HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995/06/07 - Agenda PacketCITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
REGULAR MEETINGS
1st and 3rd Wednesdays - 7:00 p.m.
June 7, 1995
Civic Center
Council Chambers
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
City Councilmembers
William J. Alexander, Mayor
Rex Gutierrez, Mayor Pro Tem
Paul Biane, Councilmember
James V. Curatalo, Councilmember
Diane Williams, Councilmember
Jack Lain, City Manager
James L. Markman, City Attorney
Debra J. Adams, City Clerk
City Office: 989-1851
City Council Agenda
June 7, 1995
PAGE
All items submitted for the City Council Agenda must be in writing. The
deadline for submitting these items is 6:00 p.m. on the Tuesday prior to the
meeting. The City Clerk's Office receives all such items.
A. CALL TO ORDER
Pledge of Allegiance.
Roll Call: Alexander Biane , Curatalo
Gutierrez , and Willjams __
B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
Presentation of Proclamations to Sally Timms and her Search Dog Jethro
and Sharon Gattas and her Search Dog Dauger, for Outstanding Service in
the Rescue Effort of the Federal Building in the Oklahoma City Bombing.
C. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council.
State law prohibits the City Council from addressing any issue not previously
included on the Agenda. The City Council may receive testimony and set the
matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes
per individual.
D. CONSFNT 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. Any item may be removed by a Councilmember or member of the
audience for discussion.
Approval of Warrants, Register Nos. 5110/95 and 5/17/95; and Payroll
ending 5/4/95 and 5/18/95 for the total amount of $1,652,410.41.
o
Approval of Historic Landmark Designation 95-01 - David R. Moore, and
consideration of an application to designate the Kincaid Ranch as a Local
Landmark, located at 9449 Ninth Street - APN: 209-032-21. Related files:
Histodc Landmark Alternation Permit 95-02 and Mills Act Agreement 95-02.
l0
City Council Agenda
June 7, 1995
PAGE
2
o
o
,
o
RESOLUTION NO. 95-082
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVING HISTORIC LANDMARK
95-01 DESIGNATING THE KINCAID RANCH HOUSE,
LOCATED AT 9449 NINTH STREET, AS A LANDMARK -
APN: 209-032-21
Approval of Mills Act Agreement 95-02 - David R. Moore - to execute a Mills
Act Contract with David R. Moore for the restoration of the Kincaid Rancho
House, a designated local landmark, located at 9449 Ninth Street - APN:
209-032-21.
Approval of Mills Act Agreement 95-01 - Wesley and Dorothy West - to
execute a Mills Act Contract with Wesley and Dorothy West for the
restoration of the G.P. Ledig House, a designated local landmark, located
at 5759 Hellman Avenue - APN: 1062-071-24.
Approval to execute the Operation Area Development Agreement (CO 95-
016) between San Bemardino County and the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
according to the new Statewide Standardized Emergency Management
System (SEMS) requirement.
Approval of a request to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (CO
95-017) for the purpose of developing and implementing a Habitat
Conservation Plan to conserve wildlife and plant species of concern in the
San Bernardino Valley.
Approval to execute the Improvement Agreement and Secudty for the
Dunlop Tire Facility located within the City of Ontario on the south side of
Fourth Street east of Santa Anita Avenue, submitted by Catellus
Development Corporation.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-083
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND SECURITY
FOR THE DUNLOP TIRE FACILITY LOCATED WITHIN
THE CITY OF ONTARIO
Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 13281
located on the northwest comer of Base Line Road and Rochester Avenue,
submitted by Brock Homes.
2Z
10
24
4Z
52
87
88
89
City Council Agenda
June 7, 1995
PAGE
3
o
10.
11.
12.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-084
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 13281
Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 13703
located on the west side of Haven Avenue at Amber Lane, submitted by
Sheffield Homes.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-085
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 13703
Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 13851
located on the northeast corner of Wilson Avenue and Canistel Avenue,
submitted by Pacific International Development, Inc.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-086
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 13851
Approval of Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 14407 located on
the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Mountain View Drive,
submitted by Lewis Homes.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-087
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 14407
Approval to accept Improvements, Release of Bonds and Notice of
Completion for Tract 14121 located on the northwest comer of Milliken
Avenue and Kenyon Way.
Release: Faithful Performance Bond (Street)
Accept: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street)
$459,800.00
45,980.00
91
92
94
95
97
98
100
101
City Council Agenda
June 7, 1995
PAGE
4
13.
14.
15.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-088
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING
THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 14121 AND
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF
COMPLETION FOR THE WORK
Approval to Release Maintenance Guarantee Bonds for Tract 13930 located
on Wilson Avenue at Hellman Avenue.
Release:
Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street)
Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Storm Dr)
Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Utilities)
$ 29,700:00
56,400.00
19,000.00
Approval to Release Maintenance Guarantee Bonds for Tract 14192-1
located on the east side of Hellman Avenue south of 19th Street.
Release: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 75,900.00
Approval to Release Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Parcel Map 12959-1
located on the southeast comer of Arrow Highway and White Oak Avenue.
Release: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 134,000.00
102
103
104
105
E. CONSENT ORDINANCES
The following Ordinances have had public hearings at the time of first reading.
Second readings are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will
be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. The City Clerk
will read the title. Any item can be removed for discussion.
CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO ESTABLISH A SPEFD
LIMIT OF 35 MPH ON CHURCH STREET FROM PEPPFR STRFFT TO
ARCHIBALD AVFNUE: AND A SPEFD LIMIT OF 35 MPH ON MORNING
PLACE AND VINTAGE DRIVE FROM BANYAN STRFFT TO MILLIKFN
AVENUE
ORDINANCE NO. 540 (second reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING
SECTION 10.20.020 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE PRIMA FACIE
SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN CITY STREETS
106
City Council Agenda
June 7, 1995
PAGE
F. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as
required by law. The Chair will open the meeting to receive public testimony.
No Items Submitted.
G. PUBLIC HEARINGS
The following items have no legal publication or posting requirements. The
Chair will open the meeting to receive public testimony.
No Items Submitted.
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS
The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the
Chair may open the meeting for public input.
No Items Submitted.
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
The following items have been requested by the City Council for discussion.
They are not public hearing items, although the Chair may open the meeting
for public input.
No Items Submitted.
J. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
This is the time for City Council to identify the items they wish to discuss at
the next meeting. These items will not be discussed at this meeting, only
identified for the next meeting.
K. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council.
State law prohibits the City Council from addressing any issue not previously
included on the Agenda. The City Council may receive testimony and set the
matter for a subsequent meeting, Comments are to be limited to five minutes
per individual,
City Council Agenda
June 7, 1995
PAGE
L, ADJOURNMENT
MEETING TO RECESS TO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS:
(A)
PROPERTY PER GOVERNMENT CODE 54956.8, LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BLVD AND ROCHESTER
AVENUE; VALLEY BASEBALL AND JERRY FULWOOD, DEPUTY CITY
MANAGER, NEGOTIATING PARTIES, REGARDING TERMS OF
PAYMENT; AND
(S)
LABOR NEGOTIATIONS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6
TO GIVE ROBERT DOMINGUEZ, ADMINISTRATNE SERVICES
DIRECTOR, DIRECTION IN REGARDS TO THE MEET AND CONFER
PROCESS.
EXECUTIVE SESSION TO ADJOURN TO A BUDGET ADOPTION MEETING ON
JUNE 8, 1995 TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CIVIC
CENTER AT 6:00 P.M.
I, Debm J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee,
hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June
1, 1995, seventy-two (72) hours pdor to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2
at 10500 Civic Center Drive.
k-.aE
r~kiJ
· ·
I I
i I
!
· ·
· ·
I ·
I I
I ·
-,, · ·
I
I ·
· ·
· ·
~u · I
~ I I
~ I ·
· ·
I e ·
I1,-I
I ·
o' · I
~u · ·
'( I ·
Q I I
· ·
I~1
I-:
I~1
·
I
I ·
I I
I ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
I I
· ·
· ·
I ·
I I
· I
I I
I ·
I I
I
I ·
I
· ·
i-~1
I1,-I
IO-I
i,,~1
I~1
I I
I1--1
INI
I ·
I l
I ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I I
I ·
I I
I ·
I
I ·
I
· ·
I ·
· ·
I I
I -'
I I
I I
I ·
I ·
I ·
· ·
· I
·
I ·
· ·
I ·
I I
I ·
I-I
·
·
· ·
~ -
V v V V V V V V V
V v V V v V v V V
V V V V V V V V~V
Z
r~ W
.J
I ·
· I
· I
· ·
· I
· I
· ·
· ·
·
· ·
· ·
· I
· ·
·
I ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
I ·
I · ·
i-.~1
· I
· I
· I
· ·
I ·
I
· ·
· I
I ·
· ·
I'I
· I
I ·
·
·
· ·
· ·
· I
· l
· I
· I
· ·
· I
· I
·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· I
· I
I I
· ·
I~1
· ·
I~1
· ·
I ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
I ·
· ·
· I
· ·
· ·
· I
·
· I
· I
· I
I I
I
· I
I ·
I ·
· I
I I
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· I
I ·
· ·
·
·
I ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
I I
·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· I
· ·
.t
· ·
I I
· ·
· ·
· ,, I
I I
ol
e.el~l
Ol"el
I I
· I
I I
· ·
· ·
· ·
I I
I I
141
141
i..ul
·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· I
· ·
· ·
I ·
I I
IZI
lk,el
I ·
Ij--I
I~,-el
· ·
·
· ·
I ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
I ·
I ·
I ·
· ·
I I
· ·
I ·
I ·
· I
· I
·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
141
; I
lull
I I
. . . ~
l
V~
W
%
Z
(JZO.
,..)
cJ
· l
· I
· I
· ·
·
I
I ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I~1
~1~1
~1 ·
~141
· I
· e · I
~1 I
·
I I
ZI
~1 ·
~1 ·
IZI
· ·
I~1
· ·
· I
· ·
I I
· I
· ·
· ·
· I
I ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· I
· I
I I
I ·
I ·
I I
· ·
I ·
I I
IZI
I~1
I~1
I~1
I I
IZI'
I~1
I I
I I
I I
I
· ·
· I
I ·
I I
I I
·
· I
I ·
I I
· I
I I
· ·
I I
I|
· I
· I
· I
I
· I
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I I
· ·
· ·
· ·
·
I~1
IQI
I ·
uj
3:
t.
I
%
Z
0
4 I- t
,..)er |
(..)
~C) C)
I&.v~uJ
..J
(2
V )
,J
I-
C~
I
I,
v
., ,-.
.,llld ·
C31.-, Q,:sC3~3
k4.4)- ZJ¢.,I
j~m. C2.¢
,.,,~ ~o~
J
Z(,=,) I · e
J¢:} el ii,1¢
eJ zu w~,
j
Z
· ~
· ·
I l
· ·
·
· ·
· ·
· I
· I
· I
~1 ·
· I
I ·
I ·
I I
· e ·
~1 ·
~1 I
· ·
lel
~1~1
~141
\1 I
~141
I ·
· , · ·
~l ·
~1 ·
41 ·
I ·
Zl l
~1 I
I
I~1
· ·
· ·
I ·
I I
· ·
I ·
· ·
· ·
·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
· ·
I ·
I ·
I ·
I I
·
· ·
·
I~1
I~1
IMI
I~1
I~1
I~1
I:1
I l
I~1
· ·
· I
·
· ·
· ·
· ·
·
· I
I I
· I
·
· I
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I I
· ·
· I
I ·
I I
· ·
I I
I ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
· ·
·
I~1
I~1
· ·
Z
A
A
~ZOW~ dOO~ZZZ3
I~oc
·
· I
· ·
I ·
· ·
· ·
· I
· ·
· ·
· ·
· I
· I
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
· ·
· ·
· · ·
141
· ·
· · ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
· ·
· ·
· I
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· I
· I
· ·
· I
· ·
· I
· ·
· ·
· I
· I
· I
· I
· ·
· I
· I
· ·
· I
I I
I~1
I I
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
· I
·
· ·
· ·
· I
· ·
· I
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I:
· ·
· I
· ·
· I
· ·
· ·
·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
I ·
141
· ·
· I
· ·
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
June 7, 1995
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Brad Buller, City Planner
Larry Henderson, AICP, Associate Planner
HISTORIC LANDMARK DI=SIGNATION 95-01 - DAVID R. MOORE -
Consideration of an application to designate the Kincaid Ranch as a Local
Landmark, located at 9449 Ninth Street - APN: 209-032-21. Related files:
Historic Landmark Alteration Permit 95-02 and Mills Act Agreement 95-02.
MILLS ACT AGRFFMFNT 95-0~ - DAVID R. MOORF - Consideration of
approval to execute a Mills Act Contract with David R. Moore for the
restoration of the Kincaid Ranch House, a designated local landmark,
located at 9449 Ninth Street - APN 209-032-21
RECOMMENDATION
At its meeting of May 10, 1995, the Histodc Preservation Commission recommended that
the City Council approve Landmark Designation 95-01 and Mills Act Agreement 95-02 to
designate as a Histodc Landmark and implement a reduction in property tax on this histodc
property, the Kincaid Ranch House, by adoption of the attached Resolution and minute
action, respectively.
BAC KG ROU N D/ANALYSIS
I andmark Designation:
Originally acquired in the late 1870s by the previous owner's family, it has been in
continuous citrus production for over 90 years. The house was built by S.P. Kincaid in
1897, approximately one year after his marriage. A brother of S.P. Kincaid, William J.
Kincaid, served as Cucamonga Postmaster from 1885 to 1890 and was also a County
Supervisor. The house has not been changed since its construction, with the exception
of an addition to the west side built in 1912. This served as a nursery and bedroom for the
previous owner, Dr. Stealing Kincaid. The irrigation system was still in place and functional
in October 1, 1987. A portion of the property to the rear was sold previously for industrial
use, and the property is surrounded by industrial development. The subject property is
approximately 5 acres in size..
CITYCOUNCIL STAFF REPORT
LD 95-01 & MA 95-02- MOORE
June 7,1995
Page 2
Mills Act Agreement:
In August of 1988, the City Council approved incentives that would encourage and promote
the preservation and restoration of the City's histodc and architectural resources. The Mills
Act allows for the owner of a designated landmark to realize property tax reductions upon
entering into a preservation contract with the City. The successful initiation of this
agreement would mark the City's twelfth use of the Mills Act to help property owners in their
preservation efforts. Because the City's share of the amount of property tax collected is
small, the annual loss to the City is anticipated at no more than a few hundred dollars per
contract.
CONCLUSION
The subject site and structures certainly qualify for landmark designation based upon
criteria from the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance. (See the Facts for Findings
Section of the attached Resolution). While the owner plans to continue to use the house
as a residence for a family member, he wishes to preserve the opportunity to convert all
or part of the house to an office and to ultimately develop the rear two-thirds of the property
into an allowed industrial use. Therefore, the owner has requested that only a portion of
the five-acre site be designated and preserved as shown on the submitted site plan. Staff
is recommending the area of designation be simplified to an area 100 feet by 250 feet (see
Exhibit 1 of the Resolution).
The City continues to provide incentives to owners of histodc buildings for the preservation
of these community resources and the use of the Mills Act is an important tool in these
efforts. Staff concurs with the recommendations of the Histodc Preservation Commission.
The money saved can be put to use in maintaining and restoring the landmark, which will
benefit the entire community, present and future.
City Planner
BB:LJHrjfs
Attachments:
Historic Preservation Staff Report dated May 1 O, 1995
Resolution of Approval for Landmark Designation 95-01
/l
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
May 10, 1995
TO:
Chairman and Members of the Historic Preservation Commission
FROM:
Brad Buller, City Planner
BY:
Larry Henderson AICP, Principal Planner
SUBJECT:
HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION 95-01 - DAVID R. MOORE - An
application to designate the Kincaid Ranch as a Local Landmark, located at 9449
Ninth Street - APN: 209-032-21. Related files: Historic Landmark Alteration
Permit 95-02 and Mills Act Agreement 95-02.
HISTORIC LANDMARK AI,TERATION PERMIT 95-02 - DAVID R. MOORE -
Consideration of the addition of a 1,620 square foot barn and the rehabilitation of the
Kincald Ranch house, located at 9449 Ninth Street - APN: 209-032-21. Related
files: Historic Landmark Designation 95-01 and Mills Act Agreement 95-02.
MILLS ACT AGREEMENT 95-02 - DAVID R. MOORE - A request to
implement the use of the Mills Act to reduce property tax on the Kincald Ranch
house, located at 9449 Ninth Street - APN: 209-032-21. Related files: Historic
Landmark Designation 95-01 and Historic Landmark Alteration Permit 95-02.
BACKGROUND
Historical Significance: Originally acquired in the late 1870s by the previous owner's family,
it has been in continuous citrus production for over 90 years. The house was built by
S. P. Kincald in 1897 approximately a year after his marriage. A brother of S. P. Kincaid,
William J. Kincaid, served as Cucamonga Postmaster from 1885 to 1890 and was also a
County Supervisor. The house has not been changed since its consauction, with the exception
of an addition to the west side built in 1912. This served as a nursery and bedroom for the
previous owner, Dr. Sterling Kincaid. The irrigation system was still in place and functional
in October 1, 1987. A portion of the property to the rear was sold previously for industrial use,
and the property is surrounded by industrial development. The subject property is
approximately 5 acres in size.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MILLS ACT AGREEMENT 95-02 - DAVID R. MOORE
May 10, 1995
Page 2
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North Subarea 3; General Industrial
South Subarea 3; General Industrial
East Subarea 3; General Industrial
West Subarea 3; General Industrial
General Plan Desi~,nations:
Project Site - General Industrial
North General Industrial
South General Industrial
East General Industrial
West General Industrial
Site Characteristics: The site is relatively flat, while draining gently to the south. (Drainage
acceptance was conditioned on a previously approved parcel map adjacent to the southerly
property line). The current use is non-conforming residential agricultural, which the current
owner is renovating. At this time, the owner has cleared and removed a significant build up
of undergrowth plant materials that has included weeds and shrubs. The renovation of the site
has permitted the house and grove to be visible from the street for the first time in years.
Structures on the site consist of the residence and two small sheds or garages. The house sits
on a raised rock foundation. The other structures were not on foundations and the owner has
moved (dragged) them back to the location shown on the site plan submitted.
ANAI,YSIS:
A,
General: As indicated, the owner has started the renovation process of the property. In
addition to the site work, repairs and upgrading of the residence are underway. The house is
being rewired to current electrical code and repairs to the front porch and rear walls of the
house are well underway. The exterior paint of the house has been removed in preparation for
new paint. All building material repairs are to be replacement in kind and the owner indicates
that new exterior wood siding has already been milled to match the existing house.
It is the owner's intent to use the house as a residence. Residential uses are not authorized in
industrial districts except as caretaker's quarters with approved industrial development.
Development Code Section 17.02.130D does not allow for the reestablishment (after 180 days)
of a non-conforming use. This section, however, does not apply to non-conforming dwelling
units. The Development Code also prohibits the expansion of non-conforming uses. The
house is not being enlarged and the garage addition will provide an amenity to the residence.
By its design, the garage slructure would not necessarily be limited to residential related uses
(refer to floor and elevation plans) and if the house was ever to be converted to an office for
a conforming use, the new garage could also become a part of that use.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MILLS ACT AGREEMENT 95-02 - DAVID R. MOORE
May 10, 1995
Page 3
De
Landmark Designation: The subject site and structures certainly qualify for landmark
designation based upon many of the criteria of the City Historic Preservation Ordinance. (See
Facts for Findings Section). While the owner plans to continue to use the house as a residence
for a family member, he wishes to preserve the opportunity to convert all or part of the house
to an office and to ultimately develop the rear, approximately two thirds of the property, to an
allowed industrial use. Therefore, the owner has requested that only a portion of the five-acre
site be designated and preserved as shown on the submitted site plan. Staff is recommending
the area of designation be simplified to an area 100 feet by 250 feet. (See Exhibit "1" attached
to Landmark Designation Resolution).
The requested designation area includes all the structures and generally the nearest row of trees
to the house. The owner hopes to avoid having to request an additional landmark alteration
request at the time the rear portion of the parcel is developed. Staff is concerned with the
additional loss of historical context i.e.; at the time of ultimate development, most of the
remaining portion of the grove will be eliminated. However, the structures will have been
preserved and enhanced thereby increasing the likelihood of their preservation. Also, it is
noted that additional planting will lessen potential future impact.
l .andmark Alteration: The alteration proposed consists of the addition of a new bam structure
behind the residence. This 1,620 square foot structure will be used to house vehicles and
equipment and supplies to maintain the existing grove. The design of the barn is simple:
single story construction with wood siding to match the house. The location of the barn is
relatively close to the house (15 feet); however, the owner would like to preserve an adequate
sized area between the barn and the sheds for the possibility of required parking if the
residence is converted in the future to an office use.
A future deck is shown on the submitted site plan. The owner is at this time uncertain when
this feature would be added. Because the future deck would be a minor addition, staff has
recommended a condition for staff review only, if designed to match the house.
Mills Act Agreement: In accordance with City policy the owner has requested a Mills Act
Agreement. The Agreement has been drafted and reviewed and is attached for reference (see
Exhibit "C" of the Agreement for the scheduled list of improvements).
The concept of the Mills Act program is to provide an incentive for the property owner to
protect and preserve the property so as to retain its characteristics of historical significance.
This intention is encouraged through the reduction of property taxes, thus enabling the property
owner to reinvest the money saved from the reduced property tax for improvements. The
properties that enter into the agreement are to be inspected by City staff on an annual basis to
determine whether notable progress has been made in rehabilitating the property. Staff
estimates the property tax savings to the owner could be as much as $1,500 and the reduction
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MILLS ACT AGREEMENT 95-02 - DAVID R. MOORE
May 10, 1995
Page 4
in tax proceeds to the City would be $60. The exact mounts are dependent on the County
Assessor's property valuation based on income potential and the capitalization rate at the time
of assessment.
Environmental Assessment: The project is Categorically Exempt under Class 3.e of the
Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act.
FACTS FOR FINDING:
A. Historical and Cultural Significance:
Finding 1: The proposed Landmark is particularly representative of an historic period, type,
style, region, or way of life.
Fact/s:
The property still illustrates the historic late 1800s and early 1900s of the
agricultural community of Cucamonga.
Finding 2: The proposed Landmark is an example of a type of building which was once
common but is now rare.
Fact/s:
The grove, house, and accessory structures retain the agricultural character of the
turn of the century period, which was the predominate development type.
Findin~g 3: The proposed Landmark is of greater age than most of its kind.
Fact/s:
The landmark eligible property is 97 years old and has been in citrus grove
production almost continuously over that period of time.
Finding 4: The proposed Landmark was connected with someone renowned or important
or a local personality.
Fact/s:
The house was built by S. P. Kincaid in 1897, approximately a year after his
marriage. A brother of S. P. Kincald, William J. Kincald, served as Cucarnonga
Postmaster from 1885 to 1890 and was also a county supervisor.
Finding 5: The proposed Landmark is connected with a business or use which was once
common but is now rare.
Fact/s:
Originally acquired in the late 1870s by the previous owner's family, it has been
in continuous citrus production for over 90 years.
CORRESPONDENCE: None was received.
/5
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MILLS ACT AGREEMENT 95-02 - DAVID R. MOORE
May 10, 1995
Page 5
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Commission approve the
attached Resolutions for Historic Landmark Designation and Historic Landmark Alteration Permit
and recommends approval by minute order to the City Council for the Mills Act Agreement.
jpll/Respectfully submitted,
BB:LH:mlg
Attachments:
Exhibit 'A" Site Location Map
Exhibit "B" Photos
Landmark 95-01 Resolution
Landmark Alteration Permit 95-02 Resolution
Mills Act Agreement
City of Rancho Cucamonga
300 FOOT RADIUS MAP
MA 95-02
LD 95-01
LDA 95-02
800 Feet
0 400
RESOLUTION NO. ~...~ <~d'~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING HISTORIC LANDMARK 95-01
DESIGNATING THE KINCAID RANCH HOUSE, LOCATED AT 9449 NINTH
STREET, AS A LANDMARK - APN: 209-032-21.
A. Recitals.
1. David R. Moore has filed an application for a Landmark as described in the title
of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Landmark is referred to as
"the application."
2. On May 10, 1995, the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application.
3. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part "A," of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The application applies to approximately .55 acres of land, basically a 100-foot
by 250-foot configuration, located at 9449 Ninth Street and shown in Exhibit "1 ," attached.
3. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council, including wdtten and
oral staff reports, together with public testimony, and pursuant to Section 2.24.090 of the
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, this Council hereby makes the following findings and
facts:
A. Historical and Cultural Significance:
Finding 1:
The proposed Landmark is particularly
representative of an historic period, type, style,
region, or way of life.
Fact/s:
The property still illustrates the historic late 1800s
and early 1900s agricultural community of
Cucamonga.
Finding
The proposed Landmark is an example of a type
of building which was once common but is now
rare.
Fact/s:
The grove house and accessory structures retain
the agricultural character of the tum of the century
period, which was the predominant development
type.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO.
LANDMARK DESIGNATION 95-01 - DAVID R. MOORE
June 7, 1995
Page 2
Finding 3:
The proposed Landmark is of greater age than
most of its kind.
F~ct/s:
The landmark eligible property is 97 years old and
has been in citrus grove production almost
continuously over that period of time.
Finding 4:
Fact/s:
The proposed Landmark was connected with
someone renowned or important or a local
personality.
The house was built by S.P. Kincaid in 1897,
approximately one year after his marriage. A
brother of S. P. Kincaid, William J. Kincaid, served
as Cucamonga Postmaster from 1885 to 1890 and
was also a County Supervisor.
Finding 5:
The proposed Landmark is connected with a
business or use which was once common but is
now rare.
Fact/s:
Originally acquired in the late 1870s by the
previous owners family, it has been in continuous
citrus production for over 90 years.
4. This Council hereby finds and determines that the project identified above in this
Resolution is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section
15308 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4
above, this Council hereby resolves that pursuant to Chapter 2.24 of the Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby
recommends approval of Landmark Application 95-01.
6. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution.
I
I
\
\
\
\
>0
k__,__,_,_~
Q
_JI
I~JI
OI
Z
0
bJ
u~(.~
D~
Z
T
f
® 0 0 @
(~o/ ~(~)
q:~6
I
I
I
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA --
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
June 7, 1995
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
Brad Buller, City Planner
Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner
MILLS ACT AGRFEMFNT 95-01 - WFSLFY AND DOROTHY WEST -
Consideration of approval to execute a Mills Act Contract with Wesley and
Dorothy West for the restoration of the G.P. Ledig House, a designated local
landmark, located at 5759 Hellman Avenue - APN 1062-071-24
RECOMMENDATION
At its meeting of May 10, 1995, the Histodc Preservation Commission recommended that
the City Council approve Mills Act Agreement 95-01 between the City of Rancho
Cucamonga and Wesley and Dorothy West to implement a reduction in property tax on
their historic property, the G.P. Ledig House. If the City Council concurs with the
Commission's recommendation, the agreement can be approved through minute action.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
In August of 1988, the City Council approved incentives that would encourage and promote
the preservation and restoration of the City's histodc and architectural resources. The Mills
Act allows for the owner of a designated landmark to realize property tax reductions upon
entering into a preservation contract with the City.. The successful initiation of this
agreement would mark the City's eleventh use of the Mills Act to help property owners in
their preservation efforts. Because the City's share of the amount of property tax collected
is small, the annual loss to the City is anticipated at no more than a few hundred dollars
per contract.
This Victorian farm house was built in 1898 by Gerhardt Ledig who managed one of the
area's largest citrus ranches and was the first member of the prominent Ledig family to
settle in what then called Ioamosa. It is one of five homes built by the Ledig family. G.P.
Ledig served as clerk of the School Board from 1903-1913. The house was expanded by
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
MA 95-01 - WEST
June 7, 1995
Page 2
Colonel Marr in 1935 and again in 1947. On August 3, 1988, the City Council approved
the G.P. Ledig House, then located at 5702 Amethyst Avenue, as an historic landmark.
The house, then under City ownership, was moved because of the extension of Wilson
Avenue, to its present location on Hellman Avenue and refurbished in 1991.
CONCLUSION
The City continues to provide incentives to owners of histodc buildings for the preservation
of these community resources and the use of the Mills Act is an important tool in these
efforts. Staff concurs with the recommendation of the Historic Preservation Commission.
The money saved can be put to use to maintain and restore the landmark, which will
benefit the entire community, present and future.
Respectfully submitted,
City Planner
BB:AW~fs
Attachments: Historic Preservation Commission Staff Report dated May 10, 1995
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
May 10, 1995
Chairman and Members of the Historic Preservation Commission
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
Brad Buller, City Planner
Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner
MII.LS ACT AGREEMENT 95-01 - WESI.EY AND DOROTHY WEST - A
request to implement the use of the Mills Act to reduce property tax on the Historic
Landmark property, the G.P. Ledig House, located at 5759 Hellman Avenue - APN
1062-071-24
BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: On August 3, 1988, the City Council approved the G.P. Ledig
House, then located at 5702 Amethyst Avenue, as an historic landmark. The house, then under City
ownership was moved to its present location and refurbished in 1991. Wesley and Dorothy West,
the current owners now wish to enter into a Mills Act agreement with the City.
The concept of the Mills Act program is to provide an incentive for the property owner to protect
and preserve the property so as to retain its characteristics of historical significance. This intention
is encouraged through the reduction of property taxes, thus enabling the property owner to reinvest
the money saved from the reduced property tax for improvements. The properties that enter into the
agreement are to be inspected by City staff on an annual basis to determine whether notable progress
has been made in rehabilitating the property. Staff estimates the property tax savings to the owner
could be as much as $2000 and the reduction in tax proceeds to the City would be $80. The exact
amounts are dependent on the County Assessor's property valuation based on income potential and
the capitalization rate at the time of assessment.
Mr. and Mrs. West have indicated their intent to rehabilitate the structure with the following '.
improvements over the next 10 years:
ITEM YEAR TASK
1. 1995
Install rock retaining wall on north side of property to prevent soil erosion of
slope.
2. 1995
Install sidewalks from the middle of the front yard, encircling a fountain, and
continuing around the entire perimeter of the house.
_/
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MA 95-01 - WESLEY & DOROTHY WEST
May 10, 1995
Page 2
ITEM YEAR TASK (cont'd)
,
1996 Install automatic sprinkler system in both the front and rear yards.
4. 1996
Landscaping to include: Lawns, front and rear, fruit trees, oak and walnut trees
in rear, shade trees in front, grape vines, roses and assorted flowers, water
fountain in front, pond in rear, and a vegetable garden.
5. 1997
Fencing to include rock pillars across front with wrought iron between pillars,
automatic gate openers, and cross fencing (wood) in rear.
6. 1998
The master bath will have the linoleum walls removed and replaced with paint.
Sink, bathtub, and possibly toilet fixtures will be replaced and/or updated.
1999 Old stain and varnish will be stripped and replaced in upstairs den.
2000 Custom made draperies and blinds will be installed at all windows.
9. 2001
Library walls will be stripped of old varnish and broken bookshelves will be
replaced. Walls behind bookshelves will be painted.
10. 2002
Wood patio and patio cover will be installed at south entrance to house. Built in
seating, spa, and barbeque will also be installed. Planters around decking will be
included and planted with flowers.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Commission forward its
recommendation for approval of Mills Act Agreement 95-01 to the City Council by minute order.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
City Planner
BB:AW:mlg
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Plan
Draft Mills Act Agreement for the G.P. Ledig House
HELLMAN
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1TE_IVI: MA 95-01; G.P. Ledig House
TITLE: Site Plan
EXHIBIT: "A" SCALE:
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
and when
RECORDED MAIL TO:
City Clerk, City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
HISTORIC PROP~R~"I PRESERVATION AGReeMeNT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this __th day of ,
1995, by and between the CII"f OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation
(hereinafter referred to as the "City") and Wesley West and Dorothy West
(hereinafter referred to as the "Owner").
WITN~SSMTH:
A. Recitals.
(i) California Government Code Section 50280, et seq. authorize cities
to enter into contracts with the Owners of qualified Historical Property to
provide for the use, maintenance and restoration of such Historical Property so
as to retain its characteristics as property of historical significance;
(ii) Owner possesses fee title in and to that certain real property,
together with associated structures and improvements thereon, commonly known as
the G.P. Ledig House and generally located at the street address 5759 Hellman
-1-
Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91737 (hereinafter such property shall be referred
to as the "Historic Property"). A legal description of the Historic Property is
attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "A" and is incorporated herein by this
reference;
(iii) On August 3, 1988, the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga adopted its Resolution No. 88-503 thereby declaring and designating the
Historic Property as a historic landmark pursuant to the terms and provisions of
Chapter 2.24 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code; and,
(iv) City and Owner, for their mutual benefit, now desire to enter into
this agreement both to protect and preserve the characteristics of historical
significance of the Historic Property and to qualify the Historic Property for
an assessment of valuation pursuant to the Provisions of Chapter 3, of Part 2,
of Division 1 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code.
B. A~reemen~
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Owner, in consideration of the mutual
covenants and conditions set forth herein, do hereby agree as follows:
1. Effective Date and Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall be
effective and commence on , 1995, and shall remain in effect for
a term of ten years thereafter. Each year upon the anniversary of the effective
date, such initial term will automatically be extended as provided in paragraph
2, below.
2. Renewal. Each year on the anniversary of the effective date of
this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the "renewal date"), a year shall
automatically be added to the initial term of this Agreement unless notice of
nonrenewal is mailed as provided herein. If either Owner or City desires in any
year not to renew the Agreement, Owner or City shall serve written notice of
nonrenewal of the Agreement on the other party in advance of the annual renewal
date of the Agreement. Unless such notice is served by Owner to City at least
90 days prior to the annual renewal date, or served by City to Owner at least 60
days prior to the annual renewal date, one year shall automatically be added to
-2-
the term of the Agreement as provided herein. Owner may make a written protest
of the notice. City may, at any time prior to the annual renewal date of the
Agreement, withdraw its notice to Owner of nonrenewal. If either City or Owner
serves notice to the other of nonrenewal in any year, the Agreement shall remain
in effect for the balance of the term then remaining, either from its original
execution or from the last renewal of the Agreement, whichever may apply.
3. Standards for Historical Property. During the term of this
Agreement, the Historic Property shall be subject to the following conditions,
requirements, and restrictions:
a. Owner shall preserve and maintain the characteristics of
historical significance of the Historic Property. Attached hereto, marked as
Exhibit "B," and incorporated herein by this reference, is a list of those
minimum standards and conditions for maintenance, use, and preservation of the
Historic Property, which shall apply to such property throughout the term of this
Agreement.
b. Owner shall, where necessary, restore and rehabilitate the
property according to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic
preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation and in accordance
with the attached schedule of potential home improvements, drafted by the
applicant and approved by the City Council, attached hereto as Exhibit "C."
c. Owner shall allow reasonable periodic examinations, by prior
appointment, of the interior and exterior of the Historic Property by
representatives of the County Assessor, State Department of Parks and Recreation,
State Board of Equalization, and the City, as may be necessary to determine
Owner's compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.
4. Provision of Information of Corporation. Owner hereby agrees to
furnish City with any and all information requested by the City which may be
necessary or advisable to determine compliance with the terms and provisions of
this Agreement.
-3-
5. Cancellation. City, following a duly noticed public hearing as
set forth in California Government Code Sections 50280, et seq., may cancel this
Agreement if it determines that Owner breached any of the conditions of this
Agreement or has allowed the property to deteriorate to the point that it no
longer meets the standards for a qualified historic property. City may also
cancel this Agreement if it determines that the Owner has failed to restore or
rehabilitate the property in the manner specified in subparagraph 3(b) of this
Agreement. In the event of cancellation, Owner may be subject to payment of
those cancellation fees set forth in California Government Code Sections 50280,
et seq.
6. Enforcement of A~reement- In lieu of and/or in addition to any
provisions to cancel the Agreement as referenced herein, City may specifically
enforce, or enjoin the breach of, the terms of this Agreement. In the event of
a default, under the provisions of this Agreement by Owner, City shall give
written notice to Owner by registered or certified mail addressed to the address
stated in this Agreement, and if such a violation is not corrected to the
reasonable satisfaction of the City within 30 days thereafter, or if not
corrected within such a reasonable time as may be required to cure the breach or
default if said breach or default cannot be cured within 30 days (provided that
acts to cure the breach or default may be commenced within 30 days and must
thereafter be diligently pursued to completion by Owner), then City may, without
further notice, declare a default under the terms of this Agreement and may bring
any action necessary to specifically enforce the obligations of Owner growing out
of the terms of this Agreement, apply to any court, State or federal, for
injunctive relief against any violation by Owner or apply for such other relief
as may be appropriate.
City does not waive any claim of default by Owner if City does not
enforce or cancel this Agreement. All other remedies at law or in equity which
are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in City's regulations
governing historic properties are available to the City to pursue in the event
that there is a breach of this Agreement. No waiver by City of any breach or
default under this Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other
subsequent breach thereof or default hereinunder.
7. Bindine Effect of Agreement. The Owner hereby subjects the
Historic Property described in Exhibit "A" hereto to the covenants, reservations,
and restrictions as set forth in this Agreement. City and Owner hereby declare
their specific intent that the covenants, reservations, and restrictions as set
forth herein shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to
and be binding upon the Owner's successors and assigns in title or interest to
the Historic Property. Each and every contract, deed or other instrument
hereinafter executed, covering or conveying the Historic Property, or any portion
thereof, shall conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered, and
accepted subject to the covenants, reservations, and restrictions expressed in
this Agreement regardless of whether such covenants, reservations, and
restrictions are set forth in such contract, deed or other instrument.
City and Owner hereby declare their understanding and intent that
the burden of the covenants, reservations, and restrictions set forth herein
touch and concern the land in that Owner's legal interest in the Historic
Property is rendered less valuable thereby. City and Owner hereby further
declare their understanding and intent that the benefit of such covenants,
reservations, and restrictions touch and concern the land by enhancing and
maintaining the historic characteristics and significance of the Historic
Property for the benefit of the public and Owner.
8. Notice. Any notice required to be given by the terms of this
Agreement shall be provided at the address of the respective parties as specified
below or at any other address as may be later specified by the parties hereto.
To City:
To Owner:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
Attention: City Planner
Wesley West and Dorothy West
5759 Hellman Avenue
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91737
-5-
9. General Provisions.
a. None of the terms, provisions, or conditions of this
Agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between the parties hereto and
any of their heirs, successors or assigns, nor shall such terms, provisions, or
conditions cause them to be considered joint ventures or members of any joint
enterprise.
b. Owner agrees to and shall hold City and its elected
officials, officers, agents, and employees harmless from liability for damage or
claims for damage for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property
damage which may arise from the direct or indirect use or operations of Owner or
those of his contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting
on his behalf which relates to the use, operation, and maintenance of the
Historic Property. Owner hereby agrees to and shall defend the City and its
elected officials, officers, agents, and employees with respect to any and all
actions for damages caused by, or alleged to have been caused by, reason of
Owner's activities in connection with the Historic Property. This hold harmless
provision applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered, or alleged to
have been suffered, by reason of the operations referred to in this Agreement
regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the plans,
specifications or other documents for the Historic Property.
c. All of the agreements, rights, covenants, reservations, and
restrictions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure
to the benefit of the parties herein, their heirs, successors, legal
representatives, assigns and all persons acquiring any part or portion of the
Historic Property, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever.
d. In the event legal proceedings are brought by any party or
parties to enforce or restrain a violation of any of the covenants, reservations,
or restrictions contained herein, or to determine the rights and duties of any
party hereunder, the prevailing party in such proceeding may recover all
reasonable attorney's fees to be fixed by the court, in addition to court costs
and other relief ordered by the court.
-6-
e. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement are
held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, or
by subsequent preemptive legislation, the validity and enforceability of the
remaining provisions, or portions thereof, shall not be effected thereby.
f. This Agreement shall be construed and governed in accordance
with the laws of the State of California.
10. Recordation. No later than 20 days after the parties execute and
enter into this Agreement, the City shall cause this Agreement to be recorded in
the office of the County Recorder of the County of San Bernardino.
11. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended, in whole or in part,
only by a written recorded instrument executed by the parties hereto.
IN WITNESS WHERMOF, City and Owner have executed this Agreement on the
day and year first written above.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Dated:
By:
William J. Alexander, Mayor
Dated: By:
Wesley West, Owner
Dated: By:
Dorothy West, Owner
-7-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
)
) ss.
)
On , JAN SUTTON, Deputy City Clerk of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, personally appeared WILLIAM J. ALEXANDER,
personally know to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized
capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument, the person or the entity
upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Jan Sutton
Deputy City Clerk
City of Rancho Cucamonga
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
)
) ss.
)
On the day of , 1995, before me
, Notary Public, personally appeared
, personally known
to me or proved to on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s)
whose name(s) is/are subscribed to within instrument and acknowledged to me that
he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and the
by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon
behalf of which the person(s) acted executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said State
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
for the
G.P. Ledig House
located at
5759 Hellman Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Owned by
wesley and Dorothy West
91737
Lot 11, Tract No. 13930, City of Rancho Cucamonga
County of San Bernardino, State of California
Book 230, Pages 18-20
Zxhibit "A"
THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR'S REHABILITATION STANDARDS
Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatible use for a
property that requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, or
site, and its environment, or to the use of a property for its originally
intended purpose.
The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure,
or site, and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or
alteration of any historical material or distinctive architectural features
should be avoided when possible.
All buildings, structures, and sites shall be recognized as products of
their own time. Alterations which have no historical basis and which seek
to create an earlier appearance shall be discouraged.
Changes which may have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the
history and development of a building, structure, or site, and its
environment·
Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship, which
characterize a building, structure, or site, shall be treated with
sensitivity.
Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced,
wherever possible.
In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should match the
material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other
visual qualities. Repair or replacement of missing architectural features
should be based on accurate duplications of features, substantiated by
historical, physical, or pictorial evidence, rather than on conjectural
designs or the availability of different architectural elements from other
buildings or structures.
The surface cleaning of structures shall be undertaken with the most gentle
means possible. Sandblasting and other cleaning methods that will damage
the historic building materials shall not be undertaken.
Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archaeological
resources affected by, or adjacent to, any acquisition, protection,
stabilization, preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, or reconstruction
project.
Contemporary design for alteration and additions to existing properties
shall not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy
significant historic, architectural, or cultural material and such design
is compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the
property, neighborhood, or environment.
10. wherever possible, new additions or alterations to structures shall be done
in such a manner that, if such additions or alterations were to be removed
in the future, the essential form and integrity of the structure would be
unimpaired.
Exhibit "B-l"
PROPERTY MAINTENANCE
Property Maintenance. All buildings, structures, yards and other
improvements shall be maintained in a manner which does not detract from the
appearance of the immediate neighborhood. The following conditions are
prohibited:
1. Dilapidated, deteriorating, or unrepaired structures, such as: fences,
roofs, doors, walls, and windows;
2. Scrap lumber, junk, trash or debris;
Abandoned, discarded or unused objects or equipment, such as automobiles,
automobile parts, furniture, stoves, refrigerators, cans, containers, or
similar items;
4. Stagnant water or excavations, including pools or spas;
Any device, decoration, design, structure or vegetation which is unsightly
by reason of its height, condition or its inappropriate location.
EXHIBIT "B-2"
-11-
POTEI~TIAL HOME IMPRO%rEMENTS
for the
G.P. Ledic House
Wesley and Dorothy West
5759 Hellman Avenue
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91737
The following is a list of renovation projects the applicant plans to complete.
Future projects proposed by the applicant or by the legal inheritors of this
contract will be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission's staff.
ITEM YEAR
1. 1995
2. 1995
3. 1996
4. 1996
5. 1997
6. 1998
7. 1999
8. 2000
9. 2001
10. 2002
TASK
Install rock retaining wall on north side of property to prevent
soil erosion of slope.
Install sidewalks from the middle of the front yard, encircling
a fountain, and continuing around the entire perimeter of the
house.
Install automatic sprinkler system in both the front and rear
yards.
Landscaping to include: Lawns, front and rear, fruit trees, oak
and walnut trees in rear, shade trees in front, grape vines,
roses and assorted flowers, water fountain in front, pond in
rear, and a vegetable garden.
Fencing to include rock pillars across front with wrought iron
between pillars, automatic gate openers, and cross fencing (wood)
in rear.
The master bath will have the linoleum walls removed and replaced
with paint. Sink, bathtub, and possibly toilet fixtures will be
replaced and/or updated.
Old stain and varnish will be stripped and replaced in upstairs
den.
Custom made draperies and blinds will be installed at all
windows.
Library walls will be stripped of old varnish and broken
bookshelves will be replaced. Walls behind bookshelves will be
painted.
Wood patio and patio cover will be installed at south entrance to
house. Built in seating, spa, and barbeque will also be
installed. Planters around decking will be included and planted
with flowers.
EXHIBIT
-12-
CITY OF 1L~dqCHO CUCAlviONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
May24,1995
TO:
Mayor and Members of the City Council,
FROM:
By:
SUBJECT:
OF SAN BERNARDINO
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager,
Marti Higgins, Emergency Management Cocn'l~'t
OPERATIONAL AREA AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
AND THE CITY OF RANClIO CUCAMONGA
COUNTY
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the attached Operational Area Agreement between the City of Rancho
Cucamonga and the County of San Bernardino be accepted as written. According to Senate Bill
1841 the Operational Area Agreement must be in place by December 1, 1995.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The basis for S.B.1841 authored by Senator Petris, was the loss of his home in the 1991 Oakland
fire due to the evident lack of multi-jurisdictional coordination during the disaster.
The operational area serves as the intermediate level of government
"coordination and communication" of information, resources needs,
local governments, and the State.
It is responsible for
and priorities between
The Coordinated Emergency Management Organization (CEMO) an association of Emergency
Managers within the county have worked extensively along with our City Managers, on this
agreement. It assures that all cities have a equal say in how the Operational Area will operate
during major emergencies and disasters. There are no costs to the cities associated with
this agreement. The only commitment is staff time for the Coordinating Council, training, and to
staff certain positions in the county EOC when it is activated. The city will also have a vote in
future monies coming into the Operational Area and their use.
Although Fire and Police are a part of this coordinated system, the operational area named in this
document does not affect the way they currently operate through their own system coordinating
and ordering resources during emergencies.
Attachments: County Staff Report and copy of Operational Agreement.
ql
SAN BEkNARDINO COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA
STAFF REPORT
Rackgrnund
The operational area concept is intended to decentralize selected State Office of
Emergency Services (OES) functions and give more authority to local regions.
An operational area is a special purpose organization created to prepare for and
coordinate inter-jurisdictional emergency operations and mutual aid.
The operational area is an intermediate level of government which includes the
County and all political subdivisions. It coordinates information, resources and
priorities among local governments within the operational area. The operational
area serves as the coordination and communication link between the local
government and the regional level.
This concept is set forth in Senate Bill 1841, authored by Senator Petds, who
lost his home in the 1991 Oakland fire. The basis for SB 1841 was the evident
lack of multi-jurisdictional coordination dudng that disaster. This new law places
into effect a statewide Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS).
SEMS outlines the following goals to achieve the operational area concept:
The Incident Command System (ICS). The nationally used Standardized
Emergency Management System for Field level response.
The purpose of the ICS is to streamline and integrate response, provide a
unified command structure and an action plan which identifies response
strategies.
Implementation of a Multi-agency or Inter-Agency Coordination System.
This system will pull together involved agencies and jurisdictions so that
decisions can be made regarding pdoritizing incidents and shadng and
allocating resources.
Operational Area Satellite Information System. Provides for the
implementation of an integrated operational area communication system.
Mutual Aid. To ensure that when an entity has committed all local
resources to an incident and still requires more assistance, surrounding
jurisdictions may be called upon to help.
Operational Areas.
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA STAFF REPORT
A common EOC structure compatible with ICS (Management, Operations,
Planning/Intelligence, Logistics Finance/Administration).
The Operational Area Agreement
California Government §8607 requires local governments within a County
geographic area to be organized into a single Operational Area by December 1,
1995.
Initial efforts to organize the County and 24 Cities into an Operational Area
formally began at the City Manager level in early 1994. At that time, discussions
began regarding the intent and purpose of the Operational Area.
On November 30, 1994, a draft agreement was reviewed by a subcommittee of
designees from the City Manager's including Apple Valley, Rancho Cucamonga,
Fontana, San Bernardino, Victorville, Loma Linda, Ontario, Chino, Upland, the
County Administrative Office, County Fire Department and County Office of
Emergency Services staff. Approximately 17 representatives from the cities and
the County attended this meeting. After lengthy general discussion, it was
decided that a smaller group reviewing the agreement would be more effective.
On December 12, 1994, a group of subcommittee appointees met, including the
emergency managers from the following Cities: Ontado, Rancho Cucamonga,
Apple Valley, Loma Linda, Fontana, and San Bernardino.
On March 16, 1995, the City Managers, at the monthly meeting, approved the
attached agreement as a final draft to be subsequently presented to the City's
respective councils and the Board of Supervisors.
The Fmergency M=nqgement Assist-nce (J=MA} funding issue
Eight Cities (Apple Valley, Chino, Fontana, Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga. Rialto,
San Bernardino, Victorville) and the County currently receive EMA funds. The
funds are provided by the Federal government to the State and the State, in turn,
distributes the funds to Cities and the County. These funds were originally
allocated to Cities and the County in the 1980's based on the level of emergency
services programs in place. The Cities and the County were basically asked to
request the funds or not, depending on the level of program staffing. At the time,
most Cities did not have plans for an emergency services program or a full-time
manager. Consequently, the current program exists whereby only previously
requesting Cities received EMA funds.
2
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA STAFF REPORT
Currently, the EMA funds are distributed directly to jurisdictions based on an
annual reporting process submitted to the state. In October 1996, at the end of
the Federal fiscal year, the funds will be distributed directly to the Operational
Area. In conversations with the State, it is not clear whether the level of funding
will be reduced or remain the same. It is also not clear as to what formula the
State will use to distribute funds to the operational areas (i.e., population, etc.).
In any event, the Operational Area Coordinating Council may revisit the
distribution/use of the funds at the appropriate time (see Agreement Section 3.
Consideration).
Ol~eration=l Are= Coordin=Ung Council
Section ~>. Ol~emtional Are~ Coordinating Co~jncil reads, in part:
"Persons designated to represent political jurisdictions on the Operational Area
Council should be, for Cities/Towns, the City/Town Manager, and for the County,
the County Administrative Officer or the individual appointed as the
representative by the Cities/Towns or the County. In all cases, the
representative of a jurisdiction must have sufficient authority to speak on behalf
of the jurisdiction in support of the Operational Area."
The City Manager will be asked to delegate a representative for representation
on the council in the Managers absence or should the City Manager choose to
delegate this position. It is encouraged that this position be delegated to the Fire
Chief, Police Chief or directly to the Emergency Manager responsible for the
program administration of Emergency Services in each jurisdiction.
In addition, this individual should have enough authority to make decisions or
vote on actions taken by the coordinating council. It is understood that not all
decisions may be acted on at the coordinating council level and, at times, actions
may require the approval of the City Manager or City Council, County
Administrative Officer or Board of Supervisors.
STAFF REP.DOQ3/31/95
3
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA AGREEMENT
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
OPERATIONAL AREA DISASTER RESPONSE AND
RECOVERY ORGANIZATION AGREEMENT
(MARCH 31, 1995 VERSION)
This Agreement is made this day of .1995 by and between the County of
San Bernardino, ("COUNTY"), and the jurisdictions of Adelanto, Barstow, Big Bear,
Chino, Chino Hills, Colton, Fontana, Grand Terrace, Hesperia, Highland, Loma
Linda, Montclair, Needles, Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Redlands, Rialto, San
...
RECITALS
WHEREAS the potential for a major catastrophe due to earthquake, flood, or other
natural or manmade disaster causes all governmental entities within San Bemardino
County to be prepared to share resources and information among themselves as well
as with the State of California in order to protect the public welfare; and
WHEREAS greater efficiency in mitigation. planning. response and recovery can be
achieved by joining the effods of the CITIES. TOWNS. and the COUNTY together in
pre-disaster agreements; and
WHEREAS California Govemment Code §§ 8559. 8605. and 8607 define an
Operational Area as an intermediate level of the state emergency services organization
consisting of a county and all political subdivisions within the county area and
establishes the Standardized Emergency Management System ("SEMS") to perform
disaster response and coordination of recovery operations by providing a focal point
and conduit for disaster intelligence information. mutual aid requests and efficient
management of resources; and
WHEREAS. because Califomia Govemment Code §8607 requires local govemments
within a county geographic area to be organized into a single operational area by
December 1.1995. the parties recognize the need for an operational area agreement;
(March 31. 1995 VERSION)
Page I
SA____N BERNARDINO COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
RFCOGNITION OF ANn PARTICIPATION IN THF: OPFRATIONAt ARFA FOR
DISASTFR RFSPONSF ANn RFCOVF:RY OPFRATIONS
The parties to this Agreement recognize an Operational Area, as the term is defined in
the California Emergency Services Act (Government Code §8550, et seq.) which
designates an intermediate level of organization for coordination and communication
between political subdivisions within San Bemardino County boundade's. The parties
agree to participate in an organizational structure, or Operational Area Organization,
which is a planning partnership for a systematic approach limited to exchanging
disaster intelligence, mutual aid requests and resource requests in order to foster the
effective flow of such disaster information and resource requests in emergencies, and
to prepare for disasters through cooperative training and exercise activities. Each of
the parties to this Agreement shall designate individuals to be trained to staff functions
in the Operational Area Emergency Operations Center ("EOC"). Each party to this
Agreement shall also designate, in writing, a line of succession of officials who are
empowered to speak on behalf of the party at the Operational Area Organization.
2. OPFRATIONAI ARF:A COORnlNATING COUNCIl
An Operational Area Coordinating Council is hereby established by the San Bemardino
County Board Of Supervisors to consist of one representative of each of the party
jurisdictions to the Agreement, to be appointed independently by each respective party.
Persons designated to represent political jurisdictions on the Operational Area Council
should be, for cities/towns, the City/Town Manager, and for the County, the County
Administrative Officer, or the individual appointed as the representative by the
Cities/Towns or the County. In all cases, the representative of a jurisdiction must have
sufficient authority to speak on behalf of the jurisdiction in support of the Operational
Area. It will be the responsibility of the Operational Area Coordinating Council to
establish organizational structure, policies and procedures for the functioning of the
council and operational area in accordance with Standardized Emergency Management
System (SEMS) regulations and guidelines. The Operational Area Coordinating
Council shall decide when and where it will hold meetings.
(March 31, 1995 VERSION)
Page 2
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA AGREEMENT
3. CONRInFRATION
The consideration under this Agreement is the mutual advantage of protection afforded
to each of the parties under this Agreement. There shall not be any monetary
compensation required from any party to another party as a condition of assistance
provided under this Agreement, except for reimbursement of direct costs as designated
in mutual aid agreements. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as altering any
pre-existing disaster response agreements between the parties. Nothing in this
Agreement shall be construed as altering coordination of fire and law enforcement
resources accomplished through their respective mutual aid systems. Funds assigned
to the Operational Area shall be administered by the Operational Area Coordinating
Council.
4. I FAn AGFNCY
The San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors hereby designates the San
Bemardino County Office of Emergency Services as the Lead Agency of the
Operational Area. The Board shall designate staff and be responsible for the day-to-
day administration of the Operational Area in accordance with the policies and
procedures adopted by the Operational Area Coordinating Council. This includes
taking a lead role in the initial planning and development of the Operational Area in
concert with the member local governments. The Lead Agency shall:
Coordinate information, resources and priorities among the local
governmental entities situated within the Operational Area, as
prescribed by the Operational Area Coordinating Council.
Coordinate information. resources and priorities between the region
level and the local government levels. Coordination of the State, fire
and law enforcement resources shall be accomplished through their
respective mutual aid systems.
Use multi-agency or inter-agency coordination to facilitate decisions
for overall operational level emergency response activities.
(March 31, 1995 VERSION)
Page 3
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA AGREEMENT
STANDARDIZED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (SEMS)
REGULATIONS
The Cities and County of San Bemardino recognize and fully support Califomia's
Standard Emergency Management System (SEMS). Development of the San
Bernardino Operational Area and its Disaster Response Standard Operating
Procedures will be in accordance with the major components of SEMS which include:
THE NATIONAL INCIDENT COMMAND SYSTEMS (ICS)
MULTI-AGENCY OR INTER-AGENCy COORDINATION
THE STATE'S MASTER MUTUAL AID PROGRAM
OPERATIONAL AREA
6. PROVISION OF FACII ITIFS ANn SUPPORT
The County shall provide an emergency operations center located at 1743 Miro Way,
Rialto, California, as the site for the Operational Area EOC. The County shall also
provide EOC support staff for the Operational Area Organization EOC during actual
operations and drills. All parties to this Agreement shall provide staff, as necessary, for
the decision making and operational positions of the Operational Area Organization.
7. TFRM OF AGRFFMI=NT
This Agreement shall be effective from the date it is executed in writing and shall
remain in effect unless and until it is modified or terminated in writing, in accordance
with the terms of this Agreement. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by
written agreement of a majodty of the parties entering into it, subject to approval of the
San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors.
(March 31, 1995 VERSION)
Page 4
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA AGREEMENT
8. WITHnRAWAI OF A PARTY
Any party to this Agreement may withdraw as a party to this Agreement prior to the
termination of this Agreement upon giving thirty (30) calendar days written notice to the
other parties. Notice shall be deemed to have been given three days after such notice
is posted by first class U.S. Mail or, altematively, sent by confirmed facsimile to each
existing party to this Agreement.
9. INnFMNIFICATION ANn HOI n HARMI FSS
The cities and towns agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the County and its
authorized agents, officers, volunteers, and employees against any and all claims or
actions arising from cities and towns' negligent acts or omissions and for any costs or
expenses incurred by the County or cities and towns on account of any claim therefore.
The County agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the cities and towns and
their authorized agents, officers, volunteers, or employees against any and all claims or
actions arising from the County's negligent acts or omissions and for any costs or
expenses incurred by the cities, towns or the County on account of any claim therefore.
10.
SAI ARIFS. FMPI OYMFNT ANn WORKFR'S COMPFNSATION FtFNFFITS
The salaries, employment and worker's compensation benefits of each employee
participating in the Operational Area Organization shall be the responsibility of the party
that employs the individual, and all persons participating in the Operational Area
Organization shall remain employees of the party that regularly employs them during
the performance of all tasks undertaken pursuant to this Agreement. It is understood
that each party's employees have no rights, benefits, or special employment status
conferred by reason of this Agreement.
(March 31, 1995 VERSION)
Page 5
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA AGREEMENT
11. FXFCUTION OF AGRFFMFNT
This agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall
constitute one and the same instrument, and be accorded the same force and effect as
if executed on one and the same instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO HAS EXECUTED
THIS AGREEMENT AS FOLLOWS:
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Chairman, Board of Supervisors
DATED
SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COPY
OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED
TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County
of San Bernardino.
By
Deputy
(March 31. 1995 VERSION)
Page 6
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA AGREEMENT
11. FXFCUTION OF AGRFFMFNT
This agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall
constitute one and the same instrument, and be accorded the same force and effect as
if executed on one and the same instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HAS EXECUTED
THIS AGREEMENT AS FOLLOWS:
DATE:
BY:
(Type Name)
TITLE:
(March 31, 1995 VERSION)
Page 22
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJEGT:
June 7, 1995
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
Brad Buller, City Planner
Scott Murphy, AICP, Associate Planner
A REQUEST TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR
THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING A HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN TO CONSERVE WILDLIFE AND PLANT SPECIES OF
CONCERN IN THE SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY
RFCOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council agree to participate in the Memorandum of
Understanding for the San Bernardino Valley Habitat Conservation Plan and authorize the
Mayor to sign the Memorandum of Understanding.
BACKGROUND:
On October 5, 1994, the City Council approved a Resolution supporting the formation of
a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the San Bernardino Valley. The HCP preparation
will attempt to achieve the following:
Preserve and conserve endangered, threatened, and sensitive ecosystems and
plant and animal life.
Provide greater equity in the regulation and mitigation for habitat conservation
throughout the valley.
3. Provide greater certainty for development.
Prescribe mitigation measures to lessen or avoid the cumulative impacts of reduced
habitat.
Obtain permits from federal and state officials for the "incidental taking" of covered
species in connection with lawful development. The U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service
and the California Department of Fish & Game will be signatories to the
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), thus providing greater assurance that the
required permits for "taking" species covered by the HCP will be forthcoming.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
June 7, 1995
Page 2
Provide oversight, control measures, and standards for the implementation of the
HCP. The Fish & Wildlife Service and Fish and Game Department will not approve
take permits unless they are satisfied the HCP can be implemented and enforced.
ANALYSIS:
Since the adoption of the Resolution by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the other
jurisdictions within the San Bernardino valley, a steering committee has been meeting to
develop an MOU. The committee is comprised of representatives from the U.S. Fish &
Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish & Game, the County of San Bernardino,
local jurisdictions, specialty agencies (e.g. Flood Control, water districts, utility companies,
etc.), the Building Industry Association, and environmental groups. A subcommittee was
formed to prepare the initial MOU which was presented to the entire group on two separate
occasions to review the points of the MOU. At the meeting of April 12, 1995, the
committee felt that, with a few minor changes, the MOU was ready to be presented to the
local jurisdictions for their consideration.
Staff and the City Attorney's office have reviewed the MOU and feel that the wording of the
document is acceptable. The main points of the MOU are as follows:
1. The County will act as the lead agency in processing the plan.
2. The implementation of the HCP will be done through an enforceable agreement.
Upon completion of the HCP, local jurisdictions will amend their land use plans and
policies to conform to the HCP. Failure to revise the land use plans amounts to a
withdrawal from the project and a possible reexamination of the HCP to evaluate the
impacts of the mitigation and habitat strategies affected by a city's withdrawal from
the plan.
Participating agencies may withdraw from the project at any time. As previously
mentioned, withdrawing from the HCP may cause 'a reevaluation of the HCP.
,
City resources will be required to assist in data collection and technical assistance
for the HCP. To date, Supervisor Eaves has indicated that direct monetary outlay
will not be required from local jurisdictions. "In-kind" contributions of staff time and
resources will be necessary.
Based on the review of sensitive habitat maps provided by the County of San Bernardino
and in-house documents prepared to address Riversidean Alluvial Fan Scrub and Coastal
Sage Scrub areas, the primary locations of sensitive habitat are located at the northern
portion of town including Cucamonga Canyon (west side), adjacent to the San Bernardino
County Flood Control District property at Milliken Avenue and Banyan Street (central), and
the Flood Control spreading grounds in northem Etiwanda (east side). The overall acreage
of these areas, as .calculated by the County, is 2,300 acres, or 2.4 percent of the sensitive
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
June 7, 1995
Page 3
habitat in the San Bernardino valley. The vast majority of sensitive habitat is located in the
City of Chino Hills and the unincorporated areas of the County, including Etiwanda North.
In all, the HCP is anticipated to take 2-1/2 years to complete at an estimated cost of $1.8
to $2 million dollars. To fund the plan preparation, the County has begun applying for
various grants offered through State and Federal agencies. Also, the County has
contacted SAN BAG about providing "start-up" funds for the plan preparation. SAN BAG
staff has allocated $75,000 from Measure I environmental enhancement and mitigation
funds. The use of these funds, however, requires matching funds. SAN BAG staff has
purposely not defined what constitutes matching funds to allow interpretation by the
agencies participating in the HCP. Supervisor Eaves has stated at several meetings that
contributions from local agencies would be in the form of "in-kind" contributions of staff time
and resources. Recently, however, the County has indicated that there may be the need
for monetary contributions in addition to "in-kind" contributions. As Supervisor Eaves
indicates in his letter of May 11, 1995 (see Exhibit "B"), the monetary contributions, if
needed, will be on a voluntary basis with the City Council approving the allocation of funds.
The concept of a Habitat Conservation Plan can be a valuable planning tool. The HCP will
provide greater certainty to open space preservation and to development. The HCP will
identify sensitive habitat for preservation and areas on which development may occur.
While there is a relatively small area of sensitive habitat within the City limits, the HCP has
the advantage of establishing environmental mitigation for areas that directly impact the
City, such as Etiwanda North. The HCP will also establish a level playing field for
environmental mitigation within the San Bernardino valley region. And finally, joining the
County in the HCP preparation may prevent the City from having to prepare its own HCP
if sensitive habitat is proposed for development.
If the MOU is approved by the City Council, staff will continue to monitor the HCP
preparation to ensure the plan maintains the high standards of the City and that the plan
serves the best interests of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. If staff gets any indication that
the HCP is veering from an acceptable course, the issue will be scheduled for City Council
consideration.
City Planner
BB:SM:gs
Attachment:
Exhibit "A" -
Exhibit "B" -
Exhibit "C" -
Memorandum of Understanding
Letter from Supervisor Eaves
Map of Sensitive Habitat within San
(provided by County staff)
Bernardino
County
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BY AND BETWEEN THE
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
FISH AND GAME, THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE FIFTEEN AFFECTED
CITIES IN SOUTHWESTERN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY AND ADDITIONAL
UNDERSIGNED PARTICIPATING AGENCIES
FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING A HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN TO CONSERVE WILDLIFE AND PLANT SPECIES OF CONCERN
IN THE SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY.
This Memorandum of Understanding (Memorandum) is made and entered into as of the date
of signature by and among the County of San Bemardino and the undersigned cities, state
and federal agencies and other participating local agencies. The signatories collectively are
referred to as the "Participating Agencies." The Participating Agencies for the purposes of
this Memorandum are those that have local land use authority, are self-governing local
agencies or are state or federal agencies with land management authority and/or jurisdiction
over plant and animal species and natural habitats which are the subject of the Habitat
Conservation Plan.
VVHEREAS, the Participating Agencies are among the local governments, self-goveming
agencies, and state and federal agencies that have administrative responsibility or regulatory
authority over lands within the planning area that are subject to Federal and State statutes
including the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), as amended, the California
Endangered Species Act of 1984 (CESA), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the
Federal Fish and WIldlife Coordination Act, the California Natural Community Conservation
Planning Act, state planning and zoning laws, and local ordinances, and,
VVHEREAS, these statutes direct the U. S. Fish and WIldlife Service ("Service") and the
California Department of Fish and Game ("Department") to conserve, protect, and enhance
plant, fish, and wildlife species and their habitats from adverse effects resulting from public
and pdvate development and actions, and,
WHEREAS, the various statute and sources of authority under which the Participating
Agencies function do not empower any individual agency to implement a comprehensive,
multi-agency program for long-term viability of species of concem, and,
WHEREAS, the Participating Agencies recognize the need for comprehensive and
coordinated protection of species of concern, and the need to integrate their responsibilities
and authorities in a coordinated manner to ensure successful, timely, and mutually beneficial
resolution of issues involving species of concem, and,
WHEREAS, the state and federal agencies participating in this Memorandum will ensure that
their regulatory decisions and land use practices will comply with state and federal
environmental and endangered species statutes and regulations and that their management
actions will promote appropriate use and protection of sensitive biological areas under their
junsdictions, and,
VVHEREAS, the local govemments participating in this Memorandum will ensure that their
land use decisions will comply with state and federal environmental and endangered species
statutes and regulations and that their governing actions will promote appropriate use and
protection of the areas identified as having important biological values in southwestern San
Bemardino County under their jurisdictions while promoting sound decision making practices
that attempt to balance the ecological and economic needs for the region, and
WHEREAS, efforts to coordinate conservation programs among local, State, and Federal
agencies in California are exemplified by the signing in 1991 of The Agreement on Biological
Diversity by twenty-seven Federal, State, and local agencies including the Bureau of Land
Management, the Service and the Department, and which Agreement provides a framework
for collaborative conservation planning on a bioregional or local scale, and,
WHEREAS, biological resources are important to all citizens of San Bemardino County,
including indigenous people and future residents,
THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed and understood that,
1.0 PURPnSFS t'}F MI=MORANnUM
The Participating Agencies have administrative and/or regulatory responsibilities over
species of concem in the southwestern San Bemardino County. They have voluntarily
entered into this Memorandum for the following purposes:
1.1 To define their roles and responsibilities in the development and
implementation of a San Bemardino Valley Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan
(MSHCP),
1.2 To develop a MSHCP that is consistent with the ESA, the CESA and the
Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) program, and ensures
conservation and protection of currently listed, proposed and candidate species and
species of concam and their habitats within the designated plan area. The boundaries
of the plan are described in Attachment A. The species proposed to be covered by
the plan are enumerated in Attachment B.
1.3 To provide definition and certainty to the planning process prior to substantial
investment of tim and funding, and
1.4 To demonstrate a commitment to this process as the forum for ~a
comprehensive approach to resolving land use and endangered species conflicts.
2.0 PURPO-~F.~ OF THF PI AN
It is agreed that the plan will be a coordinated multi-agency, multi-species conservation plan
focusing on certain covered species within the plan boundaries. The purposes of the plan
are:
2.1 Protection of Covered ,~,0ecies. To conserve and protect covered species and
the ecosystems on which they depend in perpetuity within southwestern San
Bemardino County pursuant to the ESA and CESA, and not preclude recovery of
listed species.
2.2 Provide F(;luity in Reg,I;tion. To provide a comprehensive means to
coordinate and standardize mitigation and compensation requirements so that public
and pi'ivate actions will be regulated equally and consistently, reducing delays,
expenses, and regulatory duplication. It is intended that the plan will eliminate
uncertainty in developing pdvate projects and will prescribe a system to ensure that
the costs of compensation and mitigation are applied equitably to all.
2.3 Red~tce Cum, jl:ative ;=ffects. To prescribe mitigation measures for pdvate
development and agency actions to lessen or avoid cumulative impacts to the covered
species and eliminate, whenever possible, case-by-case review of impacts of projects
when consistent with the mitigation and compensation requirements prescribed by the
plan.
2.4 Incident=l T=ke Permit. To obtain the necessary permits or take authorizations
from the Service and the Department to authorize the incidental take of listed species
covered in the plan in connection with otherwise lawful activities within the area
subject to the plan as provided by Section 10(a) of the ESA and Section 2081 of the
CESA.
2.5 Conserv=tion ere-listing) Agreement=. The MSHCP is intended to provide for
the long term preservation of covered species not currently listed as threatened or
endangered pursuant to the ESA or CESA such that should they become listed, the
Department and the Service shall, barring 'unforeseen or extraordinary' conditions,
authorize incidental take for the species. To accomplish this, all non-listed species
being considered under this plan will be treated as if they are already listed.
"Unforeseen or extraordinary" conditions shall be defined in the MSHCP and its
Implementation Agreement, but such conditions, for the purposes of this MOU, are
generally understood to be: (1) environmental, demographic and/or genetic stochastic
circumstances that were not and could not be antidpated dudng the preparation of the
Plan, or (2) information developed during MSHCP implementation monitoring that
identifies consequences of MSHCP implementation procedures that may jeopardize
the continued existence of the species.
2.6 prnvirl,e (lversight. ~--ontrol M,.as.,re.e :=rid Rtanderds of -q-ccess. To establish
a means in which the MSHCP will provide appropriate and successful methods of:. (1)
reporting; (2) accounting audits; (3) funding (short and long term); (4) pedodic and
independent biological evaluation; and (5) opportunities for adequate public
participation.
3
3.0 HABITAT CONSI=RVATION PI AN COMPONFNTS
3.1 The Plan. The principal component of this effort is the preparation of a
MSHCP. The plan will adopt and adhere to the best available information on or
methods of conservation biology and identify listed and unlisted species to be covered
in the plan. It will seek to minimize the threats that would lead to listing of presently
unlisted species covered in the plan and identify a reserve system, financing and
management which are sufficient to conserve the covered species. The plan will
include the development and analysis of appropriate biological data, an alternatives
analysis that includes, but is not limited to, an alternative that would not result in "take"
of listed species and the reasons why not selected, the delineation of sensitive habitat
areas supporting the covered species addressed in the plan, and the identffication of a
habitat preserve system that will support the continued existence of all species
proposed to be covered in the plan.
3.2 Section 10(R) Permit and ~081 T~ke A~hodT~tion Al~plir-~tions. Applications
for permits under Section 10(a) of the ESA and Section 2081 of the CESA will be
submitted to the Service and the Department when the draft plan is issued. The plan
will function as the MSHCP for the purpose of making the permit applications. Plan
implementation will be described in an accompanying Implementation Agreement. It
is intended that the review and approval of the MSHCP by the Participating Agencies
will satisfy the requirements of applicable Federal and State environmental law. It is
the intent of the parties to eliminate project-by-project review of the effect of
development activities on the Covered Species, to the full extent authorized by law,
and to ensure that mitigation/compensation measures are not imposed beyond those
detailed in the MSHCP for such development activities provided conditions under
which the MSHCP was formulated have not significantly changed. Such a plan will
satisfy the Federal and State agencies with respect to the protection of the Covered
Species by, among other possible mechanisms, providing uniform and biologically
viable mitigation/compensation measur. es for application to development activities.
Such mitigation measures will be developed subject to the approval of Federal and
State agencies.
Individual landowners, groups of landowners, or development interests may choose to
comply with the terms and conditions of the MSHCP affecting their proposed activities.
Alternately, they may choose to prepare and submit their own conservation plan and
Section 10(a) permit application when their activities may result in incidental take of
faderally listed species and, if State or local agency approval is required, they may
choose to submit their proposal outside the exiting conservation plan umbrella.
3.3 Iml;~lement==tion/~greernent. The conservation plan shall be implemented
through an enforceable agreement. The Agreement shall specify the operating
parameters of the conservation plan for the San Bemardino Valley. The Agreement
specffies the obligations, authorffies, responsibilities, liabilities, benefits, dghts, and
privileges of all parties or signatories to the subject conservation plan to be prepared
and submitted with the Section 10(a) permit and 2081 authorization applications. The
Agreement shall also provide for expeditious issuance of Section 10(a) permits and
2081 authorizations for Covered Species not currently listed pursuant to the ESA or
CESA by incorporating "Pre-listing" commitments into the Agreement. It is intended
that the Agreement will be entered into by all Participating Agencies approving the
conservation plan, and any pdvate party having an obligation or role in implementing
the conservation plan. The Agreement will provide specffic mitigation commitments
for private parties and Public Agencies conducting otherwise lawful activities, and
assurances by the Participating Agencies to prevent the imposition of inconsistent or
overlapping mitigation/compensation requirements under any Federal, State, or local
law.
3.4 CI=(~A ANn NI=PA Compli-nce. Concurrent with preparation and release of the
draft and final plans, a joint environmental review document will be prepared and
released which will satisfy Federal and State requirements.
3.5 l'~ecision. The acceptance of the plan, the CEQA and NEPA environmental
documents and the Section 10(a) permit applications and the signing of an
Implementation Agreement by the Service will result in the issuance of Section 10(a)
permits, pursuant to Section 10(a) of the ESA, to the local agencies that are
participants in the planning effort for the public and private lands involved.
The acceptance of the plan and the CEQA environmental documentation and the
signing of an Implementation Agreement by the Department will result in the issuance
of 2081 take authorizations for the covered species that are adequately protected by
the plan pursuant to the CESA to local agencies that are participants in the plan for
the public and pdvate lands involved. Other appropriate decision documents will be
issued by the Participating Agencies.
3.6 Implementation. Following or concurrent with the issuance of the biological
opinion, adoption of the. plan, and receipt of the lO(a) permits and 2081 take
authorizations, the signatories will revise their land use plans and policies to conform
with the plan and the 10(a) permits and 2081 take authorizations or withdraw from the
program. Take authorizations may not be in effect until land use plans are amended.
Should any participant withdraw from the program, it may adversely affect the plan
area and covered species list and therefore may require appropriate modffications of
the plan. The signatories will also ensure that future plans, policies, and actions will
be in conformance with the plan and the Section 10(a) permits and 2081 take
authorizations.
Should the need adse to amend the plan in accordance with established procedures
due to new information or the development of more effective management
prescriptions or techniques, such amendment will occur through a cooperative effort
involving fie agencies and the public in the southwestem San Bemardino County that
are subject to lO(a) permits and 2081 take authorizations or biological opinions that
may have already been issued.
3.7 ('-onserw=tion ~tmtegy. The plan shall maximize the use of appropriate
publicly-owned lands, comply with legally mandated conservation measures, and
provide incentives for conservation of pdvate lands (land acquisition, density transfers,
land swaps, tax incentives. mitigation banks. etc.).
5
3.8 ImJ;)lement~tion Funding. The scope of the plan and any preserve system must
take into account realistic, affordable funding sources. The plan shall be based upon
tangible and affordable sources of funds and may provide for increased conservation
if other local, state or federal funding becomes available.
4.0 RO~ I= OF THF PARTICIPATIN~ A~FNCIF.~
4.1 General Roles and Responsibilities. The County of San Bemardino shall act as
the functional lead agency utilizing the assistance, support and cooperation of the
cities and local agencies in preparation of the plan. When and if a Joint Powers
Authorfly (JPA) is established to facilitate and oversee the plan preparation and
implementation, the lead responsibility shall pass to the JPA. The county, cities and
local agencies shall have administrative responsibility for preparation and
implementation of the plan and shall provide for full public involvement in plan
preparation through the use of a Steedng Committee made up of public volunteers
and appointed interested parties consisting of, but not limited to, representatives of
conservation organizations, industry, and private interest groups. The Service and the
Department shall participate in the planning process by responding to work products
and by providing direction on the acceptability of proposed habitat preserve designs
and implementation mechanisms.
4.2 Assistance to the ~-o~.nty. Each Participating Agency agrees to provide to the
County. without cost to the County, the following information and assistance:
(a)
Data. All relevant information it possesses for the lands within its
junsdiction.
(b)
Technir-=l Assistance. Staft and support to assist with the following
planning tasks:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Developing management prescriptions relevant to the land within
its jurisdiction.
Providing effective liaison with adjacent jurisdictions.
Developing and Implementing a public partidpation program to
ensure adequate public partidpation within its area of jurisdiction,
as required by State Law or local ordinance.
Preparing 10(a) permit and 2081 take authorization applications.
Providing any other assistance and/or support as might b~
mutually agreed upon with the County.
(c)
Point of ~--ont=ct. Designate, in writing, the name of the individual
official(s) who will function as the primary agency contact for
coordination with the County. The names, addresses, phone numbers
and affiliations of these individuals are set forth in Attachment C.
4.3 PI-n Conform-nce. In order to be a permittee, Participating Agencies will
ensure that their land use plans and policies are revised to conform with the approved
plan and the 10(a) permits and 2081 take authorizations, and any other applicable
regional, state or federal resource management plans.
4.4 Plan Preparation Ft~nding. Funding for this plan will come from a vadety of
sources -- Participating Agency contributions, endowments from private or non-profit
entities, matching grant programs such as offered by the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation, and other State and Federal funds such as those established by the
California Natural Community Conservation Planning Act, the Intermodel Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), Traffic Management Environmental
Enhancement (TMEE) program and Land and Water Conservation Fund program.
The Participating Agencies will also provide a fair share contribution to funding the
plan preparation and implementation by allocating appropriate staff and support
services.
4.5 Prol;>osed Schedule. Signatories acknowledge that time is of the essence and
hereby agree to make their best efforts to complete and obtain final approval of the
plan by a target date of June 30, 1996. A timeline setting forth specific dates for the
completion of each identffied task necessary to complete the plan is contained in
Attachment D.
4.6 Fnvironment.,I Compli.,nce. In recognition of the goal of achieving the timely
preparation and approval of the plan, all Participating Agencies hereby agree that they
will submit any and all comments on the appropriate environmental documentation on
a timely basis, unless otherwise provided by law.
5.0 R{'}I F nF THI= P-OI INTY
The County of San Bemardino agrees to provide the following resources and to perform the
following functions according to the funding mechanisms agreed to by the cities, local
agencies, county and other interested parties:
5.1 Ie=d Agenq:y. Act as lead agency for the plan. As lead agency, the County will
provide overall leadership and coordination among the Participating Agencies in the
development of this plan. This includes functioning as Local Lead Agency in
complying with the CEQA in conjunction with the Department and coordinating NEPA
compliance in coordination with the Service.
5.2 Planning Te=m Personnel. Provide the pdmary members of the planning team.
5.3 F-cilities Prt. iDrnent- .nrf .c;,~Dort. Provide office facilities to house the
planning team and provide necessary support such as office machine supplies, etc.
The County also agrees to provide automated support. such as word processing and
geographic information system products directly or through contracts.
5.4 Data. Provide any relevant data in its possession for the use of the planning
team and the Participating Agencies and secure additional data on public lands as
6.0
needed to allow completion of the plan and encourage private landowner participation.
The County also agrees to participate in the analysis of the data and formulation of
management prescriptions.
5.5 Puhlic P=rticil;)~tion. Assume lead responsibilities for ensuring adequate public
participation by affected parties and interests and actively seek overall public
participation in the planning effort.
5.6 Point of Contact. Designate, in writing, the name of the person designated as
the primary County contact for the planning effort.
5.7 Fnd~ngered Species Acts. Submit the draft plan and draft environmental
compliance documentation to the Service and the Department for analysis, review,
and comments. The County will then submit final applications to the Service and the
Department for review and processing.
5.8 Plan Preparation F-ntfing. Funding for this plan will be as described in Section
4.4 above. As a Participating Agency, the County will also provide a fair share
contribution to funding the plan preparation and implementation by allocating
appropriate staff and support services.
ROt F nF THI= U.-~. FI-~H ANn W!I I'~1 IFF: .RFRVInF ANn THF CAIIFORNIA
nFPARTMFNT OF FIsH ANn ~AMF
6.1 Technit'~l Assist=nce. Riologir-~l ~=t~= ~=nd Ativice. The Service and the
Department shall advise and make available all public information on the species and
their habitats and shall agree to a final list of species and habitats to be addressed
during the initial stages of plan preparation. The Service will also provide guidance on
what constitutes the best available scientific and commercial information for the
purpose of permit applications.
6.2 Intedm Work Proth~ct A.0~rov=l. The Service and the Department shall provide
comments and guidance (in writing) on intedm work products at major milestones in
the planning process so es to contribute to an efficient, cost-effective MSHCP that is
capable of being completed according to the schedule in Attachment D. The following
actions are identified as major milestones for the: purpose of this paragraph: (1)
agreement on the proposed list of species to be covered in the plan, (2) agreement on
the list of associated habitats or ecosystems, (3) agreement on scientffic criteda for
conducting field surveys and the format for compiling and reporting information, (4) a
determination of what constitutes mitigation to the maximum extent practicable, (5)
preliminary approval of a proposed preserve system and related Implementation
Agreement, and (6) agreement on of the appropriate environmental documentation for
the plan.
To assist in providing data pertaining to current or future development plans of
individual projects during .the preparation of the conservation plan, and to provide
opportunities to minimize negative impacts upon long-term conservation planning and
the viability of biological resources, and to assist in the preparation of the conservation
plan and its ultimate implementation, the Participating Agencies will utilize the Intenm
Project Review Process, included as Attachment F, to consider the potential effects of
individual projects on the MSHCP.
6.3 Iss,,:~nce of Section 10(R3 Permits ~nd 7081 T~ke AuthodT=tions. The Service
and the Department agree to issue the required permits and take authorizations for
listed s. pecies to the local agencies upon finding that the plan and permit/authorization
applications meet the criteria for issuance of an incidental take permit and
authorization contained in Section 10(a)(2)(B) of the ESA and Section 2081 of the
Public Resources Code for those species through the establishment of a preserve
system that conserves adequate habitat and provides for the retention and
management of such preserves in perpetuity. The Service and the Department also
agree to provide for expedited issuance of Section 10(a) permits and 2081
authorizations for Covered Species not currently listed pursuant to the ESA or CESA
in the event that a non-listed covered species is listed in the future.
6.4 Assurnnces to Pl=n P=rticiD=nts. The approved plan shall provide assurances
to Participating Agencies and landowners that if the plan is implemented as proposed,
no additional land or financial compensation will be sought from them without their
consent if "unforeseen" or "extraordinary" circumstances should arise with respect to
either listed or unlisted species that are covered by the property functioning plan. It is
understood that species not covered by the plan will not be afforded the same
assurances as those that are covered. However, in the event that a species not
addressed in the MSHCP is listed at some future date, the Service and the
Department agree to use the MSHCP as a forum for addressing the conservation
needs of the species as required by the ESA and CESA in the same manner that
Covered Species have been addressed. All Participating Agencies will make every
attempt at accommodating the conservation requirements of the newly listed species
within the existing conservation strategies and preserves of the MSHCP.
7.0 ADnlTIc~NAI PRnVIRit1N.~
7.1 ~ood F=ith. This Memorandum is entered into freely and in good faith by the
signatory agencies. Each agency affirms that execution of this document is within its
legal purview and agrees to fuffill the role slated herein and any other tasks and
responsibilities incumbent upon Participating Agencies. All of the Participating
Agencies by signature to this Memorandum agree to diligently pursue completion of
the subject MSHCP and endorse consensus decisions of the Steering Committee as
long as the proposed actions are within the statutory and regulatory ability of their
respective agency.
7.2 Intedm PrOject Review= =nd Ap~rov=ls. All Participating Agencies recognize
that planning efforts undertaken pursuant to this Memorandum can be prolonged
beyond anticipated planning schedules due to vadous unforeseen circumstances. All
parties agree that interim land use actions shall be considered on a case by case
basis within the purview of each agencies' individual jurisdiction and in compliance
with existing laws and regulations. The MSHCP planning effort shall not be cause to
create a "de facto" moratorium for on-going. otherwise legally adequate programs and
activities. All permit applications processed dudng the pedod of the MSHCP
development will be evaluated on their individual merits and in consideration of
cumulative impacts to the species and their habitat. Appropriate incentives to land
holders for the protection on non-listed species may be achieved through
consideration of density transfers, land swaps within the MSHCP area, "Debt for
Nature" exchanges, tax incentives through gifts, donations and conservation
easements, mitigation banks and purchase of affected property.
7.3 Future listings. It is understood by all parties that thc MSHCP planning
process and the plan itseft, when adopted, is not a substitute for necessary listings of
species pursuant to the ESA or CESA. Rather, for all currently unlisted species
covered by the approved plan, it is understood that, should future listings occur, the
Service and Department shall not require the commitment of additional land or
financial compensation beyond the level of mitigation which was otherwise adequately
provided for covered species under the terms of the property functioning plan.
7.4 limit of A, ,thority =rid F-nding. The signatory agencies agree and understand
that performance under this agreement by any party is dependent upon the lawful
appropriation, availability, and allocation of funds by proper authorities and that this
agreement does not constitute a commitment of funds, which must be made by
separate action of the appropriate officials of each party.
7.5 Pt,hlic Involvement. It is the intent of the parties to the Memorandum that the
public will be afforded suffident opportunity to provide input to the MSHCP, not only
during the required CEQA and NEPA review process, but during the scoping and
planning process, as well.
7.6 I=ffective n;te of Agreement. This agreement shall take effect upon the dates
of signature.
7.7 Amendment of This Memor=nd,,m. This Memorandum may be amended at
any time with the concurrence of all parties. Approved amendments must be in writing.
7;8 Termin=tion. This agreement shall automatically terminate upon approval and
adoption of the plan or on December 31, 1997, which ever occurs tirst, unless
extended as provided in Paragraph 7.7 above.
lo
IN WITNESS VVHEREOF, THE PARTIES HERETO have executed this Memorandum, on the
date(s) set forth below, as of the day and year first above written.
By
Date
Chair,
San Bemardino County Board of Supervisors and Flood Control District
San Bemardino, Califomia
By
Mayor,
City of Chino
Chino, Califomia
Date
By
Mayor,
City of Chino Hills
Chino Hills, California
Date
By
Mayor,
City of Colton
Colton, Califomia
Date
By
Mayor,
e
City of Fontana
Fontana, Califomia
Date
By
Mayor,
City of Grand Terrace
Grand Terrace, Califomia
Date
By
Mayor,
City of Highland
Highland, California
Date
By
By
By
By
By
By
By
By
Mayor,
City of Loma Linda
Loma Linda, Califomia
Mayor,
City of Montclair
Montclair, Califomia
Mayor,
City of Ontario
Ontario, California
Mayor,
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia
Mayor,
City of Redlands
Redlands, California
Mayor,
City of Rialto
Rialto, Califomia
Mayor,
City of San Bemardino
San Bemardino, Califomia
Mayor,
City of Upland
Upland, California
12
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
By
Mayor,
City of Yucaipa
Yucaipa, California
Date
By
Regional Director,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Portland, Oregon
Date
By
California State Director,
Bureau of Land Management
Date
By
District Engineer,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Date
By
Forest Supervisor, San Bemardino National Forest
U.S. Forest Service
Date
By
Director, -
Califomia Department of Fish and Game
Date
By
Region Director,
Southem Califomia Edison Company
Date
By
District Manager.
Southem California Gas Company
Date
By
Regional Director,
Metropolitan Water District
Date
13
By
Board President,
San Bemardino Valley Water Conservation Distdct
Date
By
Board 'President,
San Bemardino Valley Municipal Water Distdct
Date
14
Aq'I'ACHMENT A
-l.
BOUNDARIES OF THE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
The Habitat Conservation Plan for the San Bemardino Valley will encompass the
area generally bounded by the county lines between San Bemardino County and
Los Angeles, Orange and Riverside Counties on the west and south and the San
Bemardino National Forest Boundary on the north and east.
A-1
Species
Insects
ATTACHMENT B
List of Species Proposed to Be Coverd in the
Valley-Wide Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan
Status
Federal State
INVERTEBRATES
Greenest tiger beetle
Cicindel~ tr=nrtsJebAdr-~ viddissimA
Delhi Sand flower-loving fly
Rh~phiomid~s termin~tJ ~s ~briomin~lis
Fishes
VERTEBRATES
Santa Ana sucker
C=tostom, ,s s~nt~n~e
Santa Ana speckled dace
Rhinichthys osc-l-soscul-s ssp.
Amphibians
Arroyo southwestam toad
Bufo micmsr~q,gh~ss t'~lifomic-s
Red-legged frog
Rana aurora draytoni
Mountain yellow-legged frog
Reptiles
Westam pond turtle
Clemnys mArmonat~ ~
Coastal westam whiptail
Cnemidol~hon ,s ~ mt iltisct ~t:~tt ~s
FC2
FE
FC2
FC2
PE/FSS CSC
PE/FSS CSC
FC2/FSS CSC
FC2/FSS CSC
FC2/FSS CSC
B-1
Species
Status
Federal
State
Coast horned lizard
Phryno-~om= coron=tum bl=invillei
San Bemardino ring-necked snake
I~i=rlophis Dunct=t~Js modestus
Coastal rosy boa
I ich~m ~r~ trivirgtqt~ ros~fs
Coast patch-nosed snake
S~lv~riom hex~li,I;}is virgj dte~
Two-striped garter snake
Th=mnophis h=mmondii
Birds
White-tailed kite
Northem hamer
Circus cy-ne,,s
Sharp-shinned hawk
Accipiter strict: :s
Cooper's Hawk
Accii~iter cooperil
Ferruginous hawk
Buteo r~qg~li=
Golden eagle
~ ~ r~nndensi=
American peregrine falcon
Falco peregdn=t, J=
Praide falcon
Falco m~-xir~m
FC2/FSS
FC2/FSS
FC2/FSS
FC2/FSS
FC2/FSS
FSS
FSS
FC2
FE
FSS
CSC
CSC
CFP
CFP
CSC
CSC
CSC
CSC
SE
CSC
B-2
Species
Western Burrowing owl
Speot:yto cunicul=n= hypuge~
Long-eared owl
Asio otus
Southwestern willow flycatcher
Fmgidon-x ~ extim~ ~s
California horned la~
F:remophil- -I~estds actia
Coastal cactus wren
C~mp. ylorhynch,~s brunneir-~ill-s
California gnatcatcher
Polioptil~ r--qlifomit'~q
Least's Belrs vireo
Vireo bellii pusilh ~s
Califomia yellow warbler
IDendroir~q petechi- hrewsted
Yellow-breasted chat
Califomia rufous-crowned sparrow
Aimophil~ n triceps t'--nescens
Bell's sage sparrow
Arn~hiq;~iT~, belli belli
Tdcolored blackbird A.gel~,i, ~s tricolor
Mammals
Greater mastiff-bat
I=t Jmops perotis r-~lifomic~ ,s
Status
Federal
FC2
PF. JFSS
FC3
FC3B
FT/FSS
FE
FC2/FSS
FC2
FC2
FC2
State
CSC
CSC
SE
CSC
CSC
SE
CSC
CSC
CSC
CSC
CSC
CSC
B-3
Species
Status
Federal
State
San Diego. black-tailed jackrabbit
LeJ;.Ut cnlifomic~ Js bennettii
Los Angeles pocket mouse
Perogn~th-s Iongimembris brevin~sus
San Diego pocket mouse
Ch:~etodiD~,s fallax fallax
San Bernardino kangroo rat
I'lipodomys merd:~mi p~rvus
Southern grasshopper mouse
onychornys tordd~ is r:~mon=
San Diego desert wood rat
Neotom~ IDjJ;la intermerli~
FC2
FC2
FC2
FC2
FC2
FC2
CSC
CSC
CSC
CSC
CSC
CSC
B-4
Species
Family
Fedeml
Status
State
CNPS
Plant~
Marsh sandwort
Aren~n~ p~ludicol=
Coulter's saltbush
AtriDlex coulted
Parish's brittlescale Atri.~lex I;)~dshii
Nevin's barbern/
Rerbeds rlevinii
Round-leaved boykinia
Roykini~ rot, ,nrlifoli=
Thread-leaved brodiaea
Rrodi~e~ ~
Brewers calanddnia
C~l=nt~dni= brewed
Plummer's lily
C~lochortt ~s pl-mmeme
Peninsular spineflower
ChodT,nthe leDtother~q
Padsh's spineflower
ChodT=nth- DaZI:Y.j var. IZaZZY. j
Prostrate spineflower
Chod?=nth~ procl
Saw-grass
Cl:~die ,m c.qlifomic~ ~m
Slender-horned spineflower
I'~ot~ec-~hem~ leptoc~-r'as
CRY
CHN
CHN
BER
SAX
LIL
POR
LIL
PLG
PLG
PLG
CYP
PLG
FE
FC2
FC1
FC1
FC2
FE
SE
SE
SE
SE
1B
1B
1B
1B
4
1B
4
1B
4
4
1B or2
B-5
Species
Family
Federal
Status
State
CNPS
Many-stemmed dudleyea
Dudle~;:~ multic~ulis
Santa Ana River woollystar
F:d:~strum densifolium s=nctorum
Hot Spring fimbdstylis
Fimbdstylis therm~lis
California bedstraw
G~lium c=lifomic,m pdm,,m
Los Angeles sunflower
Heli=th.~s n-tt:~llii I;)=dshii
Smooth tarplant
HemiToni:~ pm0ens laevis
Southem Califomia black walnut
J.191:~ns t'~lifomir~ t'-~lifomir~
Coulter's goldenfields
I ~stheni:~ gl:~hr'At~ co,lt~d
Robinson's peppergraB
I eDidi~.m virginic~.m rohinsonii
Ocellated Humbolt lily
Lilium h~mholdtii ocell~t-m
Padsh's desert-thom
I yci~ ~m I;)~ri-~hii
Padsh's bush mallow
M:~l:~cothmmm ~s Dl:jiJ3ij
Pdngle's monardella
Mon:~rrl~-II; pdnglei
Califomia spineflower
M.,cron~-~ r~iifomi,"-~
CRS
PLM
CYP
RUB
AST
AST
JUG
AST
BRA
LIL
SOL
MLV
LAM
PLG
FC2/FSS
FE
FC3B
FC2
FC2
FC2
FC2
FC2
FC2
FC2
SE
SR
2
1B
1A
1B
4
1B
1B
4
2
1A
1A
4
B-6
Status
Family
Species Federal State CNPS
Califomia muhly
Muhlenhergi= c=lifomir-=
Little mousetail
Myos-rus minimus a,aJ.l
Padsh's goosebern/
Ribes div:~dr~tJ ,m I;}:~dshii
Salt spdng checkerbloom
Sjd:aJce~ neomexit'~n:~
Wedge gross
S~henopholis obtus:qt~
POA 1B
RAN FC2 3
SAX FC2 1B
MLV 2
POA 2
Status Codes:
FE Listed as Endangered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service
FT Listed as Threatened by the US Fish and Wildlife Service
PE Proposed Endangered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service
FC1 Category 1 candidate for federal listing for which substantial information on
the biological vulnerability and threat supports the appropriateness of
proposing the species to be listed as endangered or threatened.
FC2 Category 2 candidate for federal listing for which insuffident biological
information exists to support listing.
FSS Forest Service Sensitive Species
SE Listed as Endangered by the California Department of Fish and Game
SR Listed as Ram by the California Department of Fish and Game
CSC California Department of Fish and Game "Species of Special Concern"
CFP California Fully Protected
CNPS California Native Plant Sodety
1A
1B
2
3
4
Plants presumed to be extinct.
Plants that am ram, threatened or endangered.
Plants that am ram, threatened or endangered in California, but
common elsewhere.
Plants for which insufficient data is available.
Plants that are of limited distribution in California and their
susceptibility to threat appears low at this time.
NOTE:
Appearance of a species on this list does not imply the presence or
occurrence of the species in all jurisdictions located within the boundaries
(Attachment A) of the MSHCP.
B-7
ATTACHMENT C
LIST OF PARTICIPATING AGENCIES AND POINT OF CONTACT
,an Bemardino County Planning Department
Randy Scott, Planning Manager
385 N. Arrowffiead Ave., Third Floor
San Bemardino, CA 92415-0182
_ (909) 387-4146
(909) 387-3223 (FAX)
city of
Highland
Planning Department
Steve Walker, City Planner
26985 East Base Line Avenue
Highland, CA 92346
(909) 864-6861 Ext. 215
(909) 862-3180 (FAX)
cry of
China
Community Development Department
Jerry Blum, City Planner
13220 Central Avenue
China, CA 91708
(909) 591-9812 Ext. 520
(909) 591-6829 (FAX)
City of China Hills
Community Development Department
Eric Noms, Senior Planner
2001 Grand Avenue
China Hills, CA 917094869
(909) 590-1511 Ext. 223
(909) 590-5646 (FAX)
City of Colton
Public Works Department
John C. Hutton, Director
650 North La Cadena Drive
Colton, CA 92324-2893
(909) 370-5065
(909) 370-5154 (FAX)
of
Fontana
Planning Division
Dennis Woods, Associate Plartner
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontaria, CA 92334
(909) 350-6724
(909) 350-7691(FAX)
City of
Grand Terrace
Community Development Department
Patrma Materassi, Community Development
Director
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92313
(909) 824-6621
(909) 783-7629 (FAX)
City of
Lama Linda
Planning Department
Dan Smith, Director of Community
Development
25541 Barton Road
Lama I. inda, CA 92354
(909) 799-2810
(909) 799-2890 (FAX)
cRyof
Montclair
Community Development Department
Rob Clark, Community Development Director
5111 Benlto Street
Montctair, CA 91763-0808
(909) 625-9431
(909) 621-1594 (FAX)
CRyof
Ontario
Planning Department
Otto Kroutil, CRy Planner
303 East "B' Street, Civic Center
Ontario, CA 91754
(909) 391-2506
(909) 391-0692 (FAX)
CRy of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department
Scott Murphy, Associate Planner
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
(909) 989-1851
(909) 948-1648 (FAX)
cRy of
Redlands
Planning Department
Jeff Shaw, Planning Director
30 Cajon Street
Redlands, CA 92373
(909) 798-7555
(909) 798-7503 (FAX)
C-1
77
c~y of
CjW of
Rialto
Development Services Department
Planning Division
Donn Montag, Principal Planner
150 South Palm Avenue
Rialto, CA 92376
(909) 421-7218
(909) 873--481:4 (FAX)
San Bemardino
Department of Planning and Building
Services
AI Boughey, Director
300 North 'D' Street
San Bemardino, CA 92402
(909) 384-5133
(909) 384-5461 (FAX)
City of
c~y of
Upland
Community Development Department
Sylvia Scharf, Senior Planner
460 North Euclid Avenue
Upland, CA 91785
(909) 9314144
(909) 931-4123 (FAX)
Yucaipa
Planning Department
John McMains, Director of Planning
34272 Yucaipa Boulevard
Yucaipa, CA 92399
(909) 797-2489 Ext. 231
(909) 790-9203 (FAX)
e
ATTACHMENT E
DEFINITIONS
Covered-Species. Plant and animal species which will be found adequately
protected from extirpation by the implementation of the MSHCP, and meet
issuance criteria for a 10(a) permit.
Multi-Species Hnbit=t Conserv=tion P!=n (MSHCP), A plan developed to allow
incidental take of species as described in Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the federal
Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended.
Imrqementing Agreement(s). A contract entered into by the Wildlife Agencies
and a Local Jurisdiction in which the parties agree to implement the conditions
and actions described in a Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan.
l ist~d R~ecies. Plant and animal species protected by listing as threatened
or endangered species by one or both of the Federal and State Endangered
Species Acts.
Preserve .S. yst~-m. Area to be perpetually preserved for its habitat value through
the coordinated implementation of the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan·
P~hlic I=nd. Land in the ownership or perpetual control of a local, State or
federal govemment agency.
-':;~ecies of ('-oncem. Plant and animal species that are listed as endangered or
threatened pursuant to the Federal or State Endangered Species Acts, a
candidate sip. des proposed to be listed pursuant to these acts, or-ram species
in the plan area.
T=ke A-thodT=tion. A term to describe the collective permits, authorizations,
and agreements which will be issued by the Service or the Department to
participating local jurisdiction permittees.
Take authorizations may be given by the Service and the Department:
(a)
(b)
The Service may issue take authorizations under ESA Section
10(a)(1)(B), and Section 4(d) for the Califomia gnatcatcher.
The Department may issue take authorizations under California
Fish and Game Code Sections 2081 for candidate, threatened, and
endangered species; and Section 2835 for the NCCP Act of 1992.
E-1
ATTACHMENT F
INTERIM PROJECT REVIEW GUIDELINES
This document establishes an agreement among the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
("Service"), the Califomia Department of Fish and Game ('Department') and all other
federal. state and local agencies participating in the San Bemardino Valley Multi-
Species Habitat Consen/ation Plan (MSHCP) pertaining to an Interim Project Review
Process to be utilized during the preparation of the Plan.
The Intedm Project Review Guidelines (IPRG) have two related purposes: (1) to ensure
early review and consideration of proposed projects by the Service and the Department
so that projects which could preclude the successful development of the MSHCP will be
identffied at the eadiest possible point in the development review process, and (2) to
provide a opportunity for dialogue between the lead agency, the project applicant and
the regulatory agencies to explore altematives or mitigation measures which could
minimize and mitigate potential project impacts.
Local Agencies have identified that significant problems have arisen in the past when
comments on proposed projects am not received from the Department of Fish and
Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service until very late in the lead agency's decision-
making process. To address this problem with respect to projects which may have the
potential to preclude long-term conservation strategies addressed in the MSHCP or
impact the viability of biological resources, the Service and the Deparlment are
committing to meet with the appropriate project proponent at the earliest feasible point.
Early identffication of potential impacts will assist in the preparation of environmental
documents for the project and provide the opportunity to identify potential project
altematives and mitigation measures for consideration in compliance with Public
Resources § 21080.3(a).
The IPRG specifically does not ~reats an additional layer of project review nor to confer
any additional authority on the Department, the Service or lesd agency. The
recommendations of the Service and Department am advisory; the final decision of
whether to approve, modify. or deny a project remains in the hands of the lead agency
pursuant to existing laws.
A. Guidelines for Projects to Be Included in the Review Process
Each lead agency and/or project proponent shall determine whether a project should be "
reviewed pursuant to the IPRG. Generally, the lead agency or project proponent may
consider that a project as defined by CEQA § 21065, except those projects statutory or
categorically exempt from CEQA, located within the sensitive habitat areas of the
MSHCP boundaries, has the potential to preclude long term preservation planning or
impact the viability of biological resources, and it is appropriate to utilize the IPRG. The
lead agency retains the discretion to determine that a project within the plan area,
because of the project's characteristics, has no impact on the viability of biological
resources and would not preclude long term preservation planning.
F-1
B. Overview of the Process/Relationship to CEQA and NEPA
The Service and the Department shall each identify a lead person for project review
and meeting attendance. The lead person for the County and each city shall be the
Planning Director or the Planning Director's designee. Other Participating Agency will
be determined on an as-needed basis. The Planning Directorldesignee or project
proponent shall initiate consultation by notifying the designated representative of the
Service and the Department of the need for a review meeting for one or several
specified projects. Where the project proponent is a private landowner/developer, the
Planning Director for the lead agency shall also be notified. Pdor to the project review
meeting, the Planning Directoridesignee or project proponent shall provide basic
information (as delineated under 'Procedures" below) to the Service and the
Department.
For purposes of CEQA, the project review meeting and any related activities (site visits,
follow-up correspondence etc.) shall constitute a consultation pursuant to Public
Resources Code §21080.3(A). If possible at the meeting, but otherwise in not more
than 30 days following the meeting or such shorter pedod of time as shall be necessary
to enable the lead agency to comply with Trtle 14 Califomia Code of Regulations
§15102, the Service and the Department shall provide input to the lead agency as to
whether either agency believes the project may have the potential to preclude long-term
preservation planning or impact the viability of a biological resource. The Service and
the Department shall also indicate spedtic issues which either believe should be
addressed; suggest any studies they believe may be necessary to assess project
impacts to specific biological resources; and propose any mitigation measures or
project aitematives which they believe should be considered, which may include such
incentives to land holders as density transfers, land swaps within the MSHCP area,
'Debt for Nature" exchanges, tax incentive through gifts, donations and conservation
easements, mitigation banks and purchase of affected property.
When either the Service or the Department identifies the potential for a project to
preclude long-term preservation pinning and the the project will have a significant
impact on biological resources and identifies either project alternatives and/or mitigation
measures, which am addressed in a Mitigated Negative Declmtion or a Draft
Environmental Impact Report, the lead agency/project proponent, the Service and the
Department may agree to schedule an additional meeting to discuss the Negative
Declaration or the Draft Environmental Impact Report within 30 days after the
preparation and release of a Mitigated Negative Declareion and within 45 days after
the preparation and release of a Draft Environmental Impact Report.
It is recognized that implementing the IPRG is a voluntmy cooperative process and
neither confers any authority not granted by existing pinning and environmental laws,
nor negates any authority so granted, The IPRG is intended only to facilitate
cooperation among the lead agencies, the resource agencies and project applicants to
ensure timely review of projects which have the potentiBI to preclude long term
preservation planning and to facilitate the resolution of issue which might affect the
successful preparation of the MSHCP.
Fo2
C. PROCEDURES
die
At least three weeks pdor to the desired IPRG meeting date the Planning
Directorldesignee or project proponent shall notify the Service and the
department and the MSHCP contact person in writing of any project(s) which the
lead agency or project proponent wishes to have reviewed at the IPRG meeting.
For each project. the lead agency/project proponent will transmit two copies of
each of the following:
a location map on a 7.5' quad sheet identifying the project site
· a site plan or other illustration depicting the project as proposed
· the project application or other summary sheet identifying existing general
plan designation and zoning, and any proposed changes; existing land use
on the site; and the type and intensity of land use proposed.
· the Initial Study or Environmental Assessment and a biological resource
survey if one has been prepared; if one has not been prepared then a
description of the site including vegetation, presence of a floodplain, blueline
stream, or other environmental resource, hazard or constraint, and a list of
sensitive species which have the potential to occur on site.
· Any other information deemed pertinent by the lead agency.
The lead agency or project proponent shall be responsible for notifying the other
party of the date, time, and location of the IPRG review meeting, if the
attendance of the project applicant is desired.
At the review meeting, the lead agency, project proponent, the Service and the
Department will have the opportunity to discuss the project, answer questions,
etc. A representative from an adjacent jurisdiction which may be a;;'f,,ctf,,d by the
proposed project may also attend the meeting at that jurisdiction's discretion. At
the review meeting if possible, otherwise in not more than 30 days after the
review meeting, the Service and the Department representatives shall provide
the following irrrormation to the lead agency and the project applicant
· A statement as to whethe, in the agencys Opine:
The project will not preclude long term conle~vltion pinning or
adverealy impact the viability of a species.
The project has the potential to preclude long term conservation
pinning or adversely impact the viability of a species and
additional studies on specific species may be necessary, and
project alternative and/or mitigation measures need to be
assessed in the environmental review process.
A project may be scheduled for an additional IPRG meeting at an appropriate
date if them is a need for the Service or the Deparlment to respond to a Draft
Environmental Impact Report or Mitigated Nagalive Deciaration.
F-3
JERRY EAVES
SUPIRV|$QII, FIIr~'H DISTRICT
May 11, 1995
William J. Alexander, Mayor
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91
Dear Mayor Alexander.
As you know, San BernardSilo County, the cities within Sin Bemardino Valley, and
various agencies, businesses, and environmental organizations are joining forces to
prepare a Multi-species Habitat Conservation Pin for the San Bernardtrio Valley.
objective is to facilitate future development in the plan ares without excessive delays
due to biologic, el issues by lufficiently protecting endangered, threatened and other
sensitive plant and animal siNmiss.
Last fall, I requested that each city adopt a resolution exlx'esing its support of this plan.
I felt such a resolution would'demonstrate the necessary commitment to move forward
with this project. All fillsen 6tales and the county adopted similar rMvolutions by eady
November.
Since that tim, ~nost of ';~ir energy has been devoted to the prepareion of a
Memorandum of Underate ng (MOU) the would be signed by all participating
agencies. This MOU will act is a basic contract between ell involved pmffiee so the the
expectations of all agencies Would be stated in writing to avoid confusion and wasted
effort as the plan proceeds in development. Considerable time has been exlanded in
preparing this MOU, and whireat not all interested groups agree with all provisions of
the document, there ie general consensus among the major stakeholders in the plan
that the MOU provides suffictint as.surances to all of the participating agencies and that
the MOU is ready for your cttl~'s approval.
As you know, funding Is a citical factor in the preparation of the plan. We anticipate
that it will cost approximatel/$1.8 million. None of the agencies invdved with this
program have this kind of money available for this project. Therefore, the vast majority
of the funds required to complete the worn will have to come from outside sources. A
Funding Subcommittee has; been formed to investigate available grants end other
sources of funds for which vie may apply. Many of the foundations that award grants
Sen Beme:dino County Governmen! C~tle e; 386 North k~0wheml Avenue · Sm brae. CA 9241 S~1 l0 · :~) 387-4666
William J. Alexander, Mayor
May 11, 1995
Page 2
for such work will match funds that are obtained from the participating agencies
preparing ~e plan.
SAN BAG is considering providing some funds for plan preparation on a matching fund
basis. This has prompted staff to investigate vadous alternatives in soliciting funds that
would be matched by SANBAG. Vadous approaches were discussed informally with
the city managers at the San Bemardino County CIty Managers meeting in April. Valid
concerns were expressed at this meeting about the ability of local jurisdictions to
contribute anything, other then staff time, toward this plan. I fully understand this
concam. However, some jurisdictions have felt that they could contribute something
because they could see a reel value in preparing this plan and they know the funds are
necessary to do the work. They feel that it is better to join forces and pay a little now,
th~n wait for their first major community project to come along and have to pay much
larger sums of money to prel~are their own study or plan just for the one project. It is
not my intent to request money from the cities, but, if necessary, we will, even if only on
· voluntary basis. Of coursl, any request for monetary contributions from your city
would have to come back to ~e city council for your approve1.
Recently, ! was in WashingtOn, D.C. and talked with Bruce Babbitt, Secretary of the
Interior, about this project and asked for his assistance with funding for the plan. He
expressed interest in helping end made a definite commitment to do so.
The MOU for the plan will be ~:oming before you city council in the near future. I would
appreciate your assistance in 'expediting your ctty'a adoption of this MOU so that we will
be able to move forward with this plan ~at i~ so essen~al to the economic well-being of
our valley. ~
If you have any questions cctnceming this planning effort, please contact me at (90g)
3874565.
Supervleor, Fifth District
JE:Js
CC: Jack Lam. City Manager
,=~x///,~'//- ~'"
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
June 7, 1995
TO:
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Larn, AICP, City Manager
FROM:
William J. O~Neil, City Engineer
BY:
Jerry A. Dyer, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL OF THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND SECURITY FOR THE
DUNLOP TIRE FACILITY, LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF ONTARIO, ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF FOURTH STREET EAST OF SANTA ANITA AVENUE,
SUBMITTED BY THE CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the subject agreement
and security, and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement.
BACKGROUND/ANAl ,YSIS:
The Dunlop Tire Facility, located within the City of Ontario, on the south side of Fourth Street east of
Santa Anita Avenue, was conditioned by the City of 0 ntario to upgrade the Atchison, Topeka and Santa
Fe railroad spur crossing Fourth Street. The upgrade requires some work within the City of Rancho
Cucamonga fight-of-way.
The Developer, Catellus Development Corporation, has submitted an agreement and security to guarantee
the proper construction of the improvements within the City of Rancho Cucamonga fight-of-way in the
following amounts:
Faithtiff Performance Bond: $17,824.00
Labor and Material Bond: $ 8,912.00
Copies of the agreement and security are available in the City Clerk's office.
City Engineer
WJO:JAD:dlw
~Anachments
.j
RESOLUTION NO. q,~ - (Z) ~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND SECURiTY FOR THE
DUNLOP TIRE FACILITY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF
ONTARIO
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucarnonga has for its consideration an
Improvement Agreement submitted by Catellus Development Corporation, Developer, for the
improvements within the City of Rancho Cucamonga public fight-of-way, generally located on the
north side of Fourth Street east of Santa Anita Avenue at the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe railroad
spur track; and
WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement
Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of
said real property as conditioned by the City of Ontario; and
WHEREAS, the Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient
Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES that said Improvement Agreement and
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.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
June 7, 1995
Mayor, and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
Steve M. Gilliland, Public Works Inspector ~
APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION FOR TRACT
13281 LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BASE LINE ROAD
AND ROCHESTER AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY BROCK HOMES
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, accepting the subject
agreement extension and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement.
BACKGROUND/ANAl .YSIS
Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security to guarantee the construction of the public
improvements for Tract 13281 were approved by the City Council on May 17, 1990, in the following
amounts:
Faithful Performance Bond: $843,200.
Labor and Material Bond: $421,600.
The developer, Brock Homes, is requesting approval of a 12-month extension on said improvement
agreement due to slow housing market conditions. Copies of the Improvement Agreement Extension
are available in the city Clerk's Office.
Respectfully submitted,
William .~O~"Neil
City Engineer
WJO:SMG:ly
Attachments
April 19, 1995
BROCK HOMES
ARYI,AI4DC~
Pacific Inland Division
23382 Miil Creek Dr;ve
Suite 130
Laguna Hii~s, CaliFornia ~2653
714 583-1061 Office
714 837-4536 Fax
Mr. Steve M. Gilliland
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Community Development Department
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
SUBJECT: Extension of Improvement Agreement - Tract 13281
Dear Mr. Gilliland,
In accordance with your letter dated April 13, 1995, M.J. Brock & Sons, Inc. hereby
requests a one year extension of the Improvement Agreement for Tract 13281.
Due to slow housing market conditions completion of all improvements has been delayed.
At this time we anticipate an extension of 12 months to be adequate to sell the remaining
homes in this tract and complete all improvements.
Enclosed you will find the Improvement Agreement Extension form signed in triplicate
and a check for $251.00 for processing.
If you should have any questions please feel flee to call.
Sincerely,
RESOLUTION NO. C2,_~ - ~ ~/
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 13281
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its
consideration an Improvement Agreement Extension executed on June 7, 1995, by Brock Homes
as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically
described therein, and generally located on the northwest comer of Base Line Road and Rochester
Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement
Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of
said Tract 13281; and
WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement Extension is secured and accompanied by
good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement
Extension.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California
hereby resolves, that said Improvement Agreement Extension and said Improvement Security be and
the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement
Agreement Extension on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest
thereto.
q/
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
June 7, 1995
Mayor, and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O~Ieil, City Engineer
Steve M. Gilliland, Public Works Inspector~l?'~ v<~~
APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION FOR TRACT
13703 LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HAVEN AVENUE AT AMBER
LANE, SUBMITTED BY SHEFFIELD HOMES
RKCOMMKNDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, accepting the subject
agreement extension and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement.
BACKGROUND/ANA I .YSIS
Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security to guarantee the construction of the public
improvements for Tract 13703 were approved by the City Council on February 17, 1994, in the
following amounts:
Faithful Performance Bond: $ 1,433,400.
Labor and Material Bond: $ 716,700.
The developer, Sheffield Homes, is requesting approval of a 10-month extension on said
improvement agreement in order to complete the remaining improvements. Copies of the
Improvement Agr~ment Extension are available in the city Clerk's Office.
Respectfully submitted, ·
William J. eil
City Engineer
WJO:SMG:Iy
Attachments
She ffield Home s
April 27, 1995
Steve M. Gilliland
Public Works Inspector II
City ofRancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
RE: Improvement Agreement for Tract 13703
Dear Steve:
Please allow this letter to serve as our request to obtain an extension of the Improvement
Agreement for Tract 13703. At this time the remaining work that needs to be completed is as
follows:
-Installation of city sidewalk and driveway approaches
-Installation of 15 street trees
-Installation of 1" cap paving
We anticipate completion of the above referenced items by August 1995.
Enclosed please find the completed extension form and the required fee for this extension. If you
should need any additional information please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Partner
JKA:clm
Enclosures ~
3400 Central AvenUe, Suite 325 Riverside. California 92506 (909) 682-5352 FAX (909) 6824148
sotu'rxo q No. q.5 - c> g
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 13703
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia, has for its
consideration an Improvement Agreement Extension executed on June 7, 1995, by Sheffield Homes
as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically
described therein, and generally located on the west side of Haven Avenue at Amber Lane; and
WHEREAS. the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement
Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of
said Tract 13703; and
WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement Extension is secured and accompanied by
good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement
Extension.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California
hereby resolves, that said Improvement Agreement Extension and said Improvement Security be and
the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement
Agreement Extension on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest
thereto.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
June 7, 1995
Mayor, and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
Steve M. Gilliland, Public Works Inspector II ~
APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION FOR TRACT
13851 LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF WILSON AVENUE AND
CANISTEL AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT, INC.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, accepting the subject
agreement extension and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement.
BAC KGROUND/ANA t. YS I S
Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security to guarantee the construction of the public
improvements for Tract 13851 were approved by the City Council on January 3, 1990, in the
following amounts:
Faithful Performance Bond:
Labor and Material Bond:
$1,042,000
$ 521,000
The developer, Pacific International Development, Inc., is requesting approval of a 12-month
extension on said improvement agreement. The improvements continue to be on hold due to the
economic conditions. Copies of the Improvement Agreement Extension are available in the city
Clerk's Office.
Respectfully submitted .
William J. 0
City Engineer
WJO:SMG:Iy
Attachments
PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT, INC.
A Subsidiary of PACIFIC CONSTRUCTION CO., LTD,
May 3, 1995
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
#Z 420 270 047
Mr. Steve M. Gilliland
Community Development Department
Engineering Division
City. of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729
Re: Request for Extension of Improvement Agreement for Tract 13851
Dear Mr. Gilliland:
In accordance with your instructions, enclosed please find three (3) fully executed and notarized
Improvement Agreement Extension forms and a check in the amount of $251.00 for processing the
application. In addition, please find a copy of Housing Marketing Report published by The Meyers Group
/'or your reference.
Pacific International Development. Inc. hereby requests a one year extension of the Improvement Agreement
as a result of continued depressed housing market due to the economic downturn we have experienced for
the past several years. We have no alternative but continue to place the project on hold. According to the
attached report. there still remains little or no demand for homes in the price ranging from $410,000 to
$505,000 which we originally proposed to build.
To date. we have completed rough grading, storm drains, all underground utilities. approximately 90% of
curbs and gutters. and the south side block wall. Remaining work will include street paving, final grading,
landscaping, trail fencing. and street lighting. It is estimated that the remaining work could be completed
within three months once the project is reactivated on the condition that housing market will improve
significantly. All necessary precautions have been taken to control wind and storm erosions.
If you have any questions and/or need additional information, please feel free to contact the undersigned.
Very truly yours,
Daniel Zau
Vice President
encl.
C: \WPW%N60'W~DOCG\ KPEXTEND.WPD
939 East Seventeenth Street, Santa Ana, California 92701
Tel: (714) 541-8927, Fax: (714) 568-1641
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 13851
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia, has for its
consideration an Improvement Agreement Extension executed on June 7, 1995, by Pacific
International Development, Inc., as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-way adjacent
to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located on the northeast comer of
Wilson Avenue and Canistel Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement
Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of
said Tract 13851; and
WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement Extension is secured and accompanied by
good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement
Extension.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California
hereby resolves, that said Improvement Agreement Extension and said Improvement Security be and
the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement
Agreement Extension on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest
thereto.
q7
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
June 7, 1995
Mayor, and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O~eil, City Engineer
Steve M. Gilliland, Public Works Inspector
APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION FOR TRACT
14407 LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BASE LINE ROAD AND
MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, SUBMITTED BY LEWIS HOMES
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, accepting the subject
agreement extension and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement.
BACKGROUND/ANAl .YSIS
Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security to guarantee the construction of the public
improvements for Tract 14407 were approved by the City Council on May 7, 1995, in the following
amounts:
Faithful Performance Bond:
Labor and Material Bond:
$205,000.
$102,500.
The developer, Lewis Homes, is requesting approval of a 12-month extension on said improvement
agreement due to soft market conditions and slow sales. Copies of the Improvement Agreement
Extension are available in the city Clerk's Office.
Respectfully submitted, ·
William J. ~~
City Engineer
WJO:SMG:Iy
Attachments
j
Lewis Homes Management Corp.
1156 North Mountain Avenue / P.O. Box 670 / Upland, Califomia 91785-0670
909/985 -0971 FAX: 909/949-6700
April 24, 1995
Mr. Steve Gilliland
Community Development Dept.
Engineering Division
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
Re: IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION - TRACT 14407
Dear Steve:
Enclosed please find our request for extension of the subject
agreement along with a check in the amount of $251.00 to cover the
fee.
We are requesting a twelve month extension on this tract which is
still under construction due to soft market conditions and slow
sales.
Thank you for considering this request and for your assistance.
Sincerely,
LEWIS HOMES MANAGEMENT CORP.
Maxine Bignell
Project Development
emb\003
enclosures
RESOLUTION NO. q,~ -' C) 37
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 14407
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City ofRancho Cucamonga, California, has for its
consideration an Improvement Agreement Extension executed on June 7, 1995, by Lewis Homes
as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically
described therein, and generally located on the southwest comer of Base Line Road and Mountain
View Drive; and
WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement
Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of
said Tract 14407; and
WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement Extension is secured and accompanied by
good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement
Extension.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California
hereby resolves, that said Improvement Agreement Extension and said Improvement Security be and
the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement
Agreement Extension on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest
thereto.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF RF, PORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
June 7, 1995
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lain, AICP, City Manager
William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
Steve M. Gilliland, Public Works Inspector
ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE OF BONDS AND NOTICE OF
COMPLETION FOR TRACT 14121, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND KENYON WAY
RECOMMENDATION:
The required street improvements for Tract 14121 have been completed in an acceptable manner and it
is recommended that City Council accept said improvements, accept the Maintenance Guarantee Bond
in the amount of $45,980, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the
City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond in the amount of $459,800.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Tract 14121 - located on the northwest comer of Milliken Avenue and Kenyon Way
Developer:
'K. Hovnanian _
3991 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 300
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Accept:
Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street)
$45,980.
Release:
Faithful Performance Bond (Street)
$459,800.
Respectfully 'S~;/~
William J.
City Engineer
WJO:SMG:Iy
RESOLUTION NO. ~2,5' ~ 0 ~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 14121 AND
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION
FOR THE WORK
WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Tract 14121 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, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby
resolves, 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.
/
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
June 7, 1995
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O~eil, City Engineer
Steve M. Gilliland, Public Works Inspector ~
RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BONDS FOR TRACT 13930
LOCATED ON WILSON AVENUE AT HELLMAN AVENUE
RECOM1VIENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Clerk to release the Maintenance
Guarantee Bonds.
BACKGROUND/ANAl ,YSIS
The required one year maintenance period has ended and the street improvements remain free
from defects in materials and workmanship.
DEVELOPER:
Hix Development '
437 S. Cataract, Suite 3
San Dimas, CA 91773
Release:
Maintenance Guarantee Bonds
~treet
$29,700
Storm Drain
$56,400
Utilities
$19,000
Respectfully submitted,
William J. O%leil
City Engineer
WJO:SMG:Iy
/
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
June 7, 1995
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O~eil, City Engineer
Steve M. Gilliland, Public Works Inspector ,~
RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND FOR TRACT 14192-1
LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE SOUTH OF 19TH
STREET
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Clerk to release the Maintenance
Guarantee Bond.
BACKGROUND/ANAl .YSIS
The required one year maintenance period has ended and the street improvements remain free
from defects in materials and workmanship.
Release:
DEVELOPER:
Hix Development
437 S. Cataract, Suite 3
San Dimas, CA 91773
Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street)
Respectfull .~s,~bmitted, ' . /'
William J. O~eil
City Engineer
WJO:SMG:Iy
$75,900
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
June 7, 1995
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O~Neil, City Engineer
Steve M. Gilliland, Public Works Inspectolc/~~~
RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND FOR PARCEL MAP
12959-1 LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ARROW
HIGHWAY AND WHITE OAK AVENUE
RECOMMR, NBATION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Clerk to release the Maintenance
Guarantee Bond.
BACKGROUNB/ANA I ,YSIS
The required one year maintenance period has ended and the street improvements remain free
from defects in materials and workmanship.
DEVELOPER:
Release:
Capellino & Associates
1815 W. 213th Street, Suite 225
Torrance, Ca 90501
Maintenanc~ Guarantee Bond (Street)
Respectfully submitted, .
William J. O~eil
City Engineer
WJO:SMG:Iy
$134,000
ORDINANCE NO. 5 4 1~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION
10.20.020 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY CODE
REGARDI'NG PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN
CITY STREETS
A. Recitals
(i) California Vehicle Code Section 22357 Provides that this City. Council may.
by ordinance. set prima facie speed limits upon any portion of any street not a state highway.
(ii) The City Traffic Engineer has conducted an engineering and traffic survey, of
certain streets within the Cii'y of Rancho Cucamonga which streets as specified in Part B of this
Ordinance.
(iii) The determinations concerning prima facie speed limits set forth in Pan B,
below, are based upon the engineering and traffic survey identified in Section A (ii), above.
B. Ordinance
NOW, THEREFORE. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1
Section 10.20.020 hereby is mended to the Rancho Cucamonga City Code to read.
in words and figures, as follows:
10.20.020 Decrease of state law m~xim,,rn speed. It is determined by City Council
resolution and upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation that the speed pertained by
state law is greater than is reasonable or safe under the conditions found to exist upon such streets,
and it is declared the prima facie speed limit shall be as set forth in this section on those streets or
parts of streets designated in this section when signs are erected giving notice hereof:
Declared Prima Facie
Name of Street or Portion Affected Speed Iirnit CMPH~
1. Archibald Avenue. - Banyan Street to north end 50
2. Archibald Avenue - 4th Street to Banyan Street 45
3. Arrow Route. - Baker Avenue to Haven Avenue 45
4. Baker Avenue - 8th Street to Foothill Blvd 35
5. Banyan Street from Beryl Street to London Avenue 35
6. Banyan Street - Haven Avenue to Rochester Avenue 45
7. Banyan Street from west City Limits to Beryl Street 40
SPEED LIMIT ORDINANCE
May 17, 1995
Page 2
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
Declared Prima Facie
Name of Street or Portion Affected Speed r.imit (MPH}
Base Line Road. - west City limits to Carnelian Street 45
Base Line Road. - Carnelian Street to Hermosa Avenue 40
Base Line Road. - Hermosa Avenue to Spruce Avenue 45
Beryl Street - Banyan Street to end 45
Beryl Street - 800' N/o Lemon Avenue to Banyan Street 40
Canistel Avenue - Wilson Avenue to Antietam Drive 35
Carnelian Street - Vineyard Avenue to end 45
Center Avenue - Foothill Blvd. to Church Street 40
Church Street - Pepper Street to Haven Avenue 35
Church Street - Haven Avenue to Milliken Avenue 45
East Avenue - Base Line Road. to Highland Avenue 45
8th Street - Grove Avenue to Haven Avenue 45
Etiwanda Avenue - Foothill Blvd.. to 24th Street 45
Fairmont Drive - Highland Avenue to Milliken Avenue 35
Fairmont Drive - Milliken Avenue to Victoria Park Lane 35
Fredricksburg Avenue - Banyan Street to Seven Pines Drive 35
Grove Avenue - 8th Street to Foothill Blvd. 40
Haven Avenue - 4th Street to Hillside Road. 45
Hellman AVenue - Foothill Blvd.. to Alta Loma Drive 35
Hellman Avenue - 500' N/o MapTanita Drive to Valley View 40
Hellman Avenue - 6th Street to Foothill Blvd. 45
Hermosa Avenue - Base Line Road. to Wilson Avenue 45
Hermosa Avenue - Wilson Avenue to Sun Valley Drive 40
Hermosa Avenue - llth Street to Base Line Road. 45
Highland Avenue - Sapphire Street to Carnelian Street 40
Highland Avenue - Amethyst Street to Hermosa Avenue 35
Highland Avenue - Hermosa Avenue to 800' W/o Haven Avenue 45
Hillside Road. - Ranch Gate to Amethyst Street 35
Hillside Road. - Amethyst Street to Haven Avenue 40
Hillside Road. - Haven Avenue to Canistel Avenue 35
Hillview Loop - Vintage Drive to Vintage Drive 30
Kenyon Way - Milliken Avenue to Victoria Park Lane 35
Lark Drive - Kenyon Way to Rochester Avenue 35
/o7
SPEED LIMIT ORDINANCE
May 17, 1995
Page 3
Declared Prima Facie
Name of Street or Portion Affected Speed I .imit (MPH')
41. Lemon Avenue - Jasper Street to Beryl Street 35
42. Lemon Avenue - Archibald Avenue to Haven Avenue 40
43. Lemon Avenue - Haven Avenue to Highland Avenue 40
44. Martzanita Drive - Hermosa Avenue to Haven Avenue 35
45. Morning Place/Vintage Drive - Banyan Street to Milliken Avenue 35
46. Mountain View Drive - Spruce Avenue to Milliken Avenue 40
47. Netherlands View Loop - Vintage Drive to Vintage Drive. 30
48. 9th Street - Baker Avenue to Archibald Avenue 40
49. Red Hill Country Club Drive - Foothill Blvd. to Alta Cuesta 35
50. Rochester Avenue - Foothill Blvd. to Base Line Road 40
51. San Bemardino Road. - Vineyard Avenue to Archibald Avenue 35
52. Sapphire Street - Banyan Street to end 45
53. Sapphire Street - 19th Street to Lemon Avenue 40
54. 7th Street - Hellman Avenue to Archibald Avenue 45
55. Sierra Crest View Loop - Vintage Drive to Vintage Drive 30
56. Spruce Avenue - Foothill Blvd. to Base Line Road. 40
57. Summit Avenue - Etiwanda Avenue to East Avenue 45
58. Terrace View Loop - Vintage Drive to Vintage Drive 30
59. Terra Vista Parkway - Church Street to Milliken Avenue 40
60. Victoria Street - Archibald Avenue to Ramona Avenue 35
61. Victoria Street ' Etiwanda Avenue to Route. 15 40
62. Victoria Street - Haven Avenue to Mendocino P1. 40
63. Victoria Park Lane - Fairmont Way to Base Line Road. 35
64. Victoria Windrows Loop (north &south) 35
65. Vineyard Avenue - Church Street to Base Line Road. 40
66. Vineyard Avenue - 8th Street to Carnelian Avenue 45
67. Vintage Drive - Milliken Avenue to east end 35
68. Whittram Avenue - Etiwanda Avenue to east City limits 40
69. Wilson Avenue - Amethyst Avenue to Haven Avenue 45
70. Wilson Avenue - Haven Avenue to 200' east of Canistel Avenue 40
are more than are reasonable or safe; and
(Ord. 169 Section I (part), 1982; Ord. 39 Section 5.1, (1978). Rancho Cucamonga 5/82 124
(i) Both sixty-five (65) miles per hour and fifty-five (55) miles per hour are speeds which
SPEED LIMIT ORDfNANCE
May 17, 1995
Page 4
(ii) The miles per hour as stated are the prima facie speeds which are most appropriate
to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic and are speed limits which are reasonable and safe on
said streets or portions thereof; and
(iii) The miles per hour stated are hereby declared to be the prima facie speed limits on
said streets; and
(iv) The Traffic Engineer is hereby authorized and directed to install appropriate signs
upon said streets giving notice of the pnma facie speed limit declared herein.
Section 2
The City. Clerk shall certify. to the passage of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be
published as required by law.
Section 3
The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published
within fifteen { 15) days after its passage at least once in The Inland I')aib, Bulletin. a newspaper of
general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 17th day of May, 1995.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
William J. Alexander
Debra J. Adarns, City Clerk
I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. California. do
hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was intwduced at a regular meeting of the Council of
the C irv of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 17th Day of May, 1995, and was passed at a regular
meetin~ of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 17th day of May, 1995.
Executed this 17th day of May 1995, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Debra J. Adams, City Clerk
/c c2