause of electrical effects. These effects consist of audible
noise, radio and television interference, and ozone production
and are discussed below.
A) Radio Interference
Radio interference is defined as any unwanted disturbance
within the radio frequency band, such as undesired electric
waves in any transmission channel or device. Corona discharges,
as previously discussed, are the primary cause of radio
interference.
Most radio interference that is generated by transmission
lines is random, broadband noise and occurs in the AM broadcast
band ranging from 535 to 1605 kilohertz. It is not a problem
in the FM broadcast band (88 -103 megahertz). Transmission
line radio interference depends on such factors as the dis-
tance from the line to the receiver, the orientation of the
receiving antenna, and the line geometry.
The recsived signal strength plays an important role
in determining if there is a radio interference problem. It
is best to use a relative measure called the "signal -to -noise
ratio" to race interference levels. The signal -to -noise ratio
is defined as the ratio of the broadcast station level, S, to
the radio noise level, N, both of which are variable.
IV -22
The 500 kV lines constructed on Edison's electric
transmission system are designed to meet Federal Communication
Commission Class B or better reception at a point 50 feet
from the edge of the right of way, for the majority of those
AM radio stations that presently have Class B reception.
Although radio interference may be present due to the
line, (for weak stations,) it would be limited to an area
within 300 feet from the edge of the right of way.
Class B reception is defined as "very good, background
unobtrusive" and corresponds to a minimum signal -to -noise
ratio of 24 dB.
B) Television Interference
The third consequence of corona discharges, referred
to previously, is television interference. However, most
television interference is generally caused by gap -type noise
due to faulty insulators or sharp edges on metallic fittings.
Corona caused by snow or heavy rain may cause some
television interference in the VHF low band (Channels 2 -6
in areas of weak signal strength or unfavorable antenna
location. Interference typically decreases with increasing
frequency and, therefore, instances of television interference
in the VHF high band (Channels 7 -13) and the UHF band (Channels
14 -83) have been rare.
It is anticipated that the proposed 500 kV transmission
lines to be constructed on the Edison transmission system
will not cause interference with television reception.
IV -23
J) Safety
1) Construction Activities
The proposed transmission line will be constructed in
accordance with CPUC General Order 95 - "Rules for Overhead
Electric Line Construction." OSHA safety standards will be
followed during construction activities.
2) Electric Fields
The effects of an electric field upon man are uncertain.
A Russian study indicated that workers in 500 to 750 kilovolt
(kV) switchyards were subjected to headaches and general
malaise due to the electric field. In contrast, a John Hopkins
ten -year study showed the electric field to have no medical
effect.
A hazard of electrocution would exist only if weather 410)
or an accident caused a line to break and fall to the ground,
or if a person or animal came in contact with a live wire or
with a conducting object in contact with that wire. However,
if a 500 kV conductor is parted, power to that line will be
discontinued within five cycles, or approximately 1/12 second
after the conductor contacts an adjacent phase, groundwire,
earth, or some ground potential.
IV -24
o it
v MEMORANDUM
1977
May 1, 1981
TO: CITY MANAGER AND MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER4-
SUBJECT: COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS WITH MOBILE HOME
PARK OWNERS /TENANTS
The Committee of Councilmen Mikels and Bridge met with repre-
sentatives of the tenants and owners this week to discuss the
petition for a rent stabilization board. The following are
highlights of comments and concerns expressed by the tenants
and owners:
Tenants Meeting - April 27, 1981
1. Tenants submitted documentation stating that rents have
increased substantially in the last five years. (see
attached).
2. Stephen white, representing the tenants, expressed a con-
cern that coach owners were always treated as tenants in
negotiations with the park owners. Mr. White strongly
recommended that tenants be given "legislative recognition"
as owners if an ordinance is drafted. The attorney feels
that recognition of the "tenants" as coach owners would
strengthen their bargaining position with the Park owners.
3. The tenants expressed a concern that rents have been
arbitrarily and excessively increased without any proper
justification.
4. The tenants stated that they were not looking for a "hand
out" or "welfare" but recognized that the City Council was
their only source of relief from what they consider to be
unjustified rent increases. Mr. White suggested that the
City Council put a ceiling on rent increases and require
owners to document increases that are necessary to receive
a reasonable return on their investment.
Continued.....
A
Rent Review- -
Council Committee _2_
May 1, 1981
The tenants and their attorney are requesting a review of
rent increases both past and present, and suggested a mora-
torium on rents for one year to "catch up ".
Some tenants expressed a fear of explusion from parks because
of the age of their coach. Apparently there are some parks
that require removal of coaches that have reached a specific
age.
The tenants and their attorney suggested that the City council
consider all alternatives available to the City to provide
relief to the Mobile Home tenants (coach owners), but nothing
short of a rent stabilization board.
Park Owners Meeting -- Aoril 29 1981
1. The Park owners, represented by Jim Kosik of the Western
Mobile Home Association, stated that both the proposed and
past rent increases were justifiable to receive a fair market
return on their investment. Park owners stated that proposed
rent increases were between 10 and 126 and well within the.
C.P.I. The park owners wanted to know what evidence the
City had that the rents were arbitrary and excessive.
Z. Park owners claimed that in the majority of cases, the tenants
ability to pay was not a serious problem. Tenants that needed
help would be eligible for Section 8 housing assistance through
the County. Chapparal Heights claimed that in 85 of the spaces
surveyed, one or more of the tenants were still working and
not on fixed incomes.
Jim Kosik stated that rent control was shortsighted and did
not resolve the tenants situation but historically has been
a contributing factor to the declining rental market. In
essence, rent control has aggravated the problem it set out to
resolve.
Q. Jim Kosik and the owners recognized that there were individual
cases where tenants have been impacted by justifiable rent
increases, but suggested that these problems be resolved on an
individual basis rather than by rent control.
5. As an alternative to a mandatory /binding Rent Control ordinance,
i.e., the Rialto Ordinance, the owners have suggested that the
Continued......
Rent Review --
Council Committee -3- May 1, 1481
City Council consider adopting a similar ordinance (see
attached) to the one now in force in E1 Dorado County.
Essentially the E1 Dorado ordinance encourages owners
and tenants to resolve their differences among them-
selves or set up individual committees within each park.
As an alternative to the tenants and owners proposal (Rialto
ordinance vs E1 Dorado ordinance), the City Council may want
to consider creating a Rent Review Committee supervised and
coordinated by the West End Mediation Board. A similar agree-
ment has just been made between the City of Chino and the
West End Mediation Board which establishes a Chino Mediation
Board selected by the City Council but coordinated by the
West End Mediation Board. A copy of the agreement has been
attached for your review.
JR /vz
Enclosures
aH� oP O;b
CI 1 Y of C'j IINO �.•nb,.a��
California
1 IL2D CENTRAL A %rNJE/ P O 90% 467 / CH IND C,.1 _IF ON NIA 91710
April 22, 1981
Shirley Huston, Chairman
Board of Directors
West End Mediation Board
271 South Lemon
Ontario CA 91761
LETTER OF AGREEMENT
Office of the
CITY MANAGER
1O.PI DE.,AP..
ARIA CODE 17111 627.7577
This letter will serve as an agreement between the City of Chino
and the West End Mediation Board. The City of Chino has estab-
lished a Mobilehome Park Rent Mediation Board whose purpose is
to mediate disputes between owners and tenants concerning rent
increases in mobilehome parks within the City of Chino. The West
End Mediation Board is a private, nonprofit organization serving
the West End cities including the City of Chino. The primary goal
of the West End Mediation Board is to help citizens resolve their
disputes themselves.
The City of Chino agrees to:
1. Pay to the West End Mediation Board the sum of $225 for each
mediation conducted at the request of the City. Each mediation
may require one or more sessions.
The West End Mediation Board agress to:
1. Provide training to the Chino Mobilehome Park Rent Mediation
Board members.
2. Designate one or more members of the West End Mediation Board to
coordinate, supervise, and participate as necessary in all pro -
ccedi.ngs of the Chino Mobilehome Park Rent Mediation Board upon
request of the City of Chino.
3. Assure that mediation is conducted in accordance with standards
of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service as well as
applicable ordinances of the City of Chino.
4. Provide for the rendering to the City of written minutes con-
cerning activities, actions, results of hearings, and all other
matters pertinent to the Chino Mobilehome Park Rent Mediation
Or;inances.
West End Mediation Board
Letter of Agreement
April 22, 1981
Page 2
5. Provide for a summary of the facts concerning a rent increase
in the event that owners and tenants cannot mutually agree upon
an eouitable rent. Such summary shall include any views or
opinions that the Chino Mobilehome Park Rent Mediation Board may
have concerning the proposed increase. However, an opinion of
whether the proposed rent increase appears justified and equitable
will not be required from the West Ena Mediation Board.
6. Conduct mediation sessions within the Chino City limits at a
location designated by the City of Chino.
This agreement will be effective until cancelled upon written notice
by one of the parties.
for CITY OF CHINO
for West End Mediation Board
Dated: Dated:
RENTAL INCREASES FOR THE PERIOD JAN 1, 1977 THROUGH JR.N. 1, 1981
DATE: ALTA'LAGU`.ID ALTA VISTA CFAPPAREL PINES RA;f,O':A
HEIGHTS VIHA
JAN 1, 1977% $99.00 $109.00 *90100 $95.00 $100.00
JAN.1, 1978 139.00 109.00 109.00 135.00 120.00
JAN 1, 1979 164.00 138.00 130.00 140.00 140.00
JAN 1, 1980 180.00 153.00 150.00 157.00 165.00 _
JAN 1, 1981 198.00 173.00 165.00 179.00 185.00
PEP,CEN^tAGE
JF IlICREACE
)VER Thn FOUR,
YYAR PERIOD
'ROM 1/1/77
�o 1/1/81...... 100d 59% 835 88% 85%
VERAGS INCF,EA F FOR ALL FIVE PARTS....... 835 OR APPROX. 21° PER YEAR.
SPECT_AL NOT:'',: M OYIiTER OF ALTA LAGUNA 6iOIILE PARK HAS ALREADY
IMIC.ITED 17, ' ;;ILL RAISE RENTS APPROX. 14d HY TF-v
E. D OF TIE YEAR 1981.
c. /c, +y C8.� L_
CO',`.PARITIVE INCOMER AND EXPENSE REPORT FOR YEARS 1978 AbID 1979
ALTA LACUNA MOBILE PARR — ALTA LO7iA
ITE7LS: 1978 1979 INCREASE DECREASE I
TAX — REAL PROPERTY 29,303 14,212 15,091
TRASH PICK —UP
6,696 9,288
2,592
SE7fER SERVICE
7,200 8,100
900
UTILITIES
u NO CHANGE
-0— —0—
SALARIES A ?.D OTIHE l
OVERP=1 EXPENSES(NO CHANGE)
—0— —0—
SPACE RENTAL INCOME
490,392 578,592
88,200
TOTALS . ............................... $3492 $103,291
DECREASE $103,291
INCREASE 3,492
$ 99,99 ADDfL INCOME TO OPM
# UTILITIES ACTUALLY COST LESS IN 1979 TBEN PAID BY O','rm IN 1978
DUE TO PROP. 13 ROWEVER ACCURATE FIGURES COULD NOT BE OBTAINED. '
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OF EL DORADO ESTABLISHING SUGGESTED
GUIDELINES FOR MOBILE HOME PARK REVIEW COIN51ITTEES.
IMERFAS, the value of mobile home parks within the County of
E1 Dorado have been increasing rapidly over the past several years;
and
WHERFAS, these increasing values in combination with increasing
cost of operating mobile home parks and making capital improvements,
therein have resulted in increases in the costs of mobile home
parks; and
WIIFREAS, there is a strong market demand for occupancy in
mobile home parks; and
WHEREAS, rents for spaces within mobile home parks are
increasing; and
WHERE AS, the County Board of Supervisors recognizes the right
of mobile home park residents to be charged rents which are based on
a consideration of all pertinent economic factors while at the same,
time recognizing the right of mobile home park owners to charge
rents which do reflect a consideration of all such pertinent factors.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the County Board of Supervisors
Of the County of E1 Dorado that both residents and owners of mobile
home parks are hereby urged to study the hereinafter guidelines for
the establishment of committees within mobile home parks for the
Purpose of attempting to resolve problems of any nature between
residents and owners.
BIi IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following suggested guidelines
are hereby offered for the establishment of committees within mobile
home parks: '
1. If residents and owners in a particular mobile home park
have heretofore established methods of peacefully resolving problems,
then such methods should continue to be used.
2. If such problem resolving methods do not yet exist in a
particular mobile home park, the residents and owners may consider
establishing a committee composed of five members for such purpose.
3. Two of the five members of the committee should be residents
of the Particular mobile home park who are appointed by the other
residents of the park, and the other two members should be appointed
by the owners of the particular mobile home park. The fifth member
should be appointed by the unanimous vote of the other four members.
Among the four members selected, there should be persons with
background and experience which will permit them to analyze and
evaluate the mobile home park's rental background. The fifth member
may have some financial or accounting background. Suggested term
of appointment may be for four years. A chairman of the committee
should be selected by the majority vote of the members of the
committee.
h. It is suggested that upon the request of fifty percent
plus one of the residents of the mobile home park or upon the
request of the mobile home park owner, the chairman of the committee
convene the committee within fifteen days to hear and attempt to
resolve the problem which the committee has been requested to
consider.
S. All parties should be afforded the opportunity to have an
attorney or other person of their choice present evidence on their
behalf.
G. A maximum period of time should be specified for the decision
to be rendered by the committee after the close of the committee's
meeting, provided that this maximum time period should not exceed
thirty days unless, by majority vote of the committee, additional
time is established for reaching this decision.
ADOPTED this day of , 1981.
Chairman, E1 Dora o County
Board of Supervisors — -
ATTEST:
County e— o t .e runty o
E1 Dorado
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and
regularly adopted by the County Board of Supervisors of the County
of 171 Dorndo at a regular meeting thereof held on the day
of , 1981.
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOBS: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT; COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ounty cr o R t e ounty o
E1 Dorado
SPECIAL COUNSEL AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of
by and between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, —CT (TO.N , a pub, c corpora[ on
(hereinafter referred to as "Agency "), and F. MACKE;ZIE GROWN [GRUN & NAZAFEK,
Attorneys at Law), (hereinafter referred to as "Cou•rsel ").
NON, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREEO by and between the parties hereto as
follows:
SECTION 1. That Counsel shall perform legal services in connection with the
proposed assess•nent proceedings and band issuance in the natter
of a proposed special assessment district known and designated as
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 79 -1
(hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District ") under pro-
ceedings conducted pursuant to the provisions of the "Municipal
Improvement Act of 1913 ", being Division 12 of the Streets and
Highways Code of the State of California.
Said services shall include
A. Review of the dedication and acquisition of the streets
and easements or other property in which proposed work
is to be located;
G. Examination of the plans and specifications for the pro-
posed work, the boundary map and assessment diagra9 of
the Assessment District, the assessment roll end diagram,
bonds, and the givinq of instructions and advice in con-
nection pith the foregoing;
C. Recoorendations as to procedure, schedules and actions
that should be conducted and taken;
D. preparation of all resolutions, notices, contracts, bond
forms, and other papers and documents required in the
proceedings;
E. E, amination of the proceedings, step by step, as taken;
F. Appear at all hearings under the proceedings, and attend
any meeting where attendance is requested;
G. Issuance of an unqualified legal opinion attesting to the
validity of the proceedings and the issuance of the bonds.
Such legal services shall not include any services in connection
with the acquisition, by easement or condemnation, of any ease -
ments er other intprpst in r ^.al property necessary for the pro -
pased improve ^CntS.
These , ices can he provided by counsel, by separate agreement,
if desired by A.;wv.y.
SECTION 2. That the Agency shall perforr as fo L'c ws:
A. Furnish to Counsel such naps, records, title searches,
and other documents and proceedings, or certified copies
there,,', as may be reasonably required by Counsel in the
performance of the services hereu,'.ir;
S. Pay to Counsel a fee computed as follows:
ONE PERCENT (15) of the f1YsTS2,09%000.00 of the
actual cost of construct inn, and ONE -HALF PE3CEM1'i
(0.5N) of the balance thereof, evc lusive of all
incidental costs and expenses;
C. Payment of the above- referenced tee shall N as fellows:
All due and payable upon receipt of money
from the sale of bonds, immediately upon
delivery of said bonds to successful
underwriter.
SECTION 3. In the event the proceedings are terminated or abandoned or
this Agreement is terminated before completion thereof, Coansel
Shall he paid a reasonable fee fro. services rendered to date
based on an hourly rate of S90.00 per hour, not to exceed
S20,000.00
SECTION a. That the above legal fees are legally chargeable as w inci-
dental expense to the proceedings and are not a direct obliga-
tion of the Agency.
S CTION 5. That this Agreement .nay be terminated by either party hereto
by nailing written notice thereof to the other party.
IN WITNESS prEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed on the day and year first hereinabove written.
"AGENCY"
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
By:
MAYOR
T OF RANCHO COCA �ON'uA
STATE E OF CALIFORNIA
ATTEST:
iTT'7 PK
CITY OF RANCHO COCAMONGA
STATE. OF CALIFOR9IA
"COUNSEL'����
MO'a & NA7.AREX
I
9y ,. MA K . 520'..I —L
-2-
TO ALL PARK RESIDENTS:
Rent Review Information:
Since we have submitted our petitions to the City Council, we have
been on the agenda two times for public hearings, where spokespersons
for both the Park Owners and Park Residents Nave voiced their sides
of the Rent Review Issue. At the last Council meeting, a committee
consisting of two councilmen (Bridge & Mi }:el ), was appointed to
further investigate the claims of both parties, and to present their
findings and possible solutions for settlement of the problem. This
will be done at the May 6th City Council meeting, when we are again
on the agenda. It appears from past discussion at the Council meet-
ings, that the Council would like to settle for less than Rent
Stabilization, such as a Committee to review rent increases, or
ground rules for owners and residents to meet aad try and resolve
their differences.
Your Rent Review Committee, consisting of representation from the
five parka who have petitioned the council, fuels quite strongly that
we do not want to settle for anything less than Rent Stabilization,
if at all possible, Not only Rent Stabilizatic.i for the future, but
also a look at past rent increases to see if they were justifiable.
We would like to show the Council, on May 6th, that we are sincere,
deadly earnest and united in our efforts. A ladge turn -out for the
meeting is essential to assist us to get our point across that we
mean business. We urge you all to attend...., come early and get a
good seat..... Wednesday, May 6th, 7:00 PM ..... Lions Park Community
Center at 9161 Baseline Road,....
SEE YOU THERE,
YOUR RENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
-U eA'-
,-,:�Cz co,
10
6
CITY OF RA \CI -10 Ch'CV%IO \GA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 6, 1981 L
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Supplement Information to Consent Calendar Item
Contract Change Order No. 1 Carnelian Street Storm
Drain
Attached is a proposal for $20,878. 65 ($415.00 per foot) from K.E.C.
to complete the 50.31 foot addition as stated in the Staff Report,
the Engineer's Estimate was $20,000.00. This took into considera-
tion the 1/3 larger structure the 258 increase in excavation and
the additional forms required.
Staff feels that this is an acceptable proposal and if approved,
would allow the project to continue with minimal delay.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Council approve the attached proposal in con-
junction with approval of Contract Change Order No. 1 Carnelian
Street Storm Drain Improvement Project.
Respectfully submitted,
LLOYD B. HUBBS, CITY ENGINEER
BY: Monte Prescher
Public Works Engineer
LBH:MP: jaa
Attachment
$nlr Un N.
April 30, 1981
feral contractors
CORONA. CALIFORNIA 91920
City of Rancho Cucamonga „,y
P. O. Box 807 dP�N
Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91730 1 b
d
ATTENTION: Mr. George Friedenbach
Public Works Inspector
SUBJECT: Carnelian Street Storm Drain
Reinforced Concrete Box Extension
Gentlemen:
Reference is made to your letter dated April 21, 1981 wherein
you requested a quotation for extending the box storm drain
50.31 feet downstream to join the proposed Corps, of Engineers
Demons Creek project. We estimate the cost of constructing
this 50,31 feet of box to be $415.00 per foot which is consider-
ably higher than the unit price of $250.00 per foot for the
8 foot wide by 6 foot high box on our original contract.
The reasons for the higher unit price per foot are as follows:
1. The added box is 2 feet higher.
2. The depth of excavation is approximately 15 feet
as compared to 12 feet for the original box.
3. Form costs for the 8 foot by 6 foot box can be amortized
over 15 pours as opposed to 1 pour for the 8 foot
by 8 foot box.
4. The 8 foot by 8 foot box is to be constructed on
a sharp radius adding difficulty to the forming.
If you have any further questions regarding this quotation
please, feel free to call me.
Very truly yours,
K.E.C. COMPANY
4
Donald D. Haase
Project Engineer
DDH: ITT
P.O. NO% "I I M NORTH INENMAN AVINUI • Olq 1040010 (CON.) 011) U"11 IO.C.) 17111 7740110 O.A.)
May 6, 1981
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Regular Meeting
1. CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held
in the Lion's Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, on Wednesday, May 6,
1981. The meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Mayor Phillip D. Schlosser,
who led in the flag salute.
Present: Councilmen James C. Frost, Jon D. Mikels, Arthur H. Bridge, and Mayor
Phillip D. Schlosser.
Also present: City Manager, Lauren M. Wasserman; City Attorney, Samuel Grove;
Assistant City Manager, Jim Robinson; City Planner, Barry Hogan; City Engineer,
Llovd Hobbs; Finance Director, Harry Empey; and Community Services Director, Bill
Holley.
Absent: Councilman Michael A. Palombo.
Approval of Minutes: Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Frost to approve the
minutesof March 30, April 1, April 6, and April 23, 1981. Motion carried unanimously
4 -0 -1.
2. ANNOUNCEMENTS.
a. Mayor Schlosser announced that there was a vacancy on the Historical Commission
and if anyone wished to serve, to please contact one of the councilmen or the city
staff.
b. Mayor Schlosser made a Proclamation declaring the month of May as "Older
Americans Month."
(Councilman Palumbo arrived at 7:07 p.m.).
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Mikels questioned an item on the Warrants regarding the payment to
Empire Companv for the city's liability insurance. He said he did not question
the payment, but had questions regarding our insurance coverage. Mr. Wasserman
said that he would have the Finance Director send the Council a memo answering
his specific questions.
Mr. Wasserman said that staff was requesting that item "G" be removed from the
Consent Calendar.
A. Approval of Warrants, Register No. 81 -5 -6 for $155,101.14.
B. Acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for
8850 Center Avenue.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -54
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL
PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT
FROM REUBEN HERNANDEZ.
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1981
Page 2
C. Acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for
8406 Orchard Street.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -55
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL
PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT
FROM ROLAND L. TAYLOR AND CAROLYN A. TAYLOR, HUS-
BAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS, AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME.
D. Acceptance of Agreement, Security and Real Property Improvement Contract
and Lien Agreement for Director Review 81 -10; located on Arrow Highway and
Rochester Avenue submitted by Schlosser Forge Company, Inc.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -56
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVE-
MENT AGREEMENT, SECURITY, AND REAL PROPERTY
IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT.
E. Acceptance of Improvement Agreement and Security for Director Review 80 -39;
located on the southeast corner of Jersey Boulevard and Utica Street. Sub-
mitted by Roberts Manufacturing Company.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -57
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVE-
MENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR
DIRECTOR REVIEW NUMBER 80 -39.
F. Acceptance of Improvement Agreement and Security for Installation of Arrow
Route Storm Drain by Daon Corp; located on the northside of Arrow Route bet-
ween Haven and Milliken Avenues, Submitted by Dann Corporation.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -58
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVE-
MENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR
INSTALLATION OF ARROW ROUTE STORM DRAIN.
6---A<eepeenee-e€-Peree}- Nap- 6544r- A6reemenear- end- Seenr}!yp- }eeeeed -ee- the- nereh-
wes!- Berner- a €- Neven- Avenue- end - 6th -6l rte l +-- 6nbMeted- by- 6e #en- Snterpr #see.
R66A6N£ {fiN- N6 : -8 } -5q Item removed from Consent
Calendar.
A- RE6AbA£} eN- AF- FH6- 6 {�- 66WN6 {{,- fiF- iN6- 6 {{Y -6F
MN6HA- 6A6ANBN6Ar -6A6 {FARPI {Af- APPR6V {N6- PAA666
NAP-NA.-6544r-{NPR6i6MSM{-A6AS6M6N{r- ANA- {NAAAVS-
N6NP- 666NR }FYr
H. Acceptance of Church Street and Highland Avenue Street Improvement Project.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -60
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE
CHURCH STREET AND HIGHLAND AVENUE STREET IMPROVE-
MENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF
COMPLETION,
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1981
Page 3
I. Agreement with Caltrans for Improvements to the Railroad Crossing on Vine-
yard Avenue. Purpose to provide for federal aid in the funding of improve-
ments to the railroad crossing on Vineyard Avenue north of 8th Street.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -61
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF LOCAL AGENCY -STATE AGREEMENT NO.
08 -5420 PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 4.
J. Approval of Contract Change Order No. 1 - Carnelian Street Storm Drain Improve-
ment Project.
K. Cooperative Agreement with the County Transportation Department for Maintenance
of Streets. Purpose to maintain certain high maintenance border streets during
storm conditions, normally maintained by both agencies, to minimize overlapping
maintenance efforts.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -62
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO FOR STREET MAINTENANCE.
L. Release of Bonds and Notices of Completion.
a. Minor Subdivision 78 -0046: located on Helms Avenue south of 9th Street.
Owner: Albert W. Davies.
Performance Bond (road) $ 11,000
b. Tract 9444: located on the east side of Amethyst at Banyan. Owner:
Fox Hollow III (Nubank International).
Performance Bond (road) $ 76,000
c. Tract 9329: located west of Haven Avenue, south of Hidden Farms Road.
Owner: Kenneth Kerner and Assoc.
Performance Bond (road) $158,000
d. Approval of Resolution authorizing the filing of Notices of Completion
for M.S. 78 -0046, Tract 9444, and Tract 9329.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -63
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE ROAD
IMPROVEMENTS FOR M.S. 78 -0046, TRACT 9444, TRACT
9329, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF
COMPLETION FOR THE WORK.
e. Parcel Map 4804: located on the south side of 9th Street at Lion. Owner:
Ninth Street Industrial Park.
Monument Bond
$ 2,500
f. Tract 9403: located east of Mayberry and north of Highland Avenue. Owner:
Olympus Pacific Corp.
Performance Bond (landscaping) $ 7,563
City Council. Minutes
May 6, 1981
Page 4
g. Minor Subdivision 77- 0665C: located on the north side of Foothill,
west of Lion. Owner: Lewis Development Company.
Performance Bond (block wall) $ 21,000
h. Tract 9446: located on the south side of 9th Street west of Baker
north of A.T.S.F. Railroad. Owner: Kingsway Construction Co.
Labor & Material Bond (road) $108,000
Labor & Material Bond (water) 41,000
Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 30,000
i. Tract 9454: located west side of Haven, north of Southern Pacific
Railroad. Owner: Lewis Homes.
Labor S Material Bond (road) $ 74,000
Labor & Material Bond (water) 17,400
Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 20,400
j. Tract 9521: located on Archibald Avenue, north of Hillside. Owner:
Lewis Homes.
Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 75,000
k. Tract 9582 -2: located on the north side of Wilson at Beechwood Drive.
Owner: Deer Creek Company.
Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 69,000
1. Tract 9420: located on the northeast corner of Banyan and Hellman.
Owner: Nubank International, Inc.
Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 32,000
M. Tract 9380: located on the south side of Manzanita, west of Beryl.
Owner: Kenneth C, Elmore.
Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 15,000
n. Tract 9479: located north of Church Street, east of Turner. Owner:
Kaufman and Broad.
Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 86,400
M. Tract 9302: located 9638 7th Street. Owner: Vanguard Company. Release of
Temporary Occupancy Permit (T.O.P.) Bonds:
Subdivision sign bonds on Lots 28 and 32.
Amounts: $150 and $1000 respectfully.
N. Funding for New Special Accounts. Recommend that:
$205,000 be transferred to the Capital Reserve Fund;
$ 15,250 be transferred to the Insurance Fund; and
$ 86,162 be transferred to the Central Service Fund.
(Funds were established by Resolutions on June 12, 1980, but
were not funded in the process.)
0. Authorization for Director of Community Services to attend the California
Park and Recreation Society /National Recreation and Park Association
Legislative Conference on May 14 and 15.
P. Set May 20, 1981 for public hearing for Environmental Assessment and Planned
Development No. 80 -14 (TR 11781) - The Roberts Group: A total residential
development of 76 condominiums on 6.4 acres in the proposed R- 3 -P.D. zone,
located on the west side of Hermosa about 330 feet north of 19th Street - APN
202 - 171 -20 and 38.
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1981
Page 5
Q. Set Thursday, Mav 7, 1981 for budget meetirg. It is recommended that
the City Council meet for an additional budget meeting to continue dis-
cussion regarding the city budget and financial outlook for the coming
fiscal year.
Motion: Moved by Palombo, seconded by Frost to approve the Consent Calendar with
the exception of item "G ". Motion carried unanimouslv 5 -0.
Mayor Schlosser reminded Council that the Consent Calendar included the setting
of Thursday, Mav 7 for a budget meeting. Councilman Mikels stated that he would
be unable to attend the budget meeting since he would be attending a SCAG
Executive meeting at that time.
4. SEPCIAL ITEM: MOBILE HOME RENT REVIEW BOARD CONSIDERATION. Item had been
continued from the April 1, 1981 City Council meeting.
Mavor Schlosser opened the meeting by stating that rent control was a national
problem and thct even in today's Los Angeles Times there was an article stating
that Los Angeles was trying to phase out the rent control because it simply did
not work. He said that in the long run rent control would be harmful to the city.
There were no plans for mobile home parks or apartment in the city. Rent Control
measures would hinder this type of development.
Mayor Schlosser then called on Councilman Mikels to give a report on the findings
from the meetings both he and Councilman Bridge had with park owners and park
tenant representatives.
Councilman Mikels said the following findings had been made from these meetings
1. Mobile home parks have a larger than normal precept of senior citizens
on fixed income.
2. Space rate increases create real harships in some cases.
3. Space rates are fairly competitive in Rancho Cucamonga with surrounding
areas.
4. The real problem is national in scope. Personal retirement planning,
the social security system, and private pension plans have to be
examined.
5. There are certain legal requirements which must be met before an ordinance
imposing any kind of control on rents is enacted.
6. The law guarantees a reasonable rate of return to the park owner's
investment based on the current market value of the investment.
7. There are certain unintended economic consequences of rent control:
a. A fact that a mobilehome within a well maintained park increases
in resale value while a mobilehome decreases in value when the
environment of the park deteriorates.
b. There is a reluctance on the part of developers to provide additional
mobilehome parks.
8. In terms of the relationship of coach owners and park owners for
negotiations and discussions, the tenants would like to be recognized
when it comes to a rent increase.
9. Our ordinance cannot supersede State Law.
10. From the park owners in attendance at the meetings, it was indicated
there were proposals of future rate increases from zero percent to
10 -12 percent.
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1981
Page 6
Councilman Mikels stated that if Council wished to direct staff to draft an
ordinance for consideration that it include the following:
1. A mandatory meet and confer provision with appropriate penalties if
park owners and /or tenants did not meet in good faith in an attempt
to resolve differences.
2. Some kind of a triggering mechanism for the activation of the ordinance
if a rate increase exceeds a certain amount. Various alternatives
could be proposed:
a. A flat percent increase
b. Increase related to some economic index indicator such as the CPI
Perhaps 51% of the tenants could petition requesting a meet and confer
session.
3. Include some kind of appeal process.
4. Include a sunset provision.
Councilman Bridge stated that there should be a substantial infraction requirement
in the event that park owners refused to meet. He said he was very concerned about
the lack of development of mobilehome parks and apartments in the community. He
was reluctant to impose any hardships on such development. He felt Council had to
come up with a better solution than rent control.
Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public comment.
* Samuel Rodda, the Pines Mobile Home Park, said the council had been using
the term 'rent control ", but the petitions of the people only wanted a
'rent stabilization and review board."
`favor Schlosser stated that what Council was trying to do was to create an
ordinance which would require a mandatory meet and confer session with the
park owners and tenants.
* Jack Williams, 9800 Rase Line, expressed that the rate of financing was
more of a hindrance in development of mobilehome parks and apartments than
rent control.
* Jim Kosik, Western Mobile Home Association. He pointed out that in Section
798.15 of the Civil Code, there was a mandatory meet and confer requirement.
He said that the Los Angeles County Ordinance functions very similar to what
is being proposed this evening. He said that Vacerville, Clovis, and Rialto
all have similar ordinances and yet there are no new parks being built in
these areas. He said that no matter what it is called when you set a per-
centage limit to rent increase with appeal to a third part, it is rent control.
Councilman Bridge responded by saying that they had read all these documents, and
he felt they said nothing. He said that what Councilman Mikels and he were suggesting
was something which would help with the communications problem which is the basic
problem in this situation.
Councilman Palombo suggested that Council direct staff to proceed with the develop-
ment of the ordianance or resolution, wfiichever is appropriate, and to come back
the second meeting in June.
* Harry Pate, tenant representative of Alta Laguna, said this is forcing the
owners and tenants to get together. However, he felt that he needed to see
the owners books in order to know if his suggested increase was warranted.
He felt the increase should be justified and that some type of mandatory
requirement should be included to open his books.
* Salvatore Liacci, Alta Laguna, Space 56.
* Mr. Sar;,son, Alta Laguna, asked what was considered to be a fair return on
the money? Mayor said he could get this type of information for him if he
would call his office.
Civ: Council Minutes
Mav 5, 1991
Page 7
Council concurred with Councilman Palumbo's suggestion to direct staff to draft
an ordinance or resolution, whichever was appropriate, requiring a mandatory meet
and confer sessions between park owners and tenants, and to come back to the
Council for consideration at the June 20 meeting.
Mayor Schlosser called a recess at 7:55 p.m. The meeting reconvened At 8:12 p.m.
with all members of Council and staff present.
5. PUBLIC HEARI3CS.
5A. REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND A PLANNED COMMUNITY NO. 80 -01:
VICTORIA - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY. Staff report by Barry Hogan.
A request for the establishment of a planned community zone and text which sets
forth specific land uses, development standards, circulation system, and an over-
all design theme. Project area consists of approximately 2,150 acres bounded on
the north by Highland Avenue, following Deer Creek on the west until it intersects
the Southern Pacific Railroad which then jogs east and then transverses along I -15
to Etiwanda Avenue which forms the eastern edge of the project site.
Mr. Hogan summarized the findings of the Planning Commission as outlined in the
Planning Commission Resolution No. 81 -37.
Deputy City Clerk Authelet read the title of Ordinance No. 143.
ORDINANCE NO. 143 (first reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VICTORIA
PUNNED COMMUNITY P.C. 80 -01 LOCATED SOUTH OF
HIGHLAND AVENUE GENERALLY NORTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
AND GENERALLY WEST OF ETIWAYDA AVENUE.
Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Bridge to waive further reading. Motion
carried unanimously 5 -0.
Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing.
* Cary Frye, William Lyon Company. He acknowledged the tremendous efforts that
had been put into this project by the City staff and the William Lyon Companv.
* Ron Tannebaum stated that he was pleased with the Plan as it now existed. He
said it was quite an improvement over the original version.
There being no further response from the public, Mayor Schlosser closed the public
hearing.
Mayor Schlosser set May 20 for second reading of Ordinance No, 143.
5B. REVISED TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11549 - LEWIS. A development of 90 lots on
property located between Etiwanda and East Avenues + 300 feet south of Summit in
the R -1 (single family) zone. Item continued from the April It 1981 City Council
meeting. Mr. Hogan stated that Otto Kroutil, who had worked closely with the
Lewis Company on this project, was present and would answer any questions of the
Council.
Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing.
* Richard Lewis, Lewis Company, expressed his appreciation to the city staff for
their ho Lp in redesigninp. the tract.
* Ron Tanuebaum expressed this version was an improvement and worthy of Council
approval.
There Seing no further public response, Mayor Schlosser closed the public hearing
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1981
Page 8
Councilman Frost asked if we had any assurances that approval would not close
our options on the Chaffey- Garcia House. Mr. Hogan said it was to be relocated
to another appropriate location. He said the William Lyon Company has offered
to place this within Victoria. Councilman Frost stated that he wanted to see
efforts continue to relocate this.
Richard Lewis stated that there were two proposals: (1) to work with William
Lyon to move the house to their property, and (2) work with the city staff to
move this to a location on East or Etiwanda Avenues and restore the house.
Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Palombo to adopt Resolution No. 81 -64 and
to waive the entire reading. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. City Clerk Wasserman
read title of Resolution No. 81 -64.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -64
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11549.
5C. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHING A STREET NAMING POLICY. A policy
for new, public and private, streets in the city in the interest of uniformity
and to avoid confusion to the public; and a policy for chaning existing street
names. Staff report by Barry Hogan.
City Clerk Wasserman read title of Ordinance No. 144.
ORDINANCE NO. 144 (first reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING PRO-
CEDURES FOR STREET NAMING.
Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palombo to waive further reading. Motion
carried unanimously 5 -0.
Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response,
the hearing was closed.
Councilman Frost stated that he could not concur with item "F" which states:
That in existing areas of the City, new street names shall not contradict
the prevailing theme of north /south streets names after gems and east /west
streets named after trees when possible and where feasible.
Councilman Mikels suggested the following wordage:
That in exisitng areas of the City, should strive to have new street names
be consistent with the prevailing theme of north /south streets named after
gems, etc.
Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the
public hearing was closed.
Mayor Schlosser set May 20 for second reading of Ordinance No. 144.
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1981
Page 9
5D. AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Staff report by Lauren
Wasserman.
City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 145.
ORDINANCE NO. 145 (first reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE
,NEED FOR A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO FUNCTION IN
THE COMMUNITY.
Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palombo to waive further reading. Motion
carried unanimously 5 -0.
Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing.
* Jeff Hill, Cucamonga resident, expressed concern about the hiring a more
personnel for the redevelopment agency.
Councilman Bridge responded by stating it was his policy that whenever possible
to hire consultants instead of hiring additional personnel. Then whenever the
project is completed, we do not have additional personnel on staff.
There being no further public comments, Mayor Schlosser closed the public hearing.
Mover Schlosser set May 20 for second reading of Ordinance No. 145.
5E. RFVENUE $HARING. Staff report by Harry Empey.
Mr. Empey told Council that the City's allocation is now $396,274 which means
an appropriation of $221,272 must be made for the current year, and a full
appropriation must be made for the next fiscal year. He went on to recommend
that Council continue to appropriate the Revenue Sharing funds for the support of
the Sheriff's contract with the City.
Councilman Mikels said that he questioned some of the figures in the Sheriff's
contract, but he would talk to staff regarding his concerns.
Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Palombo to approve the appropriation of
the Revenue Sharing funds for the continued support of the Sheriff's contract.
Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response,
the public hearing was closed. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0.
5F. ADOPTION OF MUNICIPAL CODE. Staff report by Lauren Wasserman.
City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordianance No. 142.
ORDTNANCE NO. 142 (second reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE "RANCHO
CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE."
Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Mikels to waive further reading. Motion
carried unanimously 5 -0.
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1981
Page 10
Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response,
the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Mikels to approve and adopt Ordinance No,
142. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0.
Mayor Schlosser called at break at 9:05 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:15 p.m.
with all members of staff and council present.
6. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS.
6A. REFUSE PERMIT ISSUANCE. Staff report by Harry Empey.
Mr. Empey said that the City had received permit applications from Yukon Disposal,
Rancho Disposal, M 6 M Disposal, A S R Disposal, and Western Disposal.
Mr. Empey stated that some of the permits were not correctly made out. He would
recom,end that Council approve these permits with the stipulation that the companies
make the necessary corrections. And that a period of no longer than two weeks be
granted for these corrections to be made.
Councilman Frost asked if the current operating companies had all been contacted.
Mr. Empey stated that they had - including Tri- County which is the only one who did
not file.
Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public comments.
* Nacho Gracia, 10360 Humbolt. He inquired as to what the people in his neighbor-
hood do; they were receiving notices that they were going to turn their accounts
over to courts for back payment. He said the problem is that the company has not
been picking up the trash. He said they were seeking direction from Council as to
what to do. Mayor Schlosser directed him to talk with Harry Empey.
There being no further public response, Mayor Schlosser closed the public hearing.
*Tim Avakian, Yukon Disposal owner. He inquired that if the city were going to set
the rates, would this include all companies. Staff informed him that maximum rates
were set by Council resolution and anyone operating within the city boundaries for
residential pickup had to comply with this maximum. They could, however, charge less.
Motion: Moved by Palombo, seconded by Frost to approve the permits which had been
received by the City subject to the condition that all applications be properly
completed on or before May 20, 1981. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0.
6B. AGREEMENTS WITH CONSULTANTS FOR ENGINEERING AND LEGAL SERVICES IN CONNECTION
W _iH THE INDUSTRIAL AREA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 79 -1 Staff reprt by
The following agreements had been submitted for approval:
I. Wildan Associates for project management, assessment engineering,
right -of -way acquisition, and plan checking.
2. Williamson 6 Schmid for storm drain design.
3. Lockwood Engineering for street and storm drain design.
4. Brown 6 Nazarek for Bond Counsel Services.
Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palombo to approve Resolution No. 81 -65 and
the waiving of the entire reading. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. City Clerk
Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 81 -65.
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1981
Page 11
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -65
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
EXECUTION OF AGREEMENTS WITH ENGINEERING CON-
SULTANTS FOR THE DESIGN OF IMPROVEMENTS FOR
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 79 -01 AND FOR PROJECT MANAGE-
MENT, PLAN CHECKING, AND OTHER SERVICES.
6C. ESTABLISHING FEES FOR MUNICIPAL CODE. Staff report by Lauren Wasserman,
The City has received several requests for copies of the Municipal C,..e. The
requests have come from those who are not a part of the city and would not normally
receive the document.
Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palumbo to set the initial fee for the
Municipal Code at $150.00 and to set $50.00 per year for the supplement, and to
waive the entire reading of the Resolution. City Clerk Wasserman read the title
of Resolution No. 81 -66.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -66
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SETTING CERTAIN FEES
FOR ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTIONS AND CODES.
6D. REPORT REGARDING THE PROPOSED WEST END LAW AND JUSTICE CENTER /MUNICIPAL CIVIC
CENTER. Staff report by Lauren Wasserman.
Mr. Wasserman stated that there really wasn't anything additional to report to the
Council that has not already been sent to them in memo form. However, he was
requesting that Council authorize the City Manager to represent the City in
the many meetings and negotionations which will be forthcoming.
Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Palombo to authorize the City Manager to
represent the City in negotiations for the civic center. Motion carried unanimously
5 -0.
7. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS. Mr. Crowe said be had nothing to report.
ADDED ITEM: Mayor Schlosser reminded Council that they were looking for a replace-
ment on the Historical Commission. Councilman Frost said that Anne Calinski has
offered to serve. However, he suggested they wait until the next meeting before
any appointment is made.
8. ADJOURNMENT. Motion: Moved by Palombo, seconded by Mikels to adjourn to an
Executive Session to reconvene May 7 at 7:00 p.m. for a Budget Meeting at Lion's
Park Community Center. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. Meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Beverly Authelet
Deputy City Clerk