HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982/03/17 - Agenda Packetas! %fr.
10 `
V c'� RAI�1 O Q)cgy.
-Y 00(TINT
ttom
z
AGENrA
X11 Lion's Park Comwnity Center
9161 Base Line Road
Rancho Cucamonga, California
t Wednesday, March 17, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
• Ail 'tame aubeitead for the City CounoiI Agenda aunt be In Writing, The dead-
line for submitting these item is s:oo p,m, on the Wednesday prior to the
mooting. The City Clerk's Office receives all such 'tams,
1 CALL TO ORDER.
A. Pledge of Allegiance to Flag.
i B Roll Call: Frost, Mikels_, Poloobo , Bridge , Schlosser_
1• C. Approval of Minutes: February 3, 1982
i
i
2. Al1N0uNCD%NS.
a. Presentation of Proclamation to Girl Scouts.
b. Thursday. March 18, 7:00 p.m. - Drainage Fee workshop - Lion's Park
Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road.
c. Wednesday, March 24, 7:00 p.m. - Planning Commission - Lion's Park
Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road.
d. Thursday. March 25, 7:00 p.m. - Advisory Commission - Lion's Park
Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road.
e, Tuesday. March 30, 7 :00 p.m. - Etiwanda Town Meeting on Specific
Plan - Etiwanda Intermediate School,
6925 Etiwanda Avenue,
f. Wednesday, March 31, 7 :00 p.m. - Chamber of Commerce. Candidates'
w Format - Lion's Park Community Center,
9161 Base Line Road.
of 9 County. L.AA.'iCounty,land
dinner Division
ofnthefLeagguerof9e
California Cities to discuss the Peripheral Canal - Anaheim Conven-
tion Center.
Y
Y' h. Monday. April 5, 7:00 p.n. - Terra Vista Meetin '
Community Center, 9161.ease Line Road. 9 "Lion s Park
"af -
y
Tuesda�y,' r 13_= ELECTIO4''DAY:.
City Council Agenda -2- March 17, 1982
3. CONSENT CALENDAR.
.4 She follwlny Conant Calendar trams ern expected to be xouelae and non -
co.-trororelal. 270y Will be acted upon by the Council at one t.lne without
discussion.
4
a. Approval of Warrants, Register No. 82 -3 -17 in the amount
1
of $309,249.66.
i ,
b. Forward Claim against the City by Deborah Ann Raines to
4
I;
the city attorney for handling.
c. Forward Claim against the City by Helga E. Scovel; Steven
Marc Scovel, Heidi Kathleen Scovel to the
8
city attorney
for handling.
d. .Forward Claim against the City by Timothy Craig Thorn-
13
bury to the city attorney for handling.
_
e. Forward Claim against the City by Joseph Neluso to.
18
the city attorney for handling.
f Approval of Agreements between Rancho Redevelopment
Agency
31
and other taxing agencies within the redevelop-
went arta. Agreements have been approved by the Re-
development Agency.
RESOLUTION NO. 82-47
32
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE RANU.V
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CUCAMONGA COUNTY
WATER DISTRICT, CHINO BASIN MUNICIPAL
WATER DISTRICT, AND WEST END RESOURCE
CONSERVATION AGENCY.
g. Acceptance of Improvement Agreement and Security for
CUP 81 -15 - Larry Deck: located at the northeast
corner of Haven and Jersey Avenues,
RESOLUTION N0. 82 -51
t
L
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING IF,T'ROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVE -
AENT SECURITY FOR CONDITIONAL.USE PERMIT
NO. 81 -15.
MkI
56
57
µr „ _�;1_63Lfr'•
%`
'et
,r
I
L
City Cotntcil Agenda
-3- March 17, 1982
h. Acceptance of Bonds and Agreements for Parcel Map 6005 62
and Release of Bonds and Agreements previously submit-
ted - located on the southside of 9th Street between
Hellman and Vineyard Avenues - Mara. Nest Corp.
Release to Mayne T. Haaland for Parcel Map 5194.
Faithful Performance Bond 17,000
Labor b Matetlal Bond 117,000
Accept from Merck Nast Corp for Parcel Hap 6005:
Faithful Performance Bond X32,000
Labor 6 Material Bond =17,000
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -52 O3
A RES(v UTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY 0, RANCHO GUCAMONUA, CALIFORNIA, _
APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGRED ENT AND IMPROVE-
MENT SECURITY FOR PARCEL MAP 6005.
i. Acceptance of Parcel Yap 7061 -1, Bonds and Agreements 71
submitted by Kacor for their development located on
the south side of 6th Street between Cleveland Avenue
and Milliken Avenue.
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -53
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING PARCEL YAP 7061 -1, IMPROYEr1ENT
AGREEMENT. AND II4PROVEKHT SECURITY.
�. Approval of a Resolution designating Robert Dougherty,
of the firm of Covington d Crowe, as the city attorney
fo- the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -5E
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
DESIGNATING THE CITY ATTORNEY.
k. Recoomnd that Council award the design services for
widening of Base Line Road at Red Hill to Linville -
Sandersen -Horn as the lowest bidder at t6.800.D0.
72
79
79
80
•'r
Pt
1
City Council Agenda
-4- March 17, 1982
1
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM. A public hearing
84
to obtain c t zen input regarding projects to be funded with
federal coomun,'.y development block grant funds; obtain city
council direction and approval of block grant objectives, projects
and funding levels; and to meet federal Department of Housing
and Urban Development CDBG requirements. —rJAA
program
RESOLUTION 110. 82 -56
104
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING PROGRAM FUNDING FOR THE COM4UNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.
08
GENERAL PLAN AMQICMEHT 82 -01 - A request to amend
t e an se o c es o s General Plan that would
/yam
the city to consider development plans within a planted ed
_
ccemunity area, prior to adoption of the planned camtunity.
Q
C.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 82 -DIC - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA.
120
request to amen the n e avant o e lcn
t ntfi 9
W change the land use designation to the area fronting
nge
�-
4th Street extending approximately 1400 feet north between
Etiwanda Avenue and the AT k SF railroad tracks. This land
use designation is recommended to be changed from Heavy
Industrial to General Industrial.
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -57
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAiONGA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING
THE ADOPTED LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE RANCHO
CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN.
D. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 82 -02 - TENTATIVF AACT 11615 - LEWIS
PROPERTIES. A change of zone from C- 1 (neighborhood - otm-
merc a to R -3 /P0 (multiple family residential /planned develop
went) and the development of 152 condominium units on 10.4
acrns of land located north of Base Line and west of Archibald -
APH 202 - 161 -37 and 202 - 151 -34.
ORDINANCE NO. 173 (First Reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
'i.TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
REZONING ASSESSOR':, PARCEL NUMBER. 202 - 161 -31
Ste% AND 202 - 151 -34 FROM C -1 AND R- 3 /P.D., LOCATED
ta_ NORTH OF BASE LINE AND WEST OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE.
127
129
164
m
City Council Agende
-5-
March 17, 1982
E. APPEAL OF PLANNING COl44ISSION DECISION FOR THE REOUIRFMENT OF 165
EN DNMI:NTAL IKIACT REPORT FOR PLAAFtO DEVELOP EHI 81-03
eve opmen of
a totaT planned residintial development of 185 single family UWL
detached units and 14.5 acre park on 95.5 acres of lama in the
R- 1.20,000 zone located on Hermosa Avenue, north of Hillside.
F. PUB, n9ROVEHENT REtMBURSEMLM. Continued from February 3, lgb2 207
nc axet ng. coaeren item be continued to April 4, 198
C dneil meeting.
ORDINANCE NO. 170 (First Reading) U
209
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CU'ANONGA. CALIFORNIA, IMPOSING A
FEE PAYABLE AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION FOR A
BUILDINC PERMIT FOR THOSr LOTS OR PARCELS OF -
LAND WITH RESPECT TO 11HILN FRONTAGE IMPROVE-
MENTS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED PURSUANT TO A
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT.
5. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS
A. RE UESY FOR PIVEROF OFF -SITE IMROVE4EtrS FRCH D.R. 81 -32 - located 210
on t o east s e o t wan a venue, sou or rrow Route. Staff
report by Lloyd Hubbs.
217
B. jUlSED WEST END LAN AND JUSTICE CENTER /CIVIC CENTER AGREEMENT
W rapOK'E m neon.
C. FLOOD CONTROL BENEFIT ASSESSMVt PROGRAM 228
Recommendation of support for 10 year Flood Control Assessment to
be presented to voters in November. Assessment amounts will be
discussed. Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs.
6. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS
7. ADJOURNMENT
NA
•• r
Lion's Park Community Center
9161 Base Line Road
Rancho Cucamonga, California
Wednesday, March 17, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
All itetas submitted for the City Connell Age:x7a swat be in Writinq. The dead-
line for submitting these items is S200 P.M. on the Wednesday prior to tho
matting. The City Clerk's Office receives all such items.
1. CALL TO ORDER, at 7,03 p.m.
A. Pledge of Allegiance to Flag.
B. Roll Call: Frost r , Mikels x. Palombo r , Bridge x , Schlosser r .
C. Approval of Minutes: February 3, 1982 approved 5-0
2 ANNOUNCEMENTS.
a. Presentation of Proclamation to Girl Scouts.
b. Thursday, Narch 18, 7:00 p.m. - Dm.inage Fee Workshop - Lion's Park
Community Center, 9161 Base Line Rmad.
c. Wednesday, March 24, 7:00 p.m. - Planning Comrissior. - Lion's Park
Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road.
d. Thursday. March 25, 7:DO p.m. - Advisory Commission - Lion's Park
Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road.
e. Tuesday. March 30, 7:00 p.m. - Ettwanda Town Meeting on Specific
Plan - Ettwanda Intermediate School, 6925 Ettwanda Avenue.
r f. Wednesday, March 31, 7:00 p.m. - Chamber of Commerce-Candidates'
r Forum - Lion's Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road.
g. Thursday. April 1, 7:15 p.m. dinner - Joint meetinr, of the Orange
County, L. A. County, and Citrus Belt Division of the League of
California Cities to discuss the Peripheral Canal - Anaheim Conven-
t.. Lion Center.
t"tsn; h. Monday. April 5, 7:00 p.m. - Terra Vista Meeting - Lion's Park
s Community Center..9161 Base Line Road.
Tuesday; April 13 =. ELECTION DAY.
iv?rn;f6iw3a'-r
f
i
e
.1
City Council Agenda
-2-
March 17, 1982
3. CONSENT CALENDAR, approved s -o with
The following Consent Calendar item, arr, Item •f• re°rrod
contrrovesatal. Trey wall be acted u arpected to be routine and non -
pon by the Council at one time without
discussion.
a. Approval of Warrants, Register No. 82 -3 -17 in the amount
of $309,249.66.
b. Forward Claim against the City by Deborah Ann Raines to
the city attorney for handling.
C. Fnrward Claim against the City by Helga E. Scovol; Steven
Marc Scovel, Heidi Kathleen Scovel to the city attorney
for handling.
d. Forward Claim against the City by Timothy Craig Thorn -
bury to the city attorney for handling.
e. Forward Claim against the City by Joseph Meluso to
the city attorney for handling.
-- 1:'^ -- APP+ alo€' Agre 'o''.cYi6S- o�o-�7edaye}ppme+i{- removed.
-"'q have MPPMVed-by—tho-ite,
RESDLUTION N0. 82-47
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE RANCHO
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CUCAMONGA CCUNTY
WATER DISTRICT, CHINO BASIN MYINICIPAL
WATER DISTRICT, AND WEST END RESOURCE
CONSERVATION AGENCY.
g. Acceptance of Improvement Agreement and Security for
CUP 81 -15 - Larry Beck: located at the northeast
corner of Haven and Jersey Avenues.
RESOLUTION N0. 82 -51
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVE- t
MENT SECURITY FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 81 -15.
:qI
�5f„tu ,��y_�'M1„i��:- :�n:.. N�ixi+- �l•.`- ''�M:K�x- r ... .. 7i'x.,l°Si N�`.��� �t
i
A
K',
■
City Council Agenda
A
-3-
h. Acceptance of Bonds and Agreements for Parcel Mao 6005
and Rele.se of Bonds and Agrer'aents previously submit -
ted - located on the southside of 9th Street between
Hellman und Vineyarr Avenues - Marck Nest Corp.
Release to W.yne T. Haaland for Parcel Map 5194.
Faithful Perfomance Bond $17,000
Labor 8 Material Bond $17,000
Accept from itarck West Corp for Parcel Map 6005:
Faithful Performance Bond $32,000
Labor b Material Bond $17,000
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -52
A RESOLUTION OF :NE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CL:AMDNGA, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVIRG IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVE -
MEXT SECURITY FOR PARCEL MAP 6005.
1 Acceptance of Parcel Map 7061 -1. Bonds and Agreements
submitted by Ka.:or for their development located on
the south side of 6th Street between Cleveland Avenue
and Milliken Avenue.
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -53
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CWJNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING PARCEL MAP 7061 -1. IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT. AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY.
J Approval of a Resolution designating Robert Dougherty,
of the firm of Covington 6 Crowe, as the city attorney
for the City of Rancho Cuca --v.• ga.
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -55
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCPISCNGA, CALIFORNIA.
DESIGNATING THE CITY ATTORNEY.
k. Recoamend that Council award the design services for
widening of Base Line Road at Red Hill to Linville -
Sanderson -Horn as the lowest bidder at $6.000.00.
March 17, 1982
Y�
'r*y� � _
�i
Y
i
r
a
City Council Agenda
-4-
r
IL
$arch 17, 1982
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. COMMUNITY UEVELOPHENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM. A public hearingy,,,.,„,�,
to o to n c1t zen nput rega ng ppro rots to bo funded with
federal community development binck grant funds; obtain city
council direction and approval of block grant objectives, projects
and funding levels; and to meet federal Department of Housing
and Urban Development COBG program requirements.
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -56
approved 4 -1-0
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
R"' Chaffey -0amia
CITY OF RANCHO CUCNONGA, CALIFORNIA,
House roof, try
APPROVING PROGRAM FUNDING FOR THE COMMUNITY
to negotiate with
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.
private companies
B. GENERA:. PLAN AMc.IIMZMT 82 -01 - LEWIS. A request to amend
approved
t e an se o . es of e GeneraT Plan that would allow
the city to consider development plans within a planned
community area, prior to adoption of the planned community.
C. GENERAL PLAN AHENOHENT 82 -OIC - CITY OF RANCHO CUCPM(1NGA.
epprcved
request to aa>en the a Use o t e eneral Plan
to change the land use designation in the area fronting
4th Street extending approximately 1400 feet north between
Etiwanda Avenue and the AT A SF railroad tracks. This land
use designation is recommended to be changed from Heavy
'
Industrial to General Industrial
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -57
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING
THE ADOPTED LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE RANCHO
CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN.
D. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 82 -02 - ,TNTAT!VE TRACT 11615 - LEWIS
1kifP�RYIES�(c6ange o zone ram - nr. g r oo - com-
merc a to R -3 /PO (multiple family residential /planned develop-
ment) and the development of 152 condominium units on 10.4
acres of land located north of Base Line and west of Archibald -
APN 202- 161 -37 and 202 - 151 -34.
ORDINANCE NO. 173 (First Reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 202- 151 -37
AND 202 - 151 -34 FROM C -1 AND R- 3 /P.D., LOCATED
NORTH GF BASE LINE AND WE °"m OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE.
�.r . •1�
sot 2nd reading
for April 7.
y�. w
City Council ,genda -5- March 17, 1982
e
E. APPEAL OF PLA14NING COMMISSION DECISION FOR
.. THE RUMOF
D EAN ENVIRONMENTAL FALT R�P bil FOR �'I�NEV1'�3 _ conelnod to
AprSI 1I.
(IT 11933) - WOOD rl PACIFIC LOELOPMENT. A development of
a total planned res err a ev�i eie enC of 185 single family
detached units and 14.6 acre park on 95.5 acres of lend in the
R- 1- 20,000 ze:ie located on Reynosa Avenue, north of Hillside.
F. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT REIMBURSEMENT. Continjed from February 3, 1982 continued to
City Council meeting. Racommend item be continued to April 7, 198 p,_Daz
City Council meeting.
ORDINANCE NO. 170 (First Rezding) . a.y ,,,r to
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY April 7.
OF RANCHO CUCAMONUA. CALIFORNIA, IMPOSING A
FEE PAYABLE AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION FOR A
BUILDING PERMIT FOR THOSE SOTS OR PARCELS OF -
LAND WITH ^ESPECT TO WHICH FRONTAGE IMPROVE-
MENTS HAVE BEEN INSTALLFD PURSUANT TO A
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT.
5 CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS
A. REQUEST M'ORWAIVEROF OFF -SITE IF'uIO"EMENT', FROM D.R. 81 -32 - located a" reverse
on tnenst side at E wan a venue, souui Of � ute. Staff aids for
report by Lloyd iiubbs. actions.
B. REVISED HEST END LAW AND JUSTI:E Cr TERICIVIC CENTER AGREEMENT approved 5 -0
Staff report y m nson.
C. FLOOD CONTROL BENEFIT ASSESSMENT PROGRAM mneeptual
approval 5 -0
Recommendation of support for 10 year Flood Control Assessment to
be presented to voters in November. Assessment amounts wilt be
t Oiscussed. Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs.
6. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS
r, 7. ADJOURNMENT
" Meeting adjourned to Monday, March 11, 7,30 a.m..0
to a redevelopment meeting at city hall. ,
1�`.. Meeting adjourned at 10:05 o.m. -i
N
t:
Item SA Actf=1 Moved and approved to get a two year Improvement
agreement secured ulth a bond. Carried 5-0.
Also• moved and approved that the profertg ornOrs On the South Who he" llen
agreements bo notified that vithfn two goar$ tho li"s will be called.
C"ziod 5-0
X,
6
rVW7
i
{ 1
�a
lJ/P
w
S
f
n
O
H_I
V ti
W
V yl
W i
i
i
i
a
�1
V
n
R
4
i
r U
J O
o i
z W
z >
i
wtlJtl.- �....ti.tliron. woo. Donne... aw. n. nnPNOwwo. wowoPO�n,noioOnv�wrR.rnewrrw.tlw
Y y WY RiV��y�er .A�My.q.M1YYWRppprnON�M�r rPVORVOO ,weWVW +�rRVanWOYVO.VWWOVO
OONN+rO0.U.0000NNw./Y. V V V�RP Y•tlMOM V Oew O�rR.nRprtl�N)PPrNY.rNMnnwY.MV
Y J VOONRi))))VVOVVVOVr�.rrryr✓•N Myryy /.VFNyyNMTRIVV VV IVVInVVVVVVVWVN V'YVIVI
Y _
, Y
t nP�p Mtli10N•VPPRiPy.NRJnM NO�,NRVNtl.�M OrI'IRMJVPO�YIIIVP VP i_ +�VyNn)MNVPO�NwV
M i MTrgtltlV wl- YwI�MMIww N �1i!)s1ll OPIPN OOOO OO OOOO rrrrr
V r'.NN�.wnI1R M.PRRRRRRYn MIVVVtlV ))NItlVV)')VV.IVVI
� 7 bIPOl1PYlP►IPP!!N)lNNIPNIN PPS�iesP!lee N ee aseeseewanau
OIMI.Cn
Otl.....MPNeR.n0..00000
!'M
OrIO.P
ONV M10L.MtO
:.OM
�
IFwNI..IbWDYnI�R..0.1,W tlnYVNTY1nR
.... ..........ONrnOV......
......0000
r
Vtlb tlr
VMFMpptlwl/WN
VW WN►IpeI.00tltlwitllI.MnM PiNtlMNVVVV
VV
2
NVVOrr
n !NN
NMVIY�INIYMnInwlVi)M'Iiai1�
r. V n
I.1 NYNr .N
tlM1Y1.nr�O.VWJMNO�nI'IVlIN Pw NtlMlr,�
� aeI N .ry Fyn Nrrtln
Plr
I
N N
� r
N
f t
n
O
H_I
V ti
W
V yl
W i
i
i
i
a
�1
V
n
R
4
i
r U
J O
o i
z W
z >
i
wtlJtl.- �....ti.tliron. woo. Donne... aw. n. nnPNOwwo. wowoPO�n,noioOnv�wrR.rnewrrw.tlw
Y y WY RiV��y�er .A�My.q.M1YYWRppprnON�M�r rPVORVOO ,weWVW +�rRVanWOYVO.VWWOVO
OONN+rO0.U.0000NNw./Y. V V V�RP Y•tlMOM V Oew O�rR.nRprtl�N)PPrNY.rNMnnwY.MV
Y J VOONRi))))VVOVVVOVr�.rrryr✓•N Myryy /.VFNyyNMTRIVV VV IVVInVVVVVVVWVN V'YVIVI
Y _
, Y
t nP�p Mtli10N•VPPRiPy.NRJnM NO�,NRVNtl.�M OrI'IRMJVPO�YIIIVP VP i_ +�VyNn)MNVPO�NwV
M i MTrgtltlV wl- YwI�MMIww N �1i!)s1ll OPIPN OOOO OO OOOO rrrrr
V r'.NN�.wnI1R M.PRRRRRRYn MIVVVtlV ))NItlVV)')VV.IVVI
� 7 bIPOl1PYlP►IPP!!N)lNNIPNIN PPS�iesP!lee N ee aseeseewanau
N
W
V
0
a W
ry
•/ aL
� tv
u +a
z ^,•
3 •s°i+.
W a
a
r
r
s
J
N
W
{
z
+
rd a
s
+ o
� o
0
x
;3 W
to x
J
M
O
_ 3
w R
Y W a
� � O
u o
o rW ti
iu aJ i
z N>
- ^w-v wvppppypy 000pOpp001f0040pOO ..y.rrpp000ppOWp0000 POPPM
• a.... oeoppppii oPa�i�� `� •�
a000naO..OnA1CpInOONp
OOOOO...
MIpIPp001MgW.ppONOM•ItiOP
Y•O WOC.pP0000O MPpY.1lp P0000PT
ppapP yppO pp�lnOORVOOOf.y�
W
.
N.• ^In.�[.O�P000Y.aPPpN MVM p000ary
:•/prPl.OP:G�MO. OO......ppll.ry
.
•.1.iO..INOT.O�PNr.pN PN afC
p•q+O1.O n1�91 M NI�OOIMW�Oa Opaa�.N..PM+M•r .}
jp�
+
� .pi'
R' o a .. was •.PN n '
N
w
F p
z
0
a W
ry
•/ aL
� tv
u +a
z ^,•
3 •s°i+.
W a
a
r
r
s
J
N
W
{
z
+
rd a
s
+ o
� o
0
x
;3 W
to x
J
M
O
_ 3
w R
Y W a
� � O
u o
o rW ti
iu aJ i
z N>
- ^w-v wvppppypy 000pOpp001f0040pOO ..y.rrpp000ppOWp0000 POPPM
• a.... oeoppppii oPa�i�� `� •�
1 _
AN") 1 1 1 i r' / =� 1., > ) Y ,) ` ► i i i `i t i _ :3 1. ;L` >�
•1
i.
i M••. NM :N I
n �
��..�
u v
S>R ••
LI < YYti 1 u
YNt\ V Vw �
r f�aY 1t Y�
Y' p Y F`DZnrwn , ly
r rcre DDD
�.) : zs vuar Eiu
�aayy ewuD ,
�U Y �tY1N 1 ' • +1
a� [ZV�WVi {•• `j
P:.ef • C C
Or
oeeo i 3a j
8 ��•`' i 1yy�
d3• ���j�, is.iu•- :,(Y,i.J::,iynir;,�d'li. �i i =s4i�t ., i. �'1 i._ i .'. '..i f` i'.T .'i�r.r(�L.}::i7,•4`�i��.H
,
x„
i
A
1llaw Offices of
CAPS. B. KEIRSEY A JOSEPH M. FABRANfg
2 1400 west Covina Parkway, Third Floor
West Covina, California 91790
(213) 960 -3702
Attorneys for Claimant
a RA HUC OCm N O CM.4GA
ADMINIS7Rr,7ION
MAR 81982
AN
INIIIV11181BANB
A
CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF RANCHO COCAMM
7I T'0.
SRBCVIIYE OFFICES,
Si CITY OF RANCHO CLCAYONOA
91
10 1. This claim is made on behalf of DEBORAH ANN RAISES;
11 2. I desire notices to be sent to the following pint office
12 111 address: -
131 law Offices of
14, CARL B. KEIBSEY S JOSEPH MICHAEL vERRAHTR
1400 west Covina Parkway, Third Ploor
16I west Covina, California 91790
16 3. The date, place and other t rcumatances of the occurrence
17 that gave rise to this claim are as follows:
I� At all times herein mentl -ned, the San Bernardino County
18�19I Sheriff's Department was under contract with the City of
20 Rancho CuLamonga to provide police protection for said city.
21 Said contract included vehicle patrols of the city limits of
22" Rancho Cucmmnnge by roputy Sheriffs of the San Bernardino
23.1 County Sheriff's Department.
24 At all time heroin mentioned, Officer T. A. Seelig, a
261 Deputy Sheriff employed by the San Bernardino County Sheriff's
261 I Department was Rating as the employee of the San Bernardino
7„ County Sheriff's Department and as agent for the City of
-I-
a-
n n ,r
-�r
<a
11i
Rancho Cucamonga under the terms and conditions of the above
2li
mentioned contract.
On December 17, 1881, Officer T.A. Seoli3 was on patrol
3,
F
in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, as a Deputy Sheriff. At
41I
5I ,
approximately 1:00 AY, Deputy Seelig made a traffic atop of
the claimant, and arrested her for driving while under the
61!
7I
influence of alcohol. At that time, Deputy Seelig handcuffed
8il
both of claimant's hands behind her back, and placed her into
q A
911
I
the rear seat of his patrol car, and began transporting her to
'
the Rancho Cucamonga substation for booking. Sometime shortly
10I
't
f
11I
thereafter, and prior to arriviug at the Rancho Cucamonga
substation, Deputy Seelig operated his patrol vehicle in such.
12
13
a violent and unsafe manner that be caused claimant to strike
her head against a portion of the patrol car, causing her to
14
lose consciousness, and suffer the hereinafter described
15 �I
'
181;
injuries.
i
17 �i4
A general description of the injury as it is now known is as
follows
161
19
From and after the date of this incident, claimant
20
began to lose the sight in both of her eyes, and as of the
4
21
date of filing of this claim, claimant is virtually blind, and
22
cannot drive, and is further unable to move about without the
{
23
assistance of a sighed person.
t
S. The names of the public employees involved in this
24
11
incident are Deputy T. A. Seelig, and other unknown agents and
-7'
TS
c'
employees of the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department
;i..
�.
28II
1
27 it
and City of Rancho Cucamonga.
28
M
I
1
I
B. Other public employees that may have been negligently
responsible in some manor for the injuries boralnabove
mentioned are not ]mown by name to the e'_aimant at this ti^.a.
7. The amount of the claim as of the date of this
presentation is $1,000,000.00, which 18 the amount of any
present and prospective future damages to the claimant as a
result of this occurrence.
B. Computation of this amount is based upon estimated
general damages, special damages and any exemplary damages to
which the claimant may be entitled.
111 8. I, CARL B. EVIRBEY, the undersigned, am a person
12I representing the claim on behalf of DEBORAH ANN RAINES.
13
14.: DL.�. D: March 4, 1882 _
15i1 Attorney for 1�EBORAH ANN AIM.
101
17 it
1811
18 �I
20
I
211
22
I�
23
2411
25'1
2811
271,
2811
-3-
,
c..
.y
�ILaw Offices Of
t�I CARL B. KEIRSEY k JOSEPH V. PERIANTH
; 2111400 West Covina Parkway, Third Floor
West Covina, California 91790
!, 3I(213) 990 -3702 - -
r 4 Attorneys for DEBORAH ANN.RAINRS
5I
i
61 CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF RANCHO CDCAMONGA
T,
7111 Decleration of Presentation of Claim by Mail
t 811 California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1013(a)
9 I
10� I am over the age of eighteen years of age and not a party to
it the claim affixed to this dcolaration. I am a citizen of the United
1211 Staten and a resident o the County of Los Aageles, State of
13 1 California. My busine3a address is 1400 Nest Covina Parkway, Third
141 Floor, Nest Covina, California 91790. 1 presented the affixed claim
15;1 by depositing three originals thereof in the United States Mail at
iB l Nest Covina, California, on March 4, 1982, in a scaled envelope, with
17 postage thereon, fully prepaid, with the name and address
i shown on the envelope as follows,
1811
19 ERECMIVE OFFICER, CITY OF RANCHO COCAMONGA
20 9320 Base Line Road
Alta Loms. California 91701
21 I declare under
penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true s
22 correct Executed March 4, 198P'at A Covin , Chlifornia.
23 L
24 Attorney for DEBORAH ANN Pf R7PS.
25'11
,�.
26 �I
27!1
i -4-
c
9'
W,
1 GELFAND AND GELFAND
A Law Corporation
2 161 South Dohany Drive
Beverly Hills, California 90211
s
Telephones (213) 272 -6361
4
Attorneys for Claimants
6
6�7
911
11 HELGA E. SCOVEL; STEVEN MARC
sCOVEL, a minor, and HEIDI
12 KATHLEEN SCOVEL, a minor, by
and thorugh their Guardian ad
13 Litem, HELGA E. SCOVEL,
14 Claimants,
15 VS.
16 CITY 07 RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
17 Respondent.
18
19
20 TO: CLERK, CITY OF
21
1
CITY OFERANCHO CUCAMONGA
ADMINISTRATION
MAR 51982
AY
51911111121112A41518
7{
CAI �cQ'c���s
CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR
PERSONAL INJURIES AND
FOR WRONGFUL DEATH
(government Code, 5911.2)
RANCHO CUCAMONGA:
22 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that HELGA E. SCOVEL; STEVEN
23 MARC SCOVEL, a minor, and HEIDI KATHLEEN SCOVT., a minor, by and
24 through their Guardian ad Litem, HELGA E. SCOVEL, claim damages
28 from the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA in a total amount as of the date
26 of the presentation of this claim of FIVE MILLION DOLLARS
27 (5510001000.00).
28 Home address of Claimantas 5110 Genevieve Street,
-1-
•�5�" 1•`�j v. vo.1�r'/%!14 �i ..'1 p'J' . • ' "�vl.. iSl'jL4.(
±A
2 1
A
3
0"
i 4
6
t�
7
le
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
94
25
26
27
28
0
San Bernardino, California 92407) Home telephone number: (714)
883 -7131; Age of Claimants: =.GA E. SCOVEL: 34 years of age;
STEVEN MARC SCOVEL: 11 years of age; HEIDI RATHLEEN SCOVEL2
8 years of age.
On or about November 28. 1901, at approximately 4330 P.M.
while driving northbound on interstate 15 (sometimes hereinafter
referred to as 0I -15'), approximately two miles north of SR -30
'alao known as *Highland Avenue•), the antomablle in which Claimant
were passengers and which was being driven by Claimants' Decedent,
RICHARD SCOVEL — to wit, a 1981 Toyota Tercel, bearing California
license plate No. 1BOS594 -- was struck by a southbound 1969
Pontia: GTO, bearing license No. SLA810, when the 1969 Pontiac
GTO want out of control and crossed the dirt median between the
north - and southbound lanes of 1 -15.
As a direct and proximate result of the traffic collisi ,
Claimants' Decedent, RICHARD SCOVEL, was seriously injured,
sustaining major injuries to his cheat, abdomen and left side,
plus multiple cuts and abrasions to the head area. As a direct an
proximate result of avid injuries, Decedent RICHARD SCOVEL died
on or about November 28, 1981, at approximately 1007 P.H.
As a further direct and proximate result of the traffic
collision, Claimant HELGA E. SCOVEL sustained serious injuries,
including but not limited to lacerations of the head, bruises,
contusions, and others.
As a further direct and proximate result of the traffic
collision, Claimant STEVEN MARC SCOVEL sustained serious injuries,
including but not limited to lacerations, bruises, abrasions,
contusions, and others. _
-2-
• � 11 As a further direct and proximate result of the traffic
2 collision, Clef ont REIDI KATHLEEN SCOVEL sustained serious
3 injuries, i• mg but not limited to facial lacerations,
4 contusions around the left eye and to other parts of her body,
's
8 a severe blow to the head which resulted in a concussion and
S 8 rendered her unconscious for approximately to minutes, bruises,
7 and others.
k
;t;, 8 Claimants contend that Respondent CI r.? RANCHO
9 CUCAMONGA knew or should have known that the fre....ay )mown as i -15,
}
10 wh.eh passed througi their city limits did not have a median
11 barrier and instead that the north - and southbound lanes of such
12 freeway was only divided by an unimproved dirt modiad 51 feet-
13 in width, and that the lack of a median barrier created a
d
16 dangerous condition under the meaning of the Government Code, 5835.
y15 The knowledge of said dangerous condition and the failure of
i 18 Respondent CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA to correct such dangerous
17 condition was negligence on the part of Respondent.
k 18 Claimants contend that Respondent's negligence in
'i 19 failing to correct a dangerous condition on I -15 was the
20 proximate cause of the traffic collision as hereinabove described.
21 Claimants have received treatment for their injuries
22 from the Loma Linda University Hospital, in Lama Linda, California,
¢1 23 frum the Raiser Foundation Hospital, in Fontana, California, and
s
' 24 from other health care practitioners and providers.
y,
k 25 As a direct and prox4 ^ate result of the negligence of
E 28 Respondent, Claimants have each suffered personal injuries as
27 described hereinabove.
�'ti•
28 An a further direct and proximate result of the negligee
R&AAW-- sec.
d
c
r.
M.
1
2
3
4
8
e
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
10
17
18
19
20
21'
22
23
24
25
28
27
20
of Respondent and each of them, Claimants have been deprived of
the care, comfort, companionship, society, affection, services,
advice, and counsel of their decadent, RICHARD SCOVEL, and have
boon deprived of contributions to their support and maintenance
which said RI ^RPYM SCOVEL would have made and said claimants, an a
result of RICHARD SCOVEL's death, have boon deprived of their
expectancies of hie had he continued to live the full period of
his normal life expectancy — all to their damage.
As a further direct and proximate result of the
negligence of Respondent, Claimaat HELGA E. SCOvEL was forced
to incur expenses for burial of said Decedent, all Jr. an
amount which is not now known. _
As a further direct and proximate result of the
negligence of Respondent, Claimants have been forced to
incur expenses for medical treatment, and will in the future be
forced to incur expenses for medical treatment, all in an amount
which in not now known.
As a further direct and proximate result of the negligence
of Respondent, Claimant HELGA E. SCOVEL has incurred property !
damago through the lose of the 1981 Toyta Tercal motor vehicle,
in an amount which is not now known.
Claimants have suffered damages in the amount of
FIVE MILLION DOLLARS (55,000,000.00). Said amount claimed is in
addition to other expenses, including those for medical treatment
for Claimants, past and future; burial of Claimants' Decedent;
r
7s;� �I •— ___.._ —_ —__ i _ _ — {.Air {e:.Xal
1
2
3
a
6
6
7
6
9
10
111
13
16
18
17
1R
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
27
and for property damage.
All notices or other communications with regard
to this claim should be neat to Claimants, in care of:
(ZLPAHD AND GELPAID)
A Lav Corporation
161 South Doheny Drive
Beverly Hills, California 90211
Dated: March 4, 1982.
GHLP D G AND,
A Ldw pOlatiO
B
y WGAn B OELPAND
Attorneys for Plaintiffs -
IA
-
1
DENNIS R. STOUT
}
ATTORNEY AND=XIIELOR AT LAY,
2
TNEARCIIICENTER
0018 ARCHIOALD AVENUr
i
3
BUILDING IW. SUITE 110
RANCNO"CAIWC . Cjr�FORNIA 01730
n' OBO•l
}.
4
Claimant Thornburg
3
AmeB.T
I
r
a..B..3s..3,BB aaalB.a�o waaF
£E, a�rfw� II -a1 Y( (po
Oct), Oo b
-
6;'t —eelsV.RD_—
e MAK 11982
7 V)9AU1211t21s(41s 6
CLAW FOR PERSONAL INJURIES
9
iD
11 TIMOTHY CRAIG THORNBURY,
12 Claimant, ) l
13 '78. ) '
)
14 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA} COUNT. 1
' OF SAN BERNARDINO; COUNTY OF SAN )
15 BL..NARDINO SHERIFP'S DEPARTMENT; )
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT and DOES )
18 1 through 100, inclusive, !
17 F fendants. j Government Code,
18 ) SS905, 910, 910.2
19 TO THE SECRETARY OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF RANCHO
20 CUCAMONGA AND THE CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR THE
21 COUNTY OF SAN E:RNARDINO:
22 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that Timothy Craic, Thornbury,
R3 whose address is 8583 tladrone, Rancho Cucamonga, California,
24 claims damages against the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the County
25 of San Bernardino, and Does 1 through 100, inclusive, in an
28
amount computed as of the date of presentation of this Claim, +
27 of Ono Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00). The Claim is based on
28 personal injuries sustainbd by claimant on or about November )
1
21, 1981, on Big Tree Road. The personal injuries were sus-
�J
2
twined as a result of the following circumstances.
y;
3
That during said date, claimant, at approximately
1
4
1:30 a.m. was proceeding sc-- thbound on Big Tree Road on a 1975
y
5
Yamaha motorcycle, California license number 81,6873. That at
•
6
said time and while proceeding sctthboupd on said roadway, a
7
County of San Bernardino Shatiff's vehicle turned northbound
j
8
from Almond onto Big Tree Road.
2
9
That as a result of claimant proceeding southbound
3
o-'
10
and said Count Sheriff's vehicle continuing to
Y ' g proceed north-
11
bound on said roadway, claimant was caused to strke the asphalt
12
curbing of Big Tree Road, causing him to be thrown from said
13
motorcycle.
14
That at all times herein mentioned, the defendants,
lb
and each of than, and their employees negligently drove their
1'
16
vehicle so as to cause claimant to lose control of his motor -
17
cycle, proximately causing the hereinafter injuries and damages.
18
That at ill rimes herein mentioned said governmental
19
entities additionally were charged with the ownership, control
20
and with responsibilities of maintenance relative to Big Tres
21
Road, approximately 500 feet north of Almond.
22
The defendants, and each of them, negligently created
23
a dangerous condition of public property in that said govern -
24
mental entities possessing an odsoment interest or some other
25
interest of ownership and a duty of control and maintenance of
f,
26
said roadway, failed to properly maintain said roadway in a
27
safe condition so that northbound and southbound traffic could
28
pass each other on said roadway.
+3
2 ;_.Y +.
p •-' II . .. ivy• ,- _� - _
The aforementioned governmental entities at all times
' 2 have had knowledge that members of the general public used said
3 roadway for purposes of access to and from the mountainous
4 areas of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the County of San
5 Bernardino.
6 That as a result of the negligence of the defendants,
7 and each o: them, a dangerous condition of public property was
6 created and did exist, which caused a serious risk of substantial
9 injury to the motoring public while using due care.
10 The defendants additionally violated various mandatory
11 duties relative to the maintenance of Said area. The defendants
12 were additionally negligent and additionally created dangerous
13 conditions of public property in that the defendants negligently
14 controlled, and owned, the public property herein referred to
15 and the adjacent private property.
16 The names of the employees -3f the governmental entities
17 named as defendants in this Claim who created and caused these
16 dangerous conditions of public property are currently unknown.
19 Inmediately following the accident, the claimant was
20 placed under medical supervision and care at :.oma Linda Oniver'sit
21 hospital.
22 Tie amount claimed by the claimant, Timothy Craig
23 Thornbury, as of the date of the presentation of this Claim is
24 computed as follows:
r
25
26
oi
I
IN,
Damages Incurred
Ifedical and hospital expenses 50,00C 00, i-
6
_
Loss of earnings, earning $ SO,000.w (a-Pi6k:
4 capacity,
5 Special-damages and general 900,00G 00 fappjox.i_�
damages
Total Damages Incurred $1,000,000.0r, (approx.) I
this All notices or other' 'communications with rrgard to
is Claim should be. sent to the claimant at Dennis R. Stout,
9 Attorney at Law, 9375 Archibald Avenue, Building 100, Suite
10 110, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730.
iY
11 DATEN February 26, 1982.
22 Est.
23 De a R. Stcut
14 torney for Claimant
15
le I
.17
18
29
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Zb
4
1 PROOF OE SERVICE BY NAIL
y-• (1013u, 2015.5 C.C.P.)
a
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
)ss,
G' 3 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
" d
I an a citizen or the United States and i am employed
8
i•
in the County of San Bern
6 ardino; I am over the age of eighteen
years and not a party to the within entitled action; my business
7
address is 9375 hrchibai4 Avenue, Building 100, suite 110,
e
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 -5798.
9
On February 26, 1982 I served the within Claim for
10
Personal Iniuriea Governmont Code, 55905, 910, 910.2) on the
11
defendants in said action, by placing a true copy thereof -
12
° enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid,
13
in the United States mall at Rancho Cucamonga, California,
rO 16
16 addressed as follower
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
16 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
175 Nest Fifth Street
17 San Bernardino, California 92403
l lE Clerk of the city Council
CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA
19 City Hall
9320 Baseline Load
'} 20 Rancho Cucamonga, - ;alifornia 91701
21 I declare, under penalty of perjury that the foregoing
' 22 is true and correct.
I
23 Executed February 26, 1982 at Rancho Cucamonga,
24 California.
i 25 y
28 a Grunnat
ee 27
b.
28
' °T"e�t�!y .�� ^ %1'3A�a..`}i'+!'r.dti;. •i.;.1:iS�iy y.. � „a' �3.�5�t�'."�''i
r`�
r
,
C
t'
ro
MEW
AII�Ifi�'
Pebruary 19, 198'
L74.'ec wCelb.•9.`12
Cllt&! 713a7, al
f ��wt(e. ; 3 —n41.
Wij
w 11982
7�819tDt111�11{2i8��H inreph via" raft to(�����_���^yyy,,,
City Of Rancho Cucamonga
9320 Baseline Road
Alta Loma, California
Re: Our Claim Number: 130 - 9244471 -SDM
Our Insured: Meluso
Date of Losse 12 -01 -81
Locations Lemon Avenue
Gentlemen:
On December 01, 1981 our insured, David Martin waa driving on
Lemon Avenue, hit a pot hole losing control of his vehicle
and then striking the curb. The Sheriff's Department has in-
formed us that the construction company is responsible for
maintaining the road during the construction period and as
the construction company was hired by The City Of Rancho
Cucamonga, we feel that the city is ultimately responsible
for the damafe to our insured's vehicle.
Since we haves already made a settlement with our own policy-
holder, he has assigned his right of claim to us. Copies of
the final papers covering his lose from this accident are en-
closed. Please accept this letter as notice of our subrogation
rights. Your prompt payment will be appreciated.
Enclosed please find copies of our supporting paperwork,
estimates and drafts.
Sincerely,
\ DONNA HILLS
Associate Claim Representative
DMibw RECEIr£1)
MY OF RAN= CUCANONGA
AD1611NISTRATION
FEB 2 31982
7�191�kIItit�19�4�5 $ ,.
r�
a[.3fSJ�4��rvv.•�: r. .
f
Y
o
- 'r ='1. "n:'.+!.� �. Vic: =�. - +_ �_-
J.,r�•-
"1) •1
UT SG
.�1 I,.I
�,
°„vno..
IL,gi.. ..r1
ME COPY
:09244• j
�
1 •. i .......
f 132
t.lY
...tn..
TTl I..Fhi ..F fl nL. U^I 11YP 1
h
•
a1
_t. =.t1 . ,o, l l a. 4L ,.. •1( L I II+ I „" ;;;;;;1;" 04559887
Iw. or
AllSlift
T. IrrT ., ..i n". t•,OvJ to, .I
141371
$
, ^1 t)7.
•
•• ••�•.
rw Io
I orar.
• uu * +r[ nau.0 m •LL3ftTr nkiwtr
. -1 •.[1
' /Ot /E
.. • r, Y I ,1 •, 11 , p1I•.Lixl900 20"IIrl AO AL"IRItIILM:G
. 1 er. �' p.outlT,rppu.o(xnn
q Co
.FT C�
NON- NEGOTIABL=
----- _.�•��
--
f11., .-; ' z`.•Sn:. �.r `v -;vo.4 ::rrr <°�"�-t-v^L - ..w:L'd_F^,; ��- _ '. - y��
o
- 'r ='1. "n:'.+!.� �. Vic: =�. - +_ �_-
J.,r�•-
. ...y` .�.•�,J,._ �';��,- ':.:..,;.�J L y.;'°.. y+•. e1.Zl�GaGY.4T/+L.'.�li�•?�'y�su �t �{�•*.
�' Mw .�' f.J..` WI.•�•.1� -�i�'. N.tf��(1C.I.}.YM.wi Cls��, �y�.1�!�- rt�[•y'S't
j. �'r_ � I..�y."�,' ��1n e•�f^;_,.. °i.n`r:Y �+�r KCY �aa� A..sa+'L �'Cb[Z,�.��1'�bW"•,iYii u`•
•. •h ..i ' -t -�yw ' ✓. r . ..-.�� � .[`.'-[.�+Y�.'.`�. .rte ...V..�t...Ta•. l..•,'1 Llt•n
• ... � _ '.`. -.. _ ''."'t•: , Jam.. ... :•.y.,,. .� Sop.
l w�, ' �..['�i•. `_ . � 1 y� J' I � _r ' •[ l,,i 1 r. r w •.I' �.. o. t ' .. '3...W y � .
•^' YSi^'. 1r' Jw� •./y�Ii'1".).V••..L',.:•IJ'��. iii .'l�.C_IY_1.�.G- ..- r\w.�....a.. _. - e •.Ir..P _ • 1 ...
I y
a
N�
\ CFWT
rolrr n�
_: lx (14RIC a ILa�a!op xlu.e
.. >,• • .
�z�• -
ORS
soDy see . smn -ImE
<-'-
n�
�T
W
hone- (714) 621308
��
r� +
i',
cR
V
5334 MOLT AVE AYE
MONTCLAIFL A91763
,
Imwn o s an .nn wn
-1 -Y -/
..,lrt
""-Z
. v.•
._
wm sme�wucl
_ .i. _
N�
\ CFWT
rolrr n�
ACQi
TAT �� �� a
eKp0n 7rAr.NA\:-s�p CIYw. Mrp M/r /Y}w epMrzrMGr AaowTl {Alp
I
r/
-/
,
mt
n�
ESIIMATE OF 2EPAIR COSTS
W
run
..,lrt
I rwlr
" -
s�
f
�
•
r
w/
7 /
n `
t,-f e d on l)
u
— J
J /
_r.
.. ✓G �i.7 /� 7y�
r
r
.�
...
r- wiz "mac•.. J r, n!
J
flwGOwIYOW yw.�w.,w Mr..nbyM.M.awrr.wp Y.Y,www ww., UMnY brn
UM bar w a,.aU w..ql •.wYYw w wrw M.ar rUlJr
w W w.y.� w.r /M. aMn rr r4,
M (a VXA Ir W\ aJI M �/. w a wMl ti N`. w w r.wa�.� Yew YV M b.� IY �Mw a w
� i1WN {M Maww..�M. \w./wM
_. _
•f�
/
.�
waN /A�IIOwI w MW MbwWa_ 1
nitr: aunmrm .m�'°...""..,."'...•••w. `.GrYi..°^.ww wa �owio-u�uwi uo w,uul.
ACQi
TAT �� �� a
eKp0n 7rAr.NA\:-s�p CIYw. Mrp M/r /Y}w epMrzrMGr AaowTl {Alp
--
()PQ ew so ! $M
M /'RITI .
P1wro] (71:
M
�•'•
LT AVE BAR
.n
1. CA 91787
�
_\ ., T
15t Pw1..T�
. MY
LL
0
, Ma
1l
MATE OF RE /AIR COSTS_
I .
O
FA _
.w. r L4i.r AV r ti! 111q Id•.w 1 W
0 %tTrC
7 -
M /'RITI .
Ir.w. «r..ww... rN• .u,Y UMw Pt
M
�•'•
•..Irry 11 Nil u.r �tM��r•. MM1 _W .'
Nul .� M iY N• N+. 1A NN �.
.n
� w•Ar+t N�.. -..r +w
.�f
wnun +unc..].nlr an /
15t Pw1..T�
%
1l
I .
at
O
FA _
.w. r L4i.r AV r ti! 111q Id•.w 1 W
0 %tTrC
7 -
M /'RITI .
Ir.w. «r..ww... rN• .u,Y UMw Pt
M
�•'•
•..Irry 11 Nil u.r �tM��r•. MM1 _W .'
Nul .� M iY N• N+. 1A NN �.
.n
� w•Ar+t N�.. -..r +w
.�f
wnun +unc..].nlr an /
15t Pw1..T�
%
O
FA _
.w. r L4i.r AV r ti! 111q Id•.w 1 W
0 %tTrC
:f
a
ne
I
CLAIM PHOTOGRAPH
RECORD wwra
twV 1 PHOTO 02
i
'Ca .lam• r '.y
it. i •• • - s�:rt,��.,�.,. ),:1r� ^r�.ti�1v *.liy�'c�
yy� ' 1, S �1S P.• M.jgyy�AC Jl:'�l "S OAF
{J, �� .{l�� !♦ :A M:-ff .dr�``�*P•4 /T>`Vi>.�= ��.].y1�
+}+ZS'� . .., •.._., � -Ia 1 •A ).p,t y. .� C. rJ' R r.Y1;w "f'
'1040B, W
NONRil
llat WO.V-1
Va 7.
U•US c
n
`t
,1
de.A. Lule,- .
8.dyl.G.f-
fiRijl-
�/nT � . 1 •!Q
9 � dP' .[ i�Vi �•a1�1 ]]
4 MJi ••/ .j' /• -1 /Sj •�• /yV��'It R'bk.
•4
111!
Kt J!
0
CLAIM FHOTOCRAPH
RECORD
��. rr p
I PHOTO #2 raaaw.
.til e-,, - pc elzc- :c z %h` 6 edoa AL E,
C e,,, qtf
I
,fUEM17TED iY�_. - _
:w_.q^•Vy_y. k4P.+. .<a lnM nta_.Y.r "P.:4 _. �. ..ate.. _.. _ �..
•
ME
�•• �� ` CLAIM PHOTOGRAPH
RECORD
,1.:r "•CyY '�'"`7A 7��jgi PHOTO 12 TAKEN
Win,
`�
lA [r f'o• �
IN:rW[B IL BINSOBED•f MEa•TIVB fl`Blts
CIAWAHT'f AVAILABLE) NO
CLAW Pa. r r f•'
�t
o.ra •i`rr+��
CAE.ICTOBEO tfNg�a:E
CLAN.ANr'S
VIM
CLLR -L t 2 G
7
•7 r
0
r
I
f
r
w vtT� v ..
..KLlnc{ _d(
�JG -CvG �a: i�..r!'n /.T .�iLt e� rd f: Lt Ygl.:.s.L•�
r'
• 'rte.;• �r'ti
�1T•r 4,��yf.,s.•��, Af 4:�,�,l N.• .�.i
4 'J Ai..W141 (M . zrl
�e
CLAIM PHOTOGRAPH
�'jvJ4`•'��
RECORD
.
CLA W MLI
PM0T012
TAC[M
T,
o p
b� C4IICTYt SD IA
•+ '
BIN)U[[D'i NWATIY[
mt .. ANT'f AVM"Lt1
BTtf
ND
CM tICTUt[D IL
a.
..KLlnc{ _d(
�JG -CvG �a: i�..r!'n /.T .�iLt e� rd f: Lt Ygl.:.s.L•�
r'
• 'rte.;• �r'ti
�1T•r 4,��yf.,s.•��, Af 4:�,�,l N.• .�.i
4 'J Ai..W141 (M . zrl
�e
eI
"inarl. trl —
aie-vute -
ip Bys
rl
-,CLAHA PHOTOGRAPH
RECORD
PHOTO 42
TAKRM----
I xs;lz C ca wwago's NCGATWI
;IS , a ?KyugtD Is.
VIS Ca FICTURK0 m
ou MAML�Z All"AM?
"inarl. trl —
aie-vute -
ip Bys
rl
die n
V.
CLAW PHOTOGRAPH
RECORD
PHOT042 TUCW_
ca FICTUX", fu k%R:.O�s AIVATIVI YES
I
M�I� AYuL"Lgl 8"
L4L 4 4.4
CLAM 00.
msualo-s
CUP#= ato W
-771�
�F' �, -1 �.i.. .a te•
:-
•
�' nu
\ \L•� •`
CLAIM PHOTOGRAPH
RECORD
TARrn
PHOTO OZ
TA[[w
fix; oAic
ea.c
CNI PICTURED IS,
BMAWUIT't
®NOf
CY IICTUn[014
'lief
LLLLJJJJ
AVAIL"L[f
UCIfAWAMi'f
..a
`'lU'2L AbGW V IVIWILC e-,Z A,. e,.nAeelt �C:. � GLey -�cta✓
9'b —,UGc- ,., r�cfrrtClLC .tlao
r V
.� P..4 F� • tr
A
/
t e��l. ilz Till,
^:•^ CLAIM PHOTOGRAPH �k kNm
RECORD
awuo (�S 1 CLA W NM S •1
PHOTO 01 TARN o R PHOTO 02 TA[t1. ° 1
VaN [}[}'(C�� o. a
rwtf� LJNOf •, CAR R]CTV[[O IL BCLAWANT'f AVAILAGIti 8M0f CAR IICTUR[O IL LJCLAWANT'f-
L Sv�ct� �(/ -CZc�' G� IGL�(.0 U L�tK- f <..:�i(�o i. • •? s i'..0 i ['.G.�2:./tzJ•L76 CCIt
rt9Ct ' 1) .10t1 v
?/ � < / w 'T��s ,�::. `U.°.iLd /ZC <lGt U!ayn.•A�, :Zlv. t J>r �iey.:7tC� �lf�k:�I �.K.
•-G LLrtpG Y %2/t�/_ BOLK•! v�L� � <Y[d� A � 6
_ ••cif %� w��
a•
r�
. n•
>t,
r•
_ ••cif %� w��
C�'rLL //: UCCt.7 Oh�///�it,CL
v ['ILA 1�IHff.:_ .J GL'CP.
CCUtN �&
i<i/ P'.n CG vl4�I RC
eV��..
.� �tlLt.(.Y.{�1•� TN .
CLAIYPHOTOGRAPH
RECORD
u.wxa
TAKEN
I PHOTO 82
T1[[x
CAN PKTUIIIDIU 84YIIdMT'I
BAG I
CAN PICTUDID IL 8CLAWLxT'1
♦VAILYLK-
C�'rLL //: UCCt.7 Oh�///�it,CL
v ['ILA 1�IHff.:_ .J GL'CP.
CCUtN �&
i<i/ P'.n CG vl4�I RC
eV��..
.� �tlLt.(.Y.{�1•� TN .
L
F
r
J
i
— CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 17, 1982
TO' Members of the City Council and City Manager
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Coemunity Defelopment
BY Tim J. Beedle, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
JD COUNTY CN S MUNICIPAL
WATER DISTRICT, D S S
BACKGROUND: As part of the fiscal review process, the Redevelopment
gencA —yTas completed the Agreements between the Cucamonga County
water District, Chino Basin Municipal Water District, and the West
End Resource Conservation District. It is necessary that the City
Council take action to approve these Agreements. Therefore, enclosed
with this report 1s a Resolution of the City Council approving the
Agreements between the Redevelopment Agency and the service districts.
RECOIMMENDATiON: It is recomwnded that the City Council approve the
enc ose so ution approviag the Agreements be.•roen the Redevelopment
Agency and the Cucamonga County Water District, Chino Basin Municipal
Water District, and Wast End Resource Conservation District.
Respectfyily submitted,
Director of Lornmity Development
JL .4B it
Attacne*nL Resolution of Approval
�a
x
�c3
h+
RESOLUTION No. g2—`i
Lauren 11. Watserman. City Clerk
A RESOLUTION OF 'ME CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING THE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN
THE RANCHO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE CLCAMONGA
COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, THE CHINO BASIN MUNICIPAL
WATER DISTRICT. AND THE WEST END RESOURCI: CONSER-
VATION DISTRICT
;e•
WHEREAS, the Rancho Redevelopment Agency has completed an
Agreement with the Cucamonga County Water District; and
WHEREAS, the Rancho Redevelopment Agency has completed an
Agreement with the Chino Basin Municipal Water District; and
WHEREAS, the Rancho Redevelopment Agency has completed an
�•
Agreement with the West End Resource Conservation District.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga does approve the Agreements between the Rancho _
Redevelopment Agency and the Cucamonga County Water District, the Chino
Basin Municipal Water District, and the West End Resource Conservation
•
District, as attached in Exhibits 'A', 'B', and "CO.
1
••
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 17th day of March, t'l82.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT•
1
1:Fi =P i, c osser, yor
ATTEST:
Lauren 11. Watserman. City Clerk
S
e,
r,.
A,
M.
a,
l•
Nc; w
AGREEMENT FOR COOPERATION BETWEEN
THE CUCAMONGA.COUNTY WATER DISTRICT,
THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
1. PARTIES AND DATE.
1.1 This Agreement entered into in the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of
California, this _ day of February, 1962, between the
CUCAMONGA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a public agency ( "Dis-
trict"), and the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUC.1hONGA, a public body ( "Agency ") and the CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation ( "City ").
2 RECITALS.
2.1 Agency is proposing to undertake a
program under the California Community Redevelopment Law
(Health and Safety Code Section 33000 at seg.)* for the
radevelopment, replanning and redesign of blighted areas
within City with stagnant, improperly utilized and unproduc-
tive land known as the Rancho Redevelopment Project
( "Project ") and requiring redevelopment in the interest of
health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the
City of Lancho Cucamonga
2.2 The District is in receipt of Ordinance
No. 166 adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho
* All subsequent references, unless otherwise noted, are to
the California Health b Safety Code.
1:�+7 "a `; Via'
I
1
" F
J
r ,
Cucamonga, California, on December 23, 1981, authorizing the
i
.-
redevelopment of an area within the territorial limits of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga by the Redevelopment Agency of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
o-
2.3 Distr.'.et is an affected taxing entity
which had special bonded indebtedness property taxes levied
on its behalf by the County of San Bernardino on all or any
portion of the property located in the Rancho Redevelopment
r
Project Area in fiats! year 1980 -81 in connection with
i,
District's Improvement District 63 -1, Improvement District 5
I
and Ceneral District.
4 -'
4
2.4 The California Community Redevelopment
-
�•
Law (Health and safety Code, Sections 33000, et seq.) autho-
rizes redevelopment agencies to pay to any taxing agency
•
with territory located within a project area other than the
J'
community which has adopted the project, any amounts nf
money which in the agency's determination is appropriate to
:�•
alleviate any financial burden or detriment caused to any
taxing agency by a redevelopment project.
`
2.5 District has determined that Project
i,
will cause financial burden or detriment if 9lstrict is not
permitted to receive special bonded inadbtedness taxes
levied and collected on its behalf upon properties which
Increase in assessed value within the Rancho Redevelopment
Project Area
'
);.
Agency
ens 2 6 District and A wish to enter into a
>
c^.
K
cooperative agreement between themselves to provide mutual
-"
ti
t;
-2-
y„v
l
aid and assistance in the redevelopment of certain areas of �..a
City through the construction of sewer and water facilities
and District and Agency have a common interest in and wish
,
to facilitate redevelopment within City and to provide for
the cooperation of District and Agency in carrying out
redevelopment activities and otherwise alleviate any finan-
cial burden or detriment caused to District by the Rancho
Revelopment Project.
2.7 District and Agency recognize the need
to provide adequate sewer and water facilities to nerve the
Project and have determined that such facilities are of
benefit to the Project and the immediate area in which the
Project is located and that there are no other reasonable
means of financing such water and sewer facilities.
2 8 District and Agency, in consideration of
these mutual undertakings, desire to cooperatively provide
for :he redevelopment of certain areas of City.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing
and the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the
parties hereto agree as follows:
3. TERMS.
3.1 Tax Allocation Special bonded indebte'
ness taxes for existing debt service attributable to that '
area within the territorial limits of District which would
have otherwise been levied upon taxable property in the ;s
Project Area by or for the benefit of the District after the ,'
-3-
effective date of Ordinance No. 166 which are allocated to
}. Agency pursuant to Section .33670(b) shall be paid by Agency
into a fund of Agency designated "Rancho Redevelopment
! Project Sewer and Water Facilities Fund" and shall be used
to pay the principal of and interest on loans, money ad-
vanced to, or indebtedness (whether funded, refunded,
assumed, or otherwise) incurred by the District to finance
or refinance, in whole or in part, those sewer and water
facilities which benefit the Project. When such loans,
advances, and indebtedness, if any, and interest thereof,
have been paid, all moneys thereafter received from taxes
attributable to District upon the taxable property within
that portion of such redevelopment project included within
the territorial limits of District shall be paid into the
special fund of the Agency.
3 2 Time of Tax Allocation Taxes which are
to be allocated to Agency pursuant to Section 33670(b) and
which are allocated pursuant to Section 3.1 to the Rancho
Redevelopment Project Sewer and Water Facilities Fund shall
be remitted to District within 30 days after taxes are
allocated and paid to Agency by the San Bernardino County
Auditor or officer responsible for the payment of taxes
Agency agrees that all such taxes which are allocated to
Agen ^y shall be hold in a separate Rancho Redevelopment
Project Sewer and Water Facilities Fund until remitted to
" District and shall be used by District for the purpose of
-4-
M
VX
0
`' _ i
paying the principal and interest on indebtedness incurred
by District to finance sewer and water facilities in con-
;; nection with District's Improvement District 63 -1, Improve-
...,
l'r ment District 5 and General District. If necessary, Agency
shall make and execute such contracts and other instruments
necessary or conceniont to enable District to exercise its
powers in order to carry out the purposes of this section.
3.3 Special Tax. District shall be allo-
cated, in addition to the portion of taxes allocated pursu-
ant to Subdivision (a) of Section 33670 and Section 3.1 of
this, Agreement, all of any portion of the tax revenues
allocated to Agency pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Section
7 93670 attributable to increases in the rate of tax imposed
for the benefit of District which levy occurs after the tax
year in which the ordinance adoptior the redevelopment plan
l
becomes effective
3 , Redemption of Bonds or Aher Indebted -
ness when taxes attributable to that area within the
Project Area which have been allocated to District pursuant
to this Agreement exceed the amount due and to be paid by
District on aocount of any indebtedness previously incurred
on behalf of Improvement District 63 -1, Improvement Dis-
trict 5 and General District, District shall immediately
t apply such funds to retirement of such indebtedness, and;or
1. redemption of outstand,ng bonds in a manner which complies
with the terms of any bond resolution or other agreement
pledging such taxes.
44)••.5
ffty�j {.i -5-
-`4,
I
V
-o
�Yc
K.
ri
� ieyMRyy.
r,
i
t
0
■
■
3.6 Mutual, Assistance. District will assist
the Agency in the planning, financing, acquisition, con-
struction and maintenance or operation of redevelopment
activities undertaken by Agency within District in accor-
dpnce with applicaole state and federal law. District shall
supply to the City such information and reports as from time
to time City may require.
3.7 Water and Sewer System Facilities.
Agency and City agree that all water and sewer system
facilities which may be constructed by Agency as part of the
Project and within the Rancho Redevelopment Project Ares
shall be transferred to D.etrict and become parts of Dis-
trict's water system or sewer system, as the case may be,
and thereafter be operated and maintained by District.
Agency and City further agree that all such water and sewer
system facilities shall be constructed in compliance with
District's standard requirements. District agrees that it
will accept all such water and sewer system facilities into
its wator and sewer systems and will thereafter operate and
maintain same as parts of such systems.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
DATED
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-6-
7
•
Cj
4�,
REDEVELOPMENT A.-ENCY OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA
DATED:
Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary
DATED: President
ATTEST:
Secretary
-7-
J
ylf .
r t
A�
•
AGREEMENT FOR COOPERATION BETWEEN
THE CHINO BASIN MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT, TiIE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
1. PARTIES AND DATE.
1.1 This Agreement entered into in the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of
California, this _ day of March, 1982, between the CHINO
BASIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, a public agency ( "District "),
and the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
a public body ( "Agency ") and the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a
municipal corporation ( "City ").
2. RECITALS.
2.1 Agency is proposing to undertake a
program under the California Community Redevelopment Law
(Health aid Safety Code Section 33000 et sag,)* for the
redevelopment, replanning and redesign of blighted areas
within City with stagnant, improperly utilized and unproduc-
tive land known as the Rancho Redevelopment Project ( "Pro-
ject") and requiring redevelopment in the interest of the
health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga.
2.2 The District is in receipt of Ordinance
No 166 adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California, on December 23, 1981, authorising
* All subsequent references, unless otherwise noted, are to
the California Health & Safety Code.
9
s
i�
9"
the redevelopment of an area, within the territorial limits
of the City of Macho Cucamonga by the Redevelopment Agency
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
2.3 District is an affected taxing entit-
which had general, Improvement District "C" and bonded indebt-
edness property taxes levied un its behalf by the County of
San Bernardino on all or any portion of the property located
in the proposed Rancho Redevelopment Project area in fiscal
year 1981 -82.
2.4 The California Community Pi- development
Law (Health and Safety Code, Sections 33000, et It%J autho-
rizes redevelopment agencies to pay :o any taxing agency
with territory located within a project area other than the
community which has adoptea the project, any amounts of
money which in the agency's determination is appropriate to
alleviate any financial burden or detriment caused to any
taxing agency by a redevelopment project.
2.! District has submitted objections to
Project's financial impact and has determined thst Project
will cause financial burden or detriment.
2.6 District and Agency wish to enter into a
cooperative agreement between themselves to provide mutual
aid and assistance in the redevelopment of certain areas of
City through the construction and operation of regional
sewer and water facilities and District and Agency have a
common interest in and wish to facilitate redevelopment
within City and to provide for the cooperation of District
-2-
ar
0
, -r
L
and Agency in carrying out redevelopment activities and
otherwise alleviate any financial burden or detriment caused
to District by the Rancho Revelopment Project.
2.7 District and Agency recognize the need
to provide adequate sewer and water facilities to serve the
Project. District and Agency further recognize that the
Basis and objectives of District's regional sewerage system
include not only the protection of public health, but also
the enhancement of the entire area served by the regional
sewer system by protecting the quality of existing and
future water sources, by improvement of Eater management
through integration of the various sources of water supply,
including effluent, and by improving general conditions for
industrial, residential, commercial and agricultural develop-
ment District and Agency also recognize that the goals and
objectives of District's regional system are of benefit to
the Project and the immediate area in which the Project is
located and to the extent that there ate no other reasonable
means of financing needed sewer and water treatment facili-
ties, Agency agrees to alleviate any financial burden or
detriment caused to District by the Project.
2.8 District a:d Agency further recognize
that financial burden and detriment has been caused to
District by redevelopment projects in the Cities of Chino,
Fontana, Montclair, Ontario and Upland which cannot be
alleviated by alleviating any financial burden or detriment
caused to District by the Rancho Development Project.
-3 —
Ala
NA
�.qg:tJiA:
c2.9 Agency has found and detormined that it
a-
z would be appropriate to alleviate any financial burden or
detriment Caused to District by the Rancho Redevelopment
Project by paying to District money to be used for those
regional sower and water facilities which benefit the
Project.
= 2.10 District and Age.,cy, in consideration of
t
¢ :base mutual undertalings, desire to settle their differ -
ances and cooperatively pruvide for the redevelopment of
certain areas of City.
NOW, THEREFORE, in considerati,)n of the foregoing
)
and the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the
parties hereto agree as follows:
a
3 TERMS.
3.1 General and Improvement District "C" tax
Allocation Taxes atributable to that area within the
territorial limits of District which would ha -o otherwise
been levied upon taxable property in the Project Area by or
�r
for the benefit of the District after the offecti•a date of
Ordinance No 166 and which are allocated to AGnncy ourauant
to Section 33670(b) shall be allocated by Agency, or in lieu
thereof an equivalent amount of money from any source what-
soever, to a fund of Agency designates "9.ancho 2edevrtlopment
Project Sower -Ind Water Facilities Fund" and shall be used
'j to pay the principal of and interest on loans, money advanced
i•
to, or indebtedness (whether funded, refunded, assumed or
otherwise) incurred ky the District to finance or refinance,
-4-
a�Ylt 4K�i%••� �Y[ Yp l n
0
■
V
-S-
iq 1,hols s% in pact' lagtunal wa,\sr grid saver facilities
®
owned, controlIcA or operated by Distri t, which \tenGht the
Project lhon in atQ 'one peat such loans, edven@aa µ1a1
,ab,sdnnss t4 an, an\e lnisvvst thereof, have beat\ paid
pursuant to ss9ttoa 1 1, all ma\\aY♦ ths\iafter repe#Eia by
accuolt\ated from taUl, nr ally pottlon the\4ot, atttrlbutablt
to D1 tc:t tkpkm \A* taxi,Dta proPstty w%kh\e that portion of
such rsdeval, •ant p%Wikut \t\cl\ldfA within \iii tutritOrlal
limits of u Let she%\ be allocated to the special fund of
the Agency idea District has dsterainet\ that Chars will
be no f„ture aemand for supplemental funds from the Capital
t�
•lapacity Reimbursement Accounts Buch daterminatio., shall
yX
not be unreasonably withheld by District when it can be
a�determined
there will be no lareseaa9la future A ®wand for
•
sich funds Provided further that the riMes may agree to
additional allocations to the special fund of the Agency
from the Rancho Redevelopment Bawer and Water Facilities
'
Fuid in the event District is maintaining a positive balance
@
in the Regional Wastewater and Reclamation Funds
3.2 General Obligation Bond Tax Allocation.
General obligation bond indebtedness taxes attributable to
that area within the territorial limits of District which
would have otherwise been levied upon taxable property in
'
the 'rolect Area by or for the benefit of the District after
;
the affective date of Ordinance No. 166 for existing general
obligstion bond debt service and which are allocated to
S
}}_
Agency pursuant to Section 33670(b) shall be paid by Agency
V
-S-
4
b
,
a
into a fund of Agency designated "Rancho Redevelopment
Project Nonreclaimable Waste Systems Fund" and shall be used
to pay the principal of and interest on loans, money ad-
vanced to, or indebtedness (whether funded, refunded,
assumed, or otherwise) incurred by the District to finance
or refinance, in whole or in part, nonreclaimable waste
systems facilities which benefit the Project. When such
loans, advances, and indebtedness, if any, and interest
thereof, have been paid, all moneys thereafter received from
taxes attributable to District upon the taxable property
within that portion of such radevelopment project included
within the territorial limits of District shall be paid into
the special fund of the Agency.
3.3 Time of General and Improvement District
"C" Tax Allocation. Taxes which are to be allocated to
Agency pursuant to Section 33670(6) and which are to be paid
to District pursuant to Section 3.1 shall be allocated to
t'{e Rancho Redevelopment Project Water and Sewer Facilities
Fund after taxes are allocated and paid to Agency by the San
Bornardino County Auditor or officer responsible for the
payment of taxes. Agency agrees that all such taxes which
are so allocated shall be held in a separate Rancho Redevel-
opment Project Water and Sewer Facilities Fund until used
by District for regional water and sewor facilities owned,
controlled or operated by District. The Agency shall remit
to and District shall use such taxes in accordance with the
following procedure:
-6-
•
Ll
i
c
0
b'
,
r
4
s
.r
(a) an or before May 1 of each year,
the District shall adopt a resolution declaring its inten-
tion to adopt a proposed budget and specifying a time, net
later than August 31, and a pla,e at which the Distract will
hold a hearing on the question of the adoption of ouch
budget The budget shall be in two (2) pmts, one part
consisring of capital costs and the other part ccnaisting of
operation and maintenance costs. Distriet'u budget shall
indicate the total taxes which must be allocated cc District
by Agency from the Rancho Cucamonga Sewer and Water Facili-
ties Fund in the budget year in order to alleviate any
- inancial burden or detriment
(b) Immsdistely after adoption of the
resolution of intention, the District shall mail a copy of
the resolution and proposed budget to the Agency. The
Agency shall review the proposed budget and, not later than
10 days preceding the date fixed for hearing, shall submit
its written report and recommendations of the Agency with
respect to the amount allocated and, at any time prior to
the adoption of the budget, the District may uake such
cho ages in the proposed budget as it deems advisuble.
(c) Not later than August 31 of each
year, the District shall by resolution sdopt the budget and
determine the Agency allocation. The several amounts of
proposed expenditures specified in the adopted budget shall
be deemed appropriated for the fiscal year and for the
purposes specified in the budget The District shall 1do,.t
i'.
-'��,.,r.�. .. - .' -, • - • -J •y� Lam. �eJ�r. .#
an amended budget to reflect the report and recommendations
of the Agency with respect to the amount allocated, unless
the District, based on specsV c findings, determines that
such recommendations will impair the District's ability to
provide water and taxer service, that the recommendations
impose unreasonable constraints upon the District with
respect to financing or time of construction of proposed
capital improvements or that the recommendations otherwise
impose undue constraints or hardships.
(d) If the Agency fails to submit a
written report and recommendations as hereinabove provided,
then the Agency shall be deemed to have epproved the pro-
posed budget
(a) if the District fails to adopt a
budget by August 31 of any fiscal year then, until such time
as the District shall adopt such budget, the budget last
adopted and the allocation determined therein shall con-
stitute the budge- and allocation for such fiscal year
(f) From and after adoption of the
budget, the Agency shall remit taxes to District from the
"Rancho Redevelopment ProJert Sewer and Water Facilities
Fund." within 30 days after receipt of written request
therefor, in such amounts as indicated in the adopted budget
leas reasonable expenses incurred by Agency in the adminis-
tration of this Agreement
3.4 Time of General Obligation bond Tax Allo-
cation. General obligation bond taxes which are to be
-g-
t" allocated to District (•y Agency pursuant to Section 3.2 of
• this Agreement shall be remitted to District within ten days
` after taxes are allocated and paid to Agency by the San
Bernardino County Auditor or officer responsible for the
payment of taxes District agrees that all such taxes which
are allocated to District shall be held in a separate Rancho
Redevelopment Project Nonreclaimable Waste systems Fund
until used and shall be used by District for the purpose of
expanding and improving the community's nonreclaimable waste
zvstems If necessary, Agency shall make and execute such
c.ntracts and other instruments necessary or convenient to
enable District to exercise its powers in order to carry out
the purposes of this se:tion
3 5 Special Tax District shall be allo-
cated, in addition to the portion of taxes allocated pursu-
ant to Subdivision (a) of Section 33670 and Sections 3 1 and
3.2 of this Agreement, all of any portion of the tax revenues
allocated to Agency pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Section
33670 attributable to increases in the rate of tax imposed
,
for the benefit of Diatrict which levy occurs after the tax
year in which the ordinance adopting the redevelopment plan
becomes effec,ive
3 6 Re,luction of Tax Allocation. In the
event DlSL,,ct 9 coat# for the acquisition, construction,
matnrenan,e or operation of the regional system is reduced
by amounts of any grants or other firanc:al assistance re-
ceived .,y District from the federal or state governments or
.g-
lit
.
'j any county, city or spacial district, District shall adopt
an amended budget reflecting such reductions.
3 7 Redemption of Bonds or Other Indebted-
ness. When taxes attributable to that area within 0.4
Project Area which have been paid into the Rancho Redevelop-
ment Sewer and water Facilities Fund or allocated to Dis-
trict pursuant to this Agreement exceed the amount due and
to be paid by District on account of any indebtedness in-
curred on behalf of the community, including, but not
limited to, retirement of District's Reclamation Capital
Fund indebtedness, Regional Wastewater Fund indebtedness or
Nonreclaimable Waste System Fund indebtedness, District
shall immediately apply such funds to retirement of such
r
indebtedness, and /or redemption of outstanding general
obligation bonds in a manner which complies with the terms
r of any bond resolution or other agreement budgeting or
e
pledging Such taxes, and the parties may thereafter termi-
nate this Agreement
3 8 Amendment of Agreement. In the event
the Redevelopment Agencies of the cities of Chino, Fontana,
t Montclair, Ontario and Upland agree to alleviate any finan-
cial burden or detriment caused to the District by their
respective existing or future redevelopment projects by
paying to District taxes attributablo to those areas within
the territorial limit of District which would have otherwise
been levied upon taxable property in the project areas of
.ti .
-lO-
11
• y
k•
these respective redevelopment agencies by or for the bene-
fit of District after the effective date of their redavel-
opment plans, Agency agrees to amend this agreement to
provide for direct payment to District of all these taxes
which would have been levied upon taxable property in the
.Y
Project Area by or for the benefit of tbd District after the
effective date of Ordinance No. 166.
3.9 Mutual Assistance. District will assist
the Agency in the planning, financing, acquisition, construc-
tion and maintenance cr operation of redevelopment activi-
tics undertaken jy Agoncy within District in a xordancn with
applicable state and federal law. District shall supply to
k' the City su -h informatinn and reports as from time to time
0 sty may require
N
Secretary
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG'A
DATED:
CHINO BASIN MUNICIPAL WATER
Mayor
ATTEST:
President
City Clerk
REDEVELOPMENT ACENrY OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
DATED:
_
Chairman
ATTEST
-��°S� K`.♦ �.�el'_ .�, -
I41Ru
Secretary
CHINO BASIN MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT
DATED:
President
ATTEST:
Secretary
_
-11
-��°S� K`.♦ �.�el'_ .�, -
I41Ru
<, _ �Y+'•. ;.°,.
:'= S�`.��YPYY'JC±SZ-S'
�''•" AGREEMENT FOR COOPERATION BETWEEN
THE {TEST END RESOURCE CONSERVATION
• DISTRICT, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
M
+; 1. PARTIES AND DATE.
1.1 This Agreement entered into in the Ciuy
of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of
,. California, this _ day of February, 1982, between THE
WEST END RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT, a public agency
( "District "), ant the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CIT1 OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA. a public body ( "Agency ") and the CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation ( "City ").
i 2. RECITALS.
2.1 Agency is proposiug to undertake a
i program under the California Community Redevelopment Law
(Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seg.)* for the
redevelopment, replanning and redesign of blighted areas
w`thin City with stagnant, improperly utilized and unproduc-
tive land known as the Rancho Redevelopment Project ("Pro -
ject ") and requiring redevelopment in the in:orest of the
health, safety, and general welfare of tha people of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga.
2.2 The District is in receipt of Ordinance
j,.
j' Ito. 166 adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho
,4
Cucamonga, California, on December 23, 1981, authorizing
*All subsequent references, unless otherwise noted, are
to the California Health 3 Safety Code.
I
.r
•:s
1'
zx
0
' n �
the redevelopment of an area within the territorial limits
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga by the Redevelopment Agency
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
2.3 District is an affected taxing entity
which had general purpose property taxes levied on its
behalf by the County of San Bernardino on all or any portion
of the property located in the proposed Rancho Redevelopment
Project Area in fiscal year 1982 -83.
2.4 The California Community Redevelopment
Law (Health and Safety Code, Sections 33000, et sew.) autho-
rizes redevelopment agencies to pay to any taxing agency
with territory located within a project area other than the
community which has adopted the project, any amcunts of
money which in the agency's determination is appropriate to
alleviate any financial burden or detriment caused to any
:axing agency by a redevelopment project
2.5 District has submitted objections to
ProJect's financial impact and has determined that Project
may cause financial burden or detriment based upon projected
ner.ds for resource conservation progrtms.
2.6 District and Agency wish to enter into a
cooperative agreement between themselves to provide mutual
aid and assistance in the redevelopment of certain areas of
City through the development of conservation practices to
save the basic resources of soil and water from unreasonable
and ecoacmically preventable waste and destruction. Dis-
trict and Agency have a common interest in and wish to
1
41
0
to' facilitate redevelopment within City and to provide for the
p •�. cooperation of District and Agency in carrying out redevel-
opment activities and otherwise alleviate any financial
e burden or detriment caused to District by the Rancho Re-
development Project.
y. 2.7 District and Agency recognise the need
to provide adequate natural resource conservation programs
to serve the Project and have determined that such programs
are of benefit to the Project and the immediate aree in
which the Project is located and that there may be no other
reasonable means of financing such programs based upon the
projected needs of District.
2.8 Agency has found and determined that it
t • would be appropriate to alleviate any future financial
�,• burden or detriment caused to District by the Rancho Redevelop-
ment Project by entering into a cooperative agreement to
provide technical and financial assistance to land owners
' and operators for soil and water conservation programs which
a.
benefit tho Project and by otherwise expanding and improving
construction, operation and maintenance of the community's
natural resource conservation capabilities.
�1 2 9 District and Agency, in consideration of
�• these mutual undertakings, desire to settle their differ -
antes and cooperatively provide for the redevelopment of
certain areas of City in a manner which will assist District
,+ in carrying out its resource conservation programs.
- - -3-
r
_ t
,f �#
. 7
1
2
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing
e
and the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the
•
parties hereto agree as follows:
3. TERHs.
3.1 Rancho Ravelooment Resource Conservation
Program. Agency and District shal. make and execute such
contracts and other instruments necessary or convenient to
`
enable Agency and District to exercise their powers in order
to develop and carry out natural resource conservation
programs which affect the community. If in the opinion of
Agency it is neceosary to alleviate any financial burden or
detriment caused to District, Agency hall assist District
in providing tachnlcal and financial assistance to land-
-
owners and operators for soil and water conservation and
e
>>
land use planning matters. Agency will consult with District
4
in the event property owners, businesses and tenants within
t�
the Rancho Redevelopment Project Area will disturb soils
within a prescribed wind erosion hazard area in the dsvelop-
meet, rental or ownership of new industrial, housing and
commercial uses within the project
t5.
3.2 Financial Assistance to District Taxes
µ
allocated to Agency pursuant to 'action 33670(b) which would
s
have otherwise been levied upon taxable property in the
Project Area by or for the benefit of the District after the
effective date of Ordinance No. 166 may be periodicallly
�'.
'!1y
disbursed to District upon request to pay the principal of
a il
t
and interest on loans, money advanced to, or indebtedness
�
®
X41 ,
_ "- (whather funded, refunded, assumed or otherwise) incurred by
N
?:*• the District to finance or refinance, in whole or in part,
'a.
consultative services, including the preparation of conser-
vation plans, provided to property owners, businesses and
tenants within the. Rancho Redavelopcant Project. When such
loans, advances and indebtedness, if any and interest thereof,
have been paid, all moneys there .ar received from taxes,
or any portion thereof, attributable to District upon the
taxable property within that portion of such redevelopment
1, project included within the territorial limits of District
may be paid into the special fund of Agency
3.3 Allocation of Special Taxes. District
j' shall be allocated, in additiou to the portion of taxes
ti
allocated pursuant to Subdivision (a) of Section 53670, all
't of any portion of the tax revenues allocated to 9igency
i
pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Section 33670 attributable to
increases in the rato of tax imposed for the benefit of
District which levy occurs after the tax year in which the
ordiz.anee adopting the redevelopment plan becomes effective.
P 3.4 Mutual Assistance. District will assi3t
the Agency in the planning, financing, acquisition, con -
!` struction and maintenance or operation of redevelopment
r
activities undertaken by Agency within District in accor-
dance with applicable natural resource conservatica programs
p and state and federal law. District shall supply to the
>> _
SGI• -.. •_era
a
y�,ta
r.
ti
Y
,r
t
�G
City such information and reports as from time to time City
may require in connection with such natural resource con-
servation programs.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
DATED:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Cler
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA.
DATED: _
Chairman -
ATTEST:
Secretary
THE REST END RESOURCE
CCNZERVATION DISTRICT
DATED: _
President
ATTEST:
Secretary
-b-
.ss
0
l
I
•
' r
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 17, 1982 uL
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City 5ngineer
BY: Barbara Rrall, Engineering Technician
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Improvement Agroemaat and Security
for COP 81 -15 - Larry Beck
3 9-
Attached for your approval is an agreement and security to quaran-
tee the construction of off -site improvements for COP 81 -15. This
project consists of 1.04 acres of land within the ind:t'striXl park
zone ror the development of a self service car wash and gas station
and was approved by the Planning Commission on October 28, 1982.
The development is located at the northeast corner of Haven and
Jersey Avenues.
It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution
accepting the agreement and bonds and authorizing the Mayor and
City Clark to sign same.
Respectfully submitted, ,
LB Bk :jam
Attachments
41
r
a
RESOLUTION NO. TO • S)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF 111E CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT AIRS IHPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 81 -: 5
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, has for its consideration an Improvement Egreement executed
on March 17, 1982 by Larry Deck as :eveloper, for the impr'ovenent of
j
public right-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically described
therein, and generally located at the northeast corner of Maven and
Jersey Avenues; and
WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in
said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be
done in conjunction with the development of said real property as referred
••
to Planning Commission, Conditional Use Permit No. 81 -15; and,
WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied
_
by good and sufficient improvement Security, which is identified in said
Improvement Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
O
of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Agreement and
said Improvement Security be and the same are hereoy approved and the
Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improveeent Agreement on behalf
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clark to attest thereto.
PASSED, APPROVED, ADOPTED this 17th day of March, 7982.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
x:
1
hillip D. S:h osser, Mayor
'•
f;
ATTEST:
uren M. Wasserman, C ty Cler-
'�_...<�.�t.— � t 144.x• _" f :•3--,,FrF,,,rtt ` _" �,l"
.1 7
tie ,-` �r+,.s'�#'.�"•.�-�x'„ kx . � �t'�'..r�„s "r _ - ,...r:.YRtS+�a.'li =i17'A •�
r•. +,r
I
I
rkll
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA ONGA
ENGINEERING DIVISION
VICINITY -'NIAP
r�
t
i
I
I
i
r'
i
I
I
I°
I�
I
I
I
I
r'
rkll
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA ONGA
ENGINEERING DIVISION
VICINITY -'NIAP
r�
t
i
I
I
i
r'
i
CRT Of KMM7 WCW0.SA •.
iliro0lLYLR .IC$IZ'W(t � �t:
C.U.P. mas
f 110it ALL AO R ffiSL PRLM", that this
agreassot Is e•d, a ant""
e
�t fetew u teuomn h/u o t uouutVa Of thr "relclyal tad. W ing, m
" tr taro sue he City to Rancho s to " s rut• a1 y and bat.. • wd city tar -
t pretleoa ber•S"![" r•f•cnd to •. me ay, y and btawm a•!d Cry awe
mow
l* "gaoras to " [b• Doralaper.
MT61altll
tW. `nyb A'. pun "mt tp .aid Code, D.rstapu has tepauosd "N"al by
n no City of. r n r pr.lc Sn "Mod"os-
,1 rtu the parttuas et too report at tbn (bsimtt -- f�Paot Dtnctor
M., a asy ae.edeasrs nwttol lncar.d
NEC
of lbrm Avenue abd Jiny A"a$
E and,
i®fAS, the City w ..ubtlahad asct W rrltirmu to be ". by "td
d.Kloper ptlor to Vanti t ms Lena "pw•l of Me d.aslap.ntl •K
_ rmru. the "@MEL= of this gnanmt d Miles of lsprn t .omritf
u herelAg!'[" eland. "d •ppnrad y the City Mton.ro no d.asnd to be
"W"len to prior raplttlas of .tad r•potr—Me for the purpose of nurlq
eW •Pt Zll
-r, Wit. Us"E n, it in bgay agn•d by and b-mosA 06 City and the Denlapr
y u [ollstr
IT, 1. ac dm"per hmy qn" to os"tm pr
ct a denlr•• "paas all
m uyrere"st• QasertbK m page 7 bereaf with" l_yasp
p fra the "to ktrsof.
! f. the 9. of tut agr.s".t •bell be - t r... �Klvg an
the due of e"mtten bKast by the City. a" aggasa"t .IW2 be " {
W wit w Me d" lolled; the last dy of the stn etlpulu". colas.
i •aL1 gem hu base .nd.d as hml"tgar pwldsd.
.' t. ae Dnelopr aq ns Kt tldluaal ties to thLch to tmptm et. prnrl - "- -
. stay of that agga.asno L wntlag at eras tbp fW Mete prior to ..�
t{ai� the 4lwlt due• W tsrindiag • stag." of 4ttu"tpdeu of aeeas.uy .
ap for eldlalae.l then. To geasldKu"n of Mir ngon t. the CSy nemas
.3 the right to nrl.v the peerula" hmol. SoelWlag eemtmo us st•pdat4. c '
cat "ties"• d sufflu "y Of the t"tannont narltf. and to gatutre
tllat"na Martin Ma "nmted by enhaMnE l tpaagu therein.
try
1. it the Dndopr lilt or egl.e" to eaNf with the yrwuWre a[ uL
gn.rente the city sh.0 btw the right at •y is" to cause said ptKt_ ;,t w
+� uo" to be mnpGttl y my L"tul easy tot tbrKps to rKwar fee {
"14 Developer b i an a, 'A
lar and /or h Sugary t full tc d erne"• 1•eurrtl ie
data$. • • ti
S. lncnuhn"t sent" .b•R be'eh•lned by ME D..elrl" froe,tM atfsca
of the City fntin.e prior to start of my wrt within the public rlp►i Y �iSti
Of ray, and the dtgaup.t shat& undo[, push wrt is fell'ta.11ale .lu'�
the rgwl•[laas "susad thagaan.' Non- taµtaeCe wy t.:att•t "rya
of the —.1k y the city. W o...aeY et of the pealit": idw `S'liot'ragA„' S,t"t13:• +�
G•.f , _ . - ' f. catfor,rlWt of Uh ay r.vd isnt wrt i.IctM "all be matrucea/�le
t -yYry�r 71 ♦.r; , r' - e1dL1LNd "/ Drillpg• and am p�.tlLL pased.eno uter.leKltbnKlwltli�'Y�n'y -ijp
✓.aim . ' ... .ball ucludi any trwttle as "Ill Kh 1K"ett•1 wtt'd.aN nKas "'jjll
i ....{�«t.:. ., r- :JGr.d[tAl•ti era Wlte safety, : tr
-tr e�;a - .:
e `t -IN ac.
ZA
"E .i° "A.>; iw,+at' Lii'r't d- a S.5 .. ti 1. )4.•t�ti"v. v°r'+�
r�3t".,f I , r N
lit
%
On a
CMMU= aCXI�
B= C"L,,,Tt
K=Mxoc= "icizz nz scft�
(Atc,-h to -Easpacto".
• 'IrmaT no. cma UM R Jr.
Mo Rofir" OW 81-15*
, -�� City Dr-Us No.8
wn
O"to -C IWIW'-co"'t f" for WLtIo4 "rolt'.r &,tumt C."
PlAt",
—t=Tl= �Con "S'Mck"
mm
k..
2
Cmq=czcrr Cam
TOM carsTaucrim
fAITHFUL MMCUXZ W" (Lon)
LAM MCD XA=UJ. WAD (wz)
DIDUCCAUX 114ACTIONn't
(rrz ic�uu)
"Ummall" BM tchsa)
Cordficate or•D@Mlt Subittgd for public M, W-"' L,
7-
P.S. ] •
f. Mort, dnee time "tell, street- .11211 he dtlla.tlr pruned to ."I.:
[lone; tM city Stull hens the flat re tomal.te any end all Writ In as
eveer of eeJietifled dolq to rospbttee, And to remover all coat n"
G.M mm intuited free the Deunlofos and /or his te n.raetar by .y Wfm
& the D2.lepsr .loll be mos I
eon. of par this for replemtsmt, nlarettee. or [r
the tcyMlmt unit to as e[ 'It"
he ;yet— In Conflict ulth
of the water ancu. 7 BeSlrar s" the mmsr
9, ft- Be "i"Of shall be rsgesslble for rarsol .1 all Ieeso tot! a" other
debris fret the pub1K right of usy neel"nif free Sert bee one the aothe
r.c property or within sold right of vp,
ID. Tha 0.vrloper .4.11 plant and rtatala psetway tn. as dlr.[" y list tba.solty DMI.prpt Dlncrer.
II. 7be lTnnret security to be furnished by the DSnlepsr to &",rein.
eCoop het,m of nMy m of this airessent shall be aublart n the "pn•.1
City y The principal aro nt Of Yid leprpvesmt exrwrlty
SW, be eat less them the sooner "out belout _
OD"'Vol NT SE=uy SDOt rm, raltafel ferforem. Beet
TRD SMyT /ACOT
nRCfift f197UT.
Certificate of Deposit 7110.49
14n.L "
1 sm Labor ao
in 1t1R6S WMF. the pant. before blue can" then presents re be duly
esar1ted .d rbaaul"p" ulth all forri![3. re9alnd by Wan the d.rS
.t forth opposite theeii"r/cttfI ta2.t
Cf9f2mLs
Sit
STt
O8R1
M1RWt
DdRr
RR
Or WOO CLCAMOfCa, ftl.liarvu
a aeeloiWl .rpef.ttm
StMSa/J n /��r'�waia Dnitnaft_&&dtloJ 996-1 19flt., before
' ] carry.[ Gov tSO..t... e�.1... }� the w4wov.d Man Pton:. pwwnol appMr!
�• 1`o cry L�ee�t ' '•
In the*,ae k t rM panad0 nio e raWfl tahrAbd`'it)
3 ' !Pint °.sf«L 1 atr r Il. w,ude tnwent w .tlna.teaetd m.t mL�'r
.n4 ., �rrer twNC•swnaru auM"hM UtaS grlM putpeM DtvSitrenbintd ,w ^, ``_ii�x
=== C IN NtTN1S9�NNC,Df�Dr.�I houvsda set nl M" we" atrti+l'iwl jJM
Y �
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT,"'GAf"
O
FFROM:Lloyd 17, 1982
Council and City Manager t�
B. Hobbit, City Engineer
ra Arall, Engineeri ng Technician
tance of Bonds and Ageemert for Parcel Map 6005
lease of Bonds and Agrement for Previously
tted - Mark heat Corp,
r,
6
Mark West Corp, has submitted a new agreement and security for
their project Parcel Map 6005 because of a change in partnership.
project was originally submitted as Parcel Map 5194 and re-
subdivided as Parcel Map 6005. Therefore, tho bonds to be releas-
ed were submitted along with Parcel Map 5194. Permits for off-
site construction have been Issued and construction has begun.
•• The development is located on thn south side oa 9th Street between
nallman and Vineyard Avenues at ?lower Road.
The new securities are in the following e:sounts:
Faithful Performance $32,000
Labor t Material $16,000 ,
-
RECOMMENDATION
i
It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution
accepting tho new agreement and security for PercOl Map 6005 and
releasing the previously accepted bonds and agreement for Parcel
Hap 5194.
Respectfully submitted,
spect ffull
LBH:9K- jaa
Attachments
a i
r�.. Y4,`l•A 1 �.
I ,y9ti: Y r � yP-Rj�
h 4•v. ..'l +�i. -RF u" b +� 1. � Ga
u
, • -
1`;: RESOLUTION NO. San - 5�
r
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA. APPROVING IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR PARCEL MAP
NO. 6005
tt.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, has for its consid- ration an Improvement Agreement executed
on March 17, 1982 by Mar{: Hest Corporation as developer, for the improve-
ment of public right- of-way adjacent to the real property specifically
described therein, and generally located on the south side of 9th Street.
between Hellman and Vineyard.at Flower Road; and
WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in
said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, ig to be -
�'one in conjunction with thv oevelopment of said real property as referred
to Planning Commission. Parcel Hap No. 6005; and f -
WHEREAS, said Improvement Agroement is secured and accompanied _
by good and sufficient Improvement Security, whicb is identified in said
improvement Agreement; and
WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security
replaces previously submitted Improvement Agreement and Improvement
Security accepted by City Council on September 19, 1979.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, Califorr•io, that said Improvement Agreement and
said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the ..
Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto,
and release Improvement Agreement and Security held for Parcel Map
Ho. 5194. r
PASSED, APPROVED, ADOPTED this 17th day of March, 1982. •-
AYES:
HOES:
ABSENT:
Phillip D. Schlosser. Mayor
ATTEST:
ti
� ..- Lauren M. Wasserman, C ty C er
(a 3
r'
rcurerrvc
�
• !d .r. +••w� e.r.a•.er< wr fvo
Intt I u / W m
' � '
PARCEL MAP N0. 6005 ••'•'•'• •^
d
�
,µ rl.•nbM rt•t,... K.a •.(lt NMy ./yr. CL•A[6b
1r..1.Y.Vr.•
_ 7 -•
[TI`�r y Hri •..Y' V r! •Iri .4Kf li J•.P1M.K.YJ•R )TI O{1\I.
�`
y
t
tag
t
NINTNr J STREET
' I.
JAI;
N
t' •7
f •`..•n
raw /
ri."l.
1
r ••
��
'
_i�
CtF'.
/�
•>rw .•
'tif
'
; yam.
LAJ
I
t.
t 1
•
III
!
,')
d•�z
:et�� ,;�,\
_ —�,
iii
r�'I
I
=
IIi
-
•EIGHTH STREET ._ _
a
_ f
Y
�
.�_,•1
• f +t
...."R
...
}�R�'`��lt
'�• •
f++rrJCns felri
•J I. �
iL..�„
i .
..w.. � +sm awnr�+
f
•�ti
I
• aAN M'{ ^Mr•YM •i.O M Y,IO
JIM i
.v, a
u
7
• • \F•'✓If WI MI4V0•• M.I fr}vY••rr.•
•WYW
)
_
•�•� �.••••
+Yf.
, �� r'• .. v><r. a.urawe.nen
'• `:, �y
'•f1.:7,��fr
...
' yir,rrJV a. m wr.
r.
i:�.a,.
��. ,. �
;^ wed " Me�iWOIMO WKt rarJ/MI+W.+K • • •
; .. •�: i
;•7f.
va Y y�
wi.
��j{.�
v
r
PARCEL MAP N0. 5194
IN Tiff CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHON6l.
ar O�UWYwTorUCr AC � iiM a
11[[GwCID R• GWit tq .wot u Ow MaM .4w..
M Y4 OtwwPW aau.TY. fJUfOV rJ.
•VM�,rIwTO
r�. rM IgMT Wta/1Tw44 UC{ OWt
•lwra7•r��
I
STREE7
w
µkis�i%7Y : `jri- VYnCE���°.,,,A4 %:,'+Y.r`.l • <��
1
llf�l
7 I.
W
.1
s
:� :
ONE,
j'.
W4
}14..
1
x•
r,
I
r.
- 5.'„`i'^:Y: - .ri _5f .• . %:at � b";:ta^+vK r`%c"k
Y
w ^ CITY OF RAIM WUUpltt'st
IIFROVENE11i ACREEREIfT
FCR
PARCEL IAP W. 6009
.
p9fM ALL 19R By THESE PRESEDTS: ThSt this wg"eant 1s nede and intend
Into, to cwfgrnena with the Provisions of the /Lnfelpel Code and AmIattov
of the City of Rtncho Cacaamge. State of California, a Wntcipal carporatim,
henlnaftor rcterted te at the City, by W batpen said City and
Hart West Cory.
FiniT' —rc errta to a cW a oiler.
M1TR`SS M: ,
THAT, *HIM. Pursuant to said Code, Developer his requested approval by the
City rf Parcel tap thmar
Provisions Of the report of W 6009 1n accoMSna with the
Ol�tl neer
reor., and aey amen�b,U
tot"tol Ioutad south side of 9th Stmt at plover
'
Md.
MOM. the City Ns established certain nquir tt to be Seat by said Der -
elopr Prior to granting the final approval of the pamlua0i any
IaiEREy.S the "ecutton of this agreent and Posting of Immanent Security
nafter Cited, and approved DSyO�
as hereinafter m
the City Attorney, an dawned to be
WvAlat to prior cmplatfw of safd•r"WreaeoU ;or the pupose of steal n9
Yid emove[;
Wit. THERVORE. 1t is hereby agreed by and batwtn the City and the Developer
as follows:
1. The De"Ipper hereby agms to construct at Developer's expense all
iSep "resents described w Pag9e S hemf within nine moths from the
data hereof. as Sectta�
per 2.1t of Ordinance g0. 2R.
2. 7M ten of this agreement shall he alm An.ths rAeeanCfng an thr date
of execution hereof by the City This a9n t shall he In default at
the day follarinngg the list ay of the tern Stipulated, unless said tern
Au been extend e0 As berw:nefter, Provided.
1. no Donlan" my regwst ddlittgnal tine in which to mplate the or;.
vtalms of this sgnesent, In writing rot loss than four weeks prior Is
the de /Sett dote, and tocludft9 A suteSetat of circuestanas of pecess/ty
for additional tine. In co stdaration of such request, tM City "serves
the right to "r6w the ProVlsicns hereof. Including cau tmCtlon Standards,
eclat the itprovement
swhMgwK
not security. and to require
emtfmte. Md by substantial changes 4hereln. -
e. if the Oveloper falls or n"lotts to omPT, with the provisions of
4
gremmnt, the City shill have See right at any lima to awe said Pravtsimf
In be completed br any lawful mrsns. and thereupm to recaver, fm said
Developer and/or it Surety thou full
iti
cast and expense incurred In w doing.
:''+
6. Cncroadment POrmlts shall be Obtained by the Developer frm the offlti of
the
•ix'
City Engtnsor- prior'` start of any work within the public rlga o/ ray,
and the Developer shall impost such work to full ,pllana with the re.
•`!ice?
.-
gitatltns contained therein. non- amplrana may result to stapplaq et the
work by tM City, "d assetm
fit of the penalties provided. ,
6. pwbllc right of wy lapro" "rot work required shall he cgnatrccted fs ice-
fgroare with SPPmed Iep"vemmt St "-
g, q -�T3
'
plans, Aaro $Wiffat}ons; and+ •• Z
Stawdin Drawings MO, Ar special &*&*=is ttanto.^ Camtrcctln shell,
Include any cransitlsns and/or Other lnciesnul work daeSeed
+ drainage or public safety. = - �•_;."4t'�t`+.vS-,rv.YM.,•
t
r t �1..• `�4 � 11��.
i '•
` Page
IMPAO MEMf AWZDU)f
f. Mark damn within existing streets shall be diligently pursued to eoeple-
Y tiont the City shall have the right to omelets any end all wort In the
t event of unjustified delay in cenpletionw AM to recover all cost and
esps+se incurred from the Developer W /or his contractor by any lawful
means.
8. The deveieper shall at responsible for rglArement, relocation, or re-
Oral of any component of any irriggaation water system-in conflict with
the required work to the satlsfactlm of the City Engineer and the owner
of the "ter system.
9. The Develaper shall be responsible for rraoval of all loose rock and
other debris from the pub] So right of way resul tine from work done an
the edJacmt property or within cold right of way.
10. The Developer shall plant and maintain wrkwsy trees as directed by W
Coeuum -ty Devolopmmt Director.
11. Tho improvement security so br fur Jibed by the Developer U guamtee
amplation of the toms of.thit agreement snail be SVKt to the
approval of the City Attar.wry. The principal amount of said t"rovemnt
security shall be not less than W arrant sham below:
MOfDmfT SECURITY R MITTED:
faithful Performance 8W 132 -O h.M natter of credit)
Mterial end Labor Bend $18.000.00 flatter of Credf tl
-t IM YITlem HWOF, the parties hereto have unod these presents to be duly
.� executed and actnuvled ed with all fomlitles required by law On W Was
set forth opposite their signatures:
b /aP
v. 8T: /1 DATE•
SYITMESS: +�e—{ 7, .A//1r ZL DATE ; -;Flf ..Z
+/ ` CI7Y OF AAlallo talfAUKA. CAL1FCRhu
x: a ea.iclpal corporation .
d 8Y: .YATM _
). ATTEST _ .CITY CLEAR
DATE'_,
- -v CADfd1W.1
a ry-I�t�AN,.CiiS
tr. :arnpv- d /F'YTra
Y. �t.G �awu�O.r•• In a A cur spawsps eCowl, W SW
G' + erOwnw'^�Iw 4el r:p art%/�f.) Iisp ! /our ✓lA - :.
�;y arwwmwbmebtq lbw - •�•,.
159.
a x+o so/b1 q b
his w K
K4WQpd that
4ti
'n••r:• i',• -i - ,r��y.
Cdr ". SGt>•aa " i � .e. '.
�'�r°$a ' �.- '_. .. •. ' . : , :.:. '- .KERB r � . r M�•� �,di
r "'c`s�•' +ter -�j� •�4�.1 -�,.. -:: - . G.� ,, :.,_ ,.x .e��r��p�np•�r,���,�
?*' AFt'"(•` �.' W..' tH':" fh '4"e <�''1`.e3w{�Ph!1°de- '�yl.� � - _ � � � �n. �S1�= :,^�..Y���S!;QSJIA •'�'.
I
w - _ ..,�;;v i.y..... V'�r`'L���^Y5. , r 4 -r'�, ..y ' ' - ' p .,r„h..e>: '•.,
♦ ♦ .mot � ��i
CM Or Lasso Crc_` d
t1MUTR== A A= 62iCY \T6
r =M%Cc= rocnT R sCg100I2:
(6ttac0 to •Ierrtttor's Co%') yin St. goo ila'gr
tans Slim MWT :O.
�mvilm gy B. sn71
►iis 4tartoo _M 6007' City vm ug b.s 327 -
WItt was not iocisgs cortot to for oritlas rtnit or ►srootot rspisco-
otot ttposits.
00]S1pIRI0s COST rsrnu7E
' COltitsOC'rlal MST ml-g1 M ,.
CV►27OCM Curls S ►:g77 00
T"4 CD03TUCTIO51 CO M, , : 577,000.00
rglTMVL tDTOV(ixCs 0000 (loos)' ' $77,000.00 `• ' ♦i
UICA An MITMM som (702) 516.000.00'] >,
MINMDW ISS►OCTIOS IQ 00''
l0etA1LRA[I011 wo (CA6O) ~'{: +� 0••'{� �'• 1
l�
• J1
0
f
=3
Lloyds Bank Califomia
r.
UW (lrt,t >r aiule,uC . Ntn Ql,fttw 9rd6o . (714) 97541W
i
4.ryn LwAr„c W Rs
i
Ku-ch 3, 1982 ` E, is C f,NdGN6A
CC6:..:01° W: 0� ... ENT DEPT.
S ;3E2
Mr. Lloyd Hubbs AS P8
City nnineer 7A960di,V:lIA30A6
v
City Of Rancho Oj=mnga 3
9330 Breslin
Rarcto Cuca=%ja, CA 91730
1
Dear Mr. Butts:
Be advised that LLOy89 Btr California hag recorded a ConatxtcG'cn °
loan t0
Mrmxd H. and itaralynm R. Lucks, and Jaws W. and Bcrnis W mis for offaite
cOnStrvctiOn Costs of lots 1 -7, parcel Map 6005, in the City of Ra0@o
CUMmmon a, C minty of San Bernardino.
' wderatatd that in order to k=ace the City of two C m=w.ga to grant
~
4 o££pi�al Of tho parcel dap, a and has been deposited wcth the City
for construction costs on behalf Of the bocraers anVor their
`
constrt:ction comiarry, Marb agt jorporation.
In order to !:duce the City to release the above turd, we k zee agree to
set aside $32,000 of thb `%cal loan proceeds to be Applied to the ooapietLen
Of ofsite iapcnvamsts as described in the attached -E ddbit A.' In the
event of default m tha part of the dovialOpar, we agree to asks available
the funds necessary to
to the City of ls=ibe
Couplets the offaite
in the a
ialaovealents described in the attadod "Hd:ibit A,' to a avdm. of $32,000.
:.
It is agreed and wderstood that this set i.xcv bl�,y a and
lather is
that e::r obligation
Ilgatim hctavith ahaLL tarmimtO thirty
ta1Uj (30) days after
City Cm-=U approval of oosplatim of said wxk, or %hen said fords
have boen m1austed, vidd ver ocras first.
Sincerely,/
7Orxy eloYntcak /,[[L
Assistant Vice president
JH:plw ..
.-
'
'
cc: fl ward Hunks
.
Jaws MSrmis
– _ :-'�•c?1P
_... –. —yt \ t
r
t S.S.4A,'�/SSzX. ' '� l�lQ
.`Yl�. :t+��i°,�c,+i•tiRi�yw�ti!f - 1
�' :•"-
l�
• J1
0
f
a
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATF: March 17, W2 OL_1"
1977
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, Cit.-/ Enginedr
BY: Barbara xrall, Engineering Technicidn
^USJECT: Acceptance of Parcel .lap 7661 -1, Bonds and Agreement -
xacor
Attached for your approval is Parcel Map 7061 -1 along with bonds
and agreements to guarantee the construction of off -site improve-
ments Since Lots 2 -10 (Phase l) are - occted south of 6th Street,
the streets shaded on the attached map along with - storm drain on
the southerly most street will be constructed at this time.
It is reco =ended that City Council adopt the attached resolution
approving Parcel Map 7061 -1, accepting the bonds and agreement
and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign th6 same.
Respectfully sub fitted,
LDN: Ksjna
Attachments
L
i
ri: ti% Y :!'f+'.F.��+w'kr�hMi"�°i�„�,�5: � ii- '�.w.:.r:•'� ' ' . .y.
r
RESOLUTION 10.
t
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
.l CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL IIAP NUMBER 7061 -1,
(TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 7061 -1) IMPROVEMENT Ar4ZEEMENT,
i^ AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY
`t WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel fbp Number 7061 -1, submitted by
Kacor, Inc., Subdivider, and consisting of 9 parcels, located on the
south side of 6th Street, betoern Cleveland and Milliken Avenues, being
a dtvision of Lots 17, 18, 23 and north 1iv of Lots 24 and 26 as recorded
in Kip Book 4, Page 9 Records of San Bernardino County was approved by
the Planning Commission as provided in the State Subdivision Map Act and
is in compliance with the requirements of Ordinance 28 of said City; and
WHEREAS, Parcel Map Number 7061 -1 is the Final Map of the
division of lard approved as sham on said tentative parcel map; and
WHEREAS, to meet the requirements established as prerequisite
to
approval of the Final Map, said subdivider submits for approval said -
�, Final Mao offering for dedication for public use the streets delineated
thereon
NOW, THCREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Carnctl of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, California, as follows:
1. That the offers for dedication and the Final Map
delineating same be approved and the City Clark
Is authorized to execute the certificate thenIon
- behalf of said City; end
2 That said Parcel flap Number 7061 1 be and the
same is hereby approved and to City Engineer is
authorized to present same to the County Recover
to be flied for record
PAS ",D, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 17th day of March, 1982
AYES
PIES
AB ,ENT
FM lip D. Scilosser, Wyor
.y
s• AttEST:
t
' +r! Lau"4 N. Wasserman, City Cle•k
-72-
to to,
jo I
to Or ti-D
too
tell
to
to, 0 Ica
jib II
Ile ! `,a9�
I loin
O
im ko�
till lilt
I IN-
105i
It
at.
CITY OF AMCHO CLMCAJXM
IIWWMW AGREENEXT
FOR
PARCM PAP NO.
7061-1
sxJw Fu mim ar,raSE PILESEITTS: That this agredeat is aside and entered
into. in confaremnot with the provisions Of the hmicIP&I Code And Regulations
of tM City of Rarcho CUCAM00010 state of WIN U. a
�t :'
hereinafter referred -to .as.the City, by and betwn-a Said city and
Ir"
Zr..9;�MTW.. a Devoloper.-',
mraloafte _77
all ilmat:
TMF. 1MMA3 pursuant to said Code. Developer has requested approval by the
City of Pam( ?kP buener 7W : In accordance with the
r U.R-
provisions or the "Part or the and A" amndeents
ty
ther,stot located -
LAST SIDE OF VATEIM AV=. SWFH OF 11114 STREET
ar4
jn
MUM. the City has established certain to be mt by said boy-
7quirmitnts
I
eloper prior to granting the final approve the panel W'. and,
WEREAS, the execution or this agratwent and Posting I.' I '�nt security
Mlefftd
as herafnaftor cited, and apprord by the City Attorneys to be
equivalent to prior completion of said re"Insents for the pupas# of securing
sold approvelg
MV. TRUMFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the City VW the Developer
as follows:
1. The letvvlopar hereby agrees to construct at Oftala;Ws expense all
tacrovesents doscritrd an Page 3 herrof within Aim units fron the
data hereof. as per Section 2.12 of Ordtaants No. 20.
2. The tam of this agratemot shall be AIM moths cmmtc109 On the date
of ftecutton hereof by the City. This agreement %bill be In default on
the day following the last day of the tam stipulated, unlest said tam
has been extended as hereinafter provided.
7
3. The Dannelocernay request additional tfm in which to conplote the Fee-
visions of this agreannent. In writing not less than four weeks Prior to
the default date, and including a statessent of cinvasWcss of mcartsity
r
for additional tIm. In CMIderatton of such r"jest. the City Merves
the right to review the pro,islons bereaf. including consotructton stoodardso
cost OWNTA. and sufficiency of the lostraveseent security. and to require
8410tMtS thIrItO when Warranted by substantial ChAnIts therein-
4. If the Developer falls at eigilects to conpry With the Provisions of this
agratnerst. the City 'hall have the right at any aim to cause said provilsiont
to to nesplated by any lawful wins and therewpon to rinvver fron sald
Developer Mdlor his Surity the fulf cast and expense Incurred In so doing.
S. tr4roachasent penits shall be obtained by the Nrnelaper Penn the office of P,
the City Engineer prior to start of any work within the public right of way,,
JUJ the O"40per shill CondAt such work in full Cooplfano, with the re,
gulatfons cu Ut"d therein. non-cocepliance my "suit in stepping of the 11
work by the Clity..Md assessnent of the Penalties provided.
1A
r.
Ay'
6. Public right of way Ineweverent work requind shall be constructed 114 con-
fonsanct with approved Improvenuent plans. Standard Specification,
Standard Drawings and any Special anendoents thereto. Can ction shall
Include transttfons for
any AM/or OtMr truild"Ita. work deawed Wassar7 ft
des
age or public safety.
N,
t
I
*I11154OYFMEMT AGNEEMEIif
t
Alt 2
7 Wort done within nittina streets shall bt diligently pursued to CMIG-
tions the city shall have the right to ca.pleM any and all work In the
,rent of unjustified delay In co pletion, and to recaver all cost and
espense incvmM frog the Developer and/or his contractor by any lawful
Mani.
B. The Caveloper, shall be responsible for nplaceeent, retocatior or n-
soval of any caapuMnt of any i "1 anon water syatm in canfRet with
the re Wired work to the satisfaction of the city Engineer and the mar
of the water systm
9. The Oevelopar shall be responsible for resaval of all loon rock and
other debris free tN mbl lc right of way resulting free work dare on
the adjacant property or within said right of way.
10. The Da"lopar [hall plant and ainsain parkway trees at directed by the
Covunity Oevelopeent 01rector.
11. the feerermeet searity to be furnished by the Developer to guarantee
completion of the tern of this egrement Shall be subject to the
approval of the City Attorney. The principal anMmt of said tapnreeent
severity shall be rwt less than the asaunt shown balm:
UIPBOEINEIIT SE=ITT SUIMMED.
Faithful Peeforance Bond _USS,00D.-
Material and Caber Bond ern !nn
•
IN VITNESS NUEOF, the parties hereto have caused Ness presents to be duly
eoewted and acknowledged with all formalities "Wired by law on Na dates
set forth opposite their signatures:
OEVELOPEA
cur
By aTE:Meer�Ji »t
By: OETEJYW~ f rs kt.
YITXE S• DATE:
CITY OF RAHCW VICAMONGA. CALIFORNIA
a tunlcipal corporation
ATTEST: .CITY CLUC
ndr.wr,• ®vv rwrurn
sranaruurdxu asnur
1 ceuwrror nVerstde --j as •��•
o`.}LICd.]`].9B} wr .ate rnv,ewia purer rybYWYW
a w. r\r.er ws.r+- E.H..DVjpnaa
lurrrrrr VLre �.... -ya, Jame, M. Van e�Ma[ar
br.eyrry Vlea P[a - en ryF
.1 Mr er/rW aw r.,aMJ W .W y+ +e
lar.a w r r b r rn+ �d oewl er .Ow
ar.�wwrerrrr.r., rw,r gear n,ln4 \LY \L
1g wnw.wra. r r m w rrs •far r LywM L loll
1 baMelMa �wb bh�w. w.lYaM E c, w�r..w+�
err um Ataw
wRnaf rr Wl W ,uaal.,.l rrwre ran"
yes
• t
�•
J
0
n n n> n n
iT70,940.00
CCVTL•i=T COSTS
T= fY M1 m
• Tom CO¢an=lm e0%TS ^I
614.011.m
rA1T=L Pmrcm%et 10x0 ucoO
•t T21 m M
LAM Am MTCRDL 00%0 (501)
r
amixi m 12artevION rQ
'•.vrr
Uu SCKM L) r
ri
• Y t
t� _ pad
mT or mm CCCL•IO.tC\
Curial [10a am T
Y '
T T
to r
'
OAT4` wsw i>' [lnOT W. CG9,[m IT knISH • '
: «.
►11* Retorwio _ /Crcel )ISO 706).) - C1t7 D[arrfoj M.o
Z=s bit at 1et14o rarroat too for trt1tle2 "r.li or /irwret rVU[M ✓, /
SlSf
®�ELJ
l mQTaDCT CWCDST T2TNAT2 r
'•
[s7FTl
®�F�e41r..Ifr.
• tn'IST2 -crcav mar t
iT70,940.00
CCVTL•i=T COSTS
T= fY M1 m
• Tom CO¢an=lm e0%TS ^I
614.011.m
rA1T=L Pmrcm%et 10x0 ucoO
•t T21 m M
LAM Am MTCRDL 00%0 (501)
r
amixi m 12artevION rQ
Uu SCKM L) r
ri
.J._pRQJaeJ
�s •�CJS:OD, �'
���lTft•R!•
•
SlSf
®�ELJ
'•
[s7FTl
®�F�e41r..Ifr.
NWlE
WMER
all
!_fIIa��
�171Z1�i:51f
�lilf
®
�
FlL3f�
ENNUAb
MEMENE-2
•IFY'E:26s'RCrrRn
®iir76
�7i1Fhi7[ir
Fi:1.U^.5
OIll9ll�ark7�i]71:
�
I.FSlSE:9�nnlwr.
meLmUi3Fs
�Lta Nflj.MmJ
X
�.IR!O�Btl•R•^
. I.r
'
Tf.rrlo7
.1.11.
ELcm
L�
�Sr(1'rRry
af•:iTn d7.7RTS •
■-um
!t!r'r�l�
n
�I/4!rRrl
iliL 9
Kma
•
�rxr��.
100mmom
�ommon
• tn'IST2 -crcav mar t
iT70,940.00
CCVTL•i=T COSTS
T= fY M1 m
• Tom CO¢an=lm e0%TS ^I
614.011.m
rA1T=L Pmrcm%et 10x0 ucoO
•t T21 m M
LAM Am MTCRDL 00%0 (501)
$117.000.Co
amixi m 12artevION rQ
Uu SCKM L) r
ri
X=N=TATIY. 29X0 (CASH) _•
�s •�CJS:OD, �'
EiK n'�yY4 �'; i•
0 0
a�3
. ^ had an. go 13 la CS 1 fAlTffM PZMAMAW. -M bMD
Pemba 01,270.00
wlmlGg, the City CvNCil of the City of Macho Cucamonga. auto 'e
of California, and RACCR Dosolopwant Coepavy
thereinafter duigr r r psZ v Ntoted w. N a g.r.ament
Whereby principal agues N install and Camplets certain designated
oah110 improvements. Which said agnesrnt, dated
190. and Identified u project P.X. 7061.1
so r and, �• • ra erreS`to a rem, part
NB19yAS. sold principal It required and" thr. terns of said
W -MUsut to furnish a hoed for the faithful perforrDee of said
agreement.
WK. yEERzrDIR, n the princlpal am "
. r aunty. are • rely
N • tY o vc age thereins[ur called -City-),
Sa the penal a® at M neMOED rlrry yPRI TH003AND AND W /10013
us ar mousy at
• u r, or
Payment eL r •ia w and truly N be
rAe, w hind ouraelres. out halts. eoteeners. executors and adnial-
,• aerators. jointly and CevetallY. firsly by these presents.
The condition of this obligation is each that if the above
bounded Principal, his or Its beirs, "setters, administrate
swacesson or aulgno. shall in all thing@ Stand W end Ibid. by.
well and truly krp and pertotu the eosernu, oondttionv and proslsio s
in the said agnoent and say alteration thereof =de as thanin
_. .. _ M.._ _mow ..........
r 7TA>r OfGil(pppA
`yM STA7y0fGU1D.W.i' • "k.,wMA•Mr
N'Oy '�Yhll a.e.Y4wpM Nlmw.i>Ywr1 70ht M. er•m.�em.
�O +1 A.YYM.OYJYPIbIIIK /M1WI 4bMYre.IMY
Y'mhY IYt1IY ����
I NORM
siv
narwAnxly
erel0•
m.\IY�6 nnN � W YM4.r. NW'f IY ►Y W Y W wtMw♦
mrY..YYYY ' w �` env ter
Q 1r.Y..bY t'e lee at
M Y YPbY. OY YYYI Y .tlY Y�r�
V•r Y Y Y .Y.w W bYyy Y .ey [[[�''���
YnYV YYYnMWSA.wY •YY bYLW O.LYLWI
t tlb.blrl b Y Ow Yd � mY1 Y t. )91i1$
YeYI.e..YL/Y.�eYbmrYw b. nvYlb• � bn�Yr ..9e.{YY�m
ha..% .e+n1Yy
'eilMt2• M Y.1 W.YYI.eI L
YmeT �
et
Lyon a. W
Its
NOyth ACknowl ddger nts of laNtmon ..�Y.w�..�Y
} yyJ
attached lT op..e i
•
Sad No. ID 13 It ro I fa90R AND PAT[RIALNCN sORO
Ptmdm included In Perfo[sirce Rand
"IERrA9, the Clty Mant11 of the City of Rancho Cocanonga, State
of California, mad R Development Company
(hereinafter designated as pr a pa re Nears m " agreement
whereby principal agrees m ImUll and complete certain designated
public imrovaments, wbfeh Said agreencnt, CAW , 1s$_.
and Sdsnttiiflied as project 7D81 -1
i • nor&Dy re sr[ to r e a part
ro f Mo.
•
NIfLATU* under the tons of said agrsenaat, principal is "qulred
before ""ring upon the yyearfornano of the wrA, m file a good and
Sufficient percent bond with the City of Rancho Wcamoaga m secure
the claims m which reference is mada in Title Is (unassuming with
section 1011) of Part a of Division I of the Civil Dodo of the eta ;a
of California.
ROW, TRTAZZORR. said principal and the unders.,^ed an a corporate
Surety, are bold firmly bound unto the City of Rancho va amonga and
all contraamrs, subCM=acmre, laborers, rterialmen and other
persans employed in the performance of the aforesaid agreement and
referred to in the aforesaid Coda of Civil procedure in the am of
AND ONE K=rn Tymm Stymy 00•d
arm or r ale
Tur-n-LaNed or labor thereon o Soy kindo or or amounts due under the
Onemplarmat Insurance net with respect to each work or laboro that
said surety will Pay the oar in an amount not exceeding the smount
harefnabowe sat forth, and also in cue suit is brought upon this bond
w 11 pay in addition to the face Swans thereof, Caere and reasonable
expenses and fees, melding reasonable attorney's fees, intvrrd by
City in successfully "forcing such obligation, to be awarded and
fixed by the court, and m be taxed As costs and to be Included In the
Judgment therein rendered.
tt As hereby erpreuly stipulated and .grad that this b"d shall
fyAff 0 /GY/DaW.t
�LIM�nl
a
.1rwr.�rrrr.w
tt�?
fbr
mom
sloe —
ARAM
N lV
rrur,r
are `
�e.y1t
ja
G tun Maotts
Li't"..31i Sae stn rove NR,e•
9P
......wo
over
RAT[ar raYrJaMrA 11j
6
twrno._AtTmetl `45�.�
WreP� ""r'r rrrmYWl[WI
and
yy Iman
Jsy� M._ N e stet
1 .r..r..rrw yics_�..ra,uy
VIN 43.aaidaQt yrrr
rs.w.r
♦ w ww.r er r rwo Irerret
down
rr.wewe. a.e.i.� Y
,w.rr rrW
IyNR L I011t!
rewerrbe
r Yr. .YO,Ve.
W wrlie{Ca.H
1IIn.Qt.leW Wra,Yat
o,�wrrr �.aiA
�LIM�nl
a
.1rwr.�rrrr.w
tt�?
fbr
mom
sloe —
ARAM
N lV
rrur,r
are `
�e.y1t
YM .�
h
:r
r�
A
r(
r
r
RESOLUTION NO. 82- 15C*
A RBSOLWIION OF 186 CnT COUNCIL OF 788 CITY OF
RANMO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING THE
CITY ATTORNEY.
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga was incorporated on
November 30. 1977 as a general law city of tLe State of California; and
WHEREAS, on December 20 1977 the City Council appointed an
interim city attorney by Resolution No. 77 -2; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary that the City Council designate a
city attorney to represent the City's interest.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Robert Dougherty of the law firm of Covington and
Crowe is hereby daeignated as the City Attorney to serve at the pleasure of the
City Council.
Section 2. Samuel Crown and Edward A. Ropeon of the I" firm
of Covington 6 Crane are hereby designated as Assistants to the City Attorney to
serve at the pleasure of the City Attorney and the City Council.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 17th day of March, 1982.
AYES:
POPS:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Lauren N. Wasserman, City Clark
Phillip D. Seblosser. Mayor
s'
z
-af
i;
i
x
t
r,
13
S!
w +
Z
2 �r
1+
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
METE: Hatch 17, 1982 bL
TOs City council and City Manage,
PROM: Lloyd H. Hobbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Award of Design Services for Widening of Base Line
and Red Hill
Proposals were received Hnrch 10, 1982 for the design of a project
to widen and resurface Base Linv from Carnolian to vest City Limits.
Three proposals were received as listed below. Tho firm of
Linville- Sanderson -Horn submitted the most favorable proposal
and it is recommended that Council direct Staff to negotiate a
a contract with the firm under the stated terms.
Linville- Sandorson -Horn$ 6,800.00
Associated Engineers $ 7,500.00
L. D. Ring $14,000.00
It is recommended that Council award the design services to
Linville- Sandorson -Horn for the contract amount of $6,800.00.
Respectfully submitted,
I ,
SQ
0
�1
4
rs LINVILLE -SANDERSON -HORN& ASSOCIATES
CIVIL ENGINEERS- "NI) SURVEYORS
•
R.F.P.
VASELINE AT REO HILL PROJECT
RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA
—,--.March. 1982,
met tmnowRnuTe. suite -w
FUN00 Cu MONO, CA 91 7M
11141 M1211
I
�r�{
�i'.
R•
.;'
�._
I
eF
�''���g l
( _
i
Y
�W��R lPi��.�T� /�
4
S.
I�'.
r
x
f
1:
&
Proposed Services
p.
�f
1 X- Sections and topo Baseline
2. Prepire improvement plans
3 Retaining wall design
4 Soils report and testing
5 Engineer's estimate
r
_
Alternate Striping Plan
Fees
S ,
Principal ........... S46 /hr
Office Engineer. .. .. 138 /hr,
Technician .. ... S26 /hr,
Secretary .. ..... S15 /hr,
Survey crew ... 5108 /hr
Printing at cost
Soi1S(Nills & Associates) at cost
9'
4'
1
Y
r
1
r!
riM
YJ3Iea,
r
.��
1
Wi
A,
t_
11
�4a
Estimated Cost
Preliminary survey
S1,431.00
Office Engineering
1,544.00
Structural
500.00
Soils Engineering
300.00
Construction Staking
1,080.00
TOTAL
S4,855.00
NOT TO EXCEED
S6,800.00
Additional Engineerino if requested
For Striping Plan S 600 00
NOT TO EXCEED 850.00
Our estimated completion time is four(4) weeks
The above fees are based on preparing new plan and profile
shects(two) and City being responsible for specifications
r,■
--gY
_: t
- ,
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Ali
STAFF REPORT°
w-
o
'ti
Rn
DATE: March 17, 1982
'
TO: Members of the City Council and City Manager
Fllai: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of ;umiunity Development
BY: Rick Marks, Associate Painner
S03JECT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ALOCK E`ANT PRLSRAM - A public
hear ng to obta n citizen regaRIng projects to
be funded with federal Community Develo,,aent Block Grant
,.
funds, obtain City Council direction and approval of
Block Grant objectives and projects and finding levels,
and to meet federal Department of Housing aid Urban
Development CDBG program requirements. -
ABSTRACT: This report provides backgieund on the Cesmmiiy Develop-
•
mint Block Grant Program public hearing and recommends that the City
S
Council approve program funding as suggested :n the attached 'esolu-
tion
BACKGROUND: Last month the City released for public review and am-
vent a Tyre Tminary Statement of Community Objectives wpich described
the federal Community Development Block Grant Program and tae programs
that staff recommended for Block Grant funding. The Preliminary State-
ment of Community Objectives was distributed at the Neighborhood Center,
Lions Park Cocnnmity Center, Rancho Cucamonga Branch Library and at
City Hall. File copies were placed in the Chaffey College Library and
•
the Rancho Cucamonga Branch Library Because of their stated interest.
a copy was either mailed to or hand delivered to the President of the
d
YIP Club and the Chairman of the North Town Citizens rarticipation
Advisory Committee.
Under the new regulations governing the Community Oevelopment Block
Grant Program cities are required to hold a public hearing in order
'
to give citizens an opportunity to respond to staff recoaarndations
•
regarding programs and program funding and to offer for City Council
consideration other recommendations for program funding. The public
hearing you are holding tonight meets the federal requirements and
will allow staff to continue processing our Block Grant application
r!'
•7"
i
--gY
_: t
Community Development Block Grant Program
City Council Agenda ••
March 17, 1982
Page 2 •
PUBLIC INPUT: To date, staff has received two letters (see attached) from the
general Public regarding the Preliminary Statement of Community Objectives.
The first was received on February 16, 1982 from Hr Nacho Gracia, Chairma,,
of the Citizens Participation Advisory Committee in which Mr. Gracia states
that L.PAC determined their number one funding priority for Block Grant money
was the North Town Streets Phase III Progect. This project is included in
staff's recommendation to the City Council for project funding of $120,000.
The second letter was received on March 5, 1982 from Mr. Bob Williams, President
of the VIP Club. Hr. Williams wrote to the City Council to support and announce
the VIP Club's request for the City to fund the expansion of thg. existing Neigh -
borhocd Center in order to help meet the growing needs of the City's Senior
Citizen population. This report is also recommended for funding during this -
(an: Perhaps future) program years. Funding is recommended for land acquisition
or lease and architectural and engineering plans at a cost of approximately
sa1.0o0
During talks with Hr Williams and other members of the VIP Club also mentioned w
�
I Increasing need for affordable housing for senior citizens. Staff feels
that this is a very important item to pursue and would, with Council authoriza-
tion, like tc exn' a the options open to the City to terms of providing afford -
Ahle Senior hour ind report back to the Council in the next few months as
a separate itov.
Tonigh- , nearing was advertised in The Daily Rye ort� legal advertising section
in March 5, 1982, and via press release submitted to the Progress Bulletin,
Daily Resort, and the San Bernardino Sun an March 3, 1982. ApproximatTy 300
F57 ei s�tne Drellmlury ttitement oofomnunity Objectives (which discussed
the Pun H c hearing) were distributed Citywide and during the last week over
100 Sranish language and English language flyers announcing the meeting were
distribured Citywide. Lastly, the latest addition to the City newsletter,
The Grapevine has a full pale spread on the 00BG Program and the public hearing
SUMMAR" During the public hearing the Preliminary Statement of Community
b ect ves +end the sheet listing the Items Recommended for Program funding
should form the basis for discussion and Council action. Breed on testimony
received tonight and City Council action, staff will prepare the final list
of programs to Ire funded and submit them to the Department of Housing and
'Jrban Development along with other required information.
1
1
S
Community Development Block Grant Program
City Council Agenda
March 17, 1982
Page 3
■
RECDIPIENDATIDN: It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached
W u1�e ut oon regarding the Cwwnity Development Block Grant Program.
Respectfully submitted,
Director of Community Development
JL:RN:jr
Attachments
,e�',r!a� �k'•`'D;�= z'•�a+n'r:tZV c;''�; �i�.1.. ... _i : " :,1,y" i'rfi',C: `
w q
Community Development Block Grant Program:
Items Recommended for Program funding
Program
Amount
%
1. Ncrth Tam Streets
$120,000
33.3%
Phase III
2. Neighborhood Center
S 01,000
22.5%
Expansion
3. Housing Rehabilitation
$ O4.00Q
23.3%
4. Cuntingerry
$ 17.387
4.8%
S. Loral Costs - Program
Implementation
r
(a) Administration
S b,255
1.1%
(b) Program Management
S 51.358
14%
$360,000
•100%
• Percentage: have been rounded
and do not Precisely
total 100%;
amounts are based on estimates
and may vary slightlj.
r4+"k %i'G`ic�'1"ylbn Ftl3�- �e,�xiie•j�te3.� L b7
i
Or]
�S
4• �
L
r
G ' cSsa
CUCNid,�`µr
V.I.P. CLUB r ^ NIT M., p pr
SENIOR � EN mO9 AI C14 a C AMON6%9�.V,1lIL,(714) ^ %:es4
R, c -
9791 A, Hishwav 111$16
mw
Rancho Cuumonsu, CA 91730 January 11 1982
Dear Mayor Schlosser and Members of the City Councils
Bet Senior Citizens Center d Senior Housing
Persuant to our previous discussions with the City Council,
and In responae to request from Richard Marks and Tin Beadle;
The V I P Club wlanes to make the following proposals, which
might be helpful to you in planning, financing and developing
the needed facilities.
The President, Mr. Bob Williams, and Jim Hunt, Lisson
officer, hss spoken to *ambers of the City Council regarding the
problems cf Senior Citizens of the srso and we Jere encouraged
by the positive response to our regjests. It should he
emphasised we are not only speaking of the V I P Club hoods,
but for all of the Senior Citizens of Rancho Cucamonga. The
best information available to uc is that a fairly large per-
centage of the total city papulatian in mode up of Senior
Citizens and these numbers are growing annually.
Our V I P Club is 3 years old now and It started with a
' membership of 27 people and has groon to a total of 315 members
at the present time. We anciclocte we will groo to 400 or S00
members within two years. Sur average attendance, for bur Thursday
meeting, is 130 members end this greatly taxes the present
facilities available to us. ,
With the present allocation of apoco to other groups In the
Noiehborhood Servlea Center, the V I P Club does not have
i sufticent space to handle the programs already scheduled and we
are unable to expand our twice a week meetings to a daily basis
which would be desirable if we are to moot the expanding needs
of seniors in Rancho Cucanang3.
We would propose that the City Council support our request
for an addition to the existing Neighborhood Service Center as
discussed with Vr. William Holly, Director of Community Services
and Rich Marks, Associate planner for the City.
We would to plobseo to work with members of the City Staff
In exploring ways to develop these proposals ant to seek wethods
for financing the programs.
We would appreciate hearing from you and would be happy to
meet with the chuncil.
Sincerely,
,`PRIENDSHIPTS
CARING s
/•ici ;evn iaaUz4=Zloa advi.aoay (o— tee
P. C. °ac 771
"tea C-==-Sa, Ca. 91730
P CA &4n 4
City of ?onelm Camarinsa
9320 aeeltne Pd
Snc:wed !a a chaff !<ot of the prt,artitiea affeULV iba Rortt/ loan
,7t tfe (i.ti. ;u Paxuclpofian &WUW -.y C=U t'ee 'm=v ,/, /9F2
czctiuw a ration can Dade to Gave Plane /// Stnaet SmAvh ocntn as p ivntty
.Po. /
Ve .Save .xpu ed Dort cone in fort tAe pm6laui flat affect. the Runth
.7mn ^ , in P4ncAo Cucaaanp and tb : u, dent need to lave Yk-A Ac mdica
Vle 1006 fu ra ..d io /= Ulcipctlon in trig .Wja6i"l.;vA pnocran-a prtocran
t%at oi.0 Ae10 vale a= eomroaity a 6ettex place to live.
.lna -0 c:acia (a.A.0 C/a..uan
r
•
CITY OF RANUn CL�r_kNX =A
PRESS RE LEASE
r
Z
1977
z
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMDNGA - COMMUNITY DMLOPMF.NT BLOCK GRANT PUBLIC HEARING
A public hearing will be conducted by the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga at the Lions Park Commity Center on Wednesday, March 17, 1982,
at 7:00 p.m. to determine the Community Development Black Grant Progan for
the next program year beginning9 in July, 1982. The City Council will review
e Proposed Statement of Commmity Objectives outlining the types of programs
and projects suggested for Block Grant funding and proposed funding levels.
information gathered during this public herring will be used to prepare the
City's Block Grant application to the United States Department of Housing
and Urban Development.
Copies of the Proposed Statement of Commmity Objectives are available at
the following locations: . `
- Rancho Cucamonga City Hall (Community Development Department and-
Administration Building)
- Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center
- San Bernardino County Library, Rancho Cucamonga Branch
- Lions Park Coa m unity Center
- Chgffey Community College Library (Alta Loma)
Interested citizens are encouraged to attend this meting and make their
views and suggestions known to the City Council. For further information,
please contact Rick Marks, Community Development Department, City of
Rancho Cucamonga at (714) 989 -1851.
Submitted to Progress Bulletin, Daily Report, and San Bernardino Sun
3/3/82.
Y'— �TA�'- w '2`'�'l.s?�J:��rei°.i..,�r•y`�M w+___ i _ � - �, y"v.�8!'}?3'LSI S <'
e
r.
a
a'
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT;
BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
PREI•affNARY STATEMENT OF
COIIBTMTY OBJECTIVE'S
FEBRUARY 1982
w
O
E�
1�1
U,
COMMUNITY
DLWELOPMENT
U11AIRI MEET
s
S
1977
C7
ITJ
O
�yj_d� � , ,FOSTOFF`C�110C1oi a RA,�CIIg CCCAwnSGtA CALIFnR�IA fir]o � RUIf3 >IISI A- .-_± °s�
w•
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
n
s I C 1rd.APhmii D.S,asa,yr
.
e Allan w, Mu
CPrtai LI�6a.f Milk
mn February 9, 1982
'
TO: RESIDENTS OF THE CITY
i
"-
The attached information has been written to provide background on the 1982 -83
-
program year of the federal Community Development Block Grant Program. Because
of the change of federal administrations and the City's changed status under the
program regulations due to its official 1980 Census of Population count, the
in the processgotarewriting they gulationsegoverning thee COBG Programtandi owhile
they have not been released (End won't be until April /Hay 1982) the City must pro-
teed in completing an application for funding before June.
'
One of the most critical steps in this year's application process is the staff
completicn
and public response to a Preliminary Statement of Community Objectives
indicating the projects /programs that the City believes ought to be funded with
Block Grant money. Based on public tLstimony gathered at a required public
hearing, the Preliminary Statement of Community Objective; wil4be revised if
f,
necessary and submitted to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
as part of the application for funding.
The Preliminary Statement of Community Objectives is attached along with other
'
i
background information concerning the C =unity Development Block Grant in Rancho
Cucamonga On March 17, at its regular meeting, the City Council will hold a
t'
public hearing to discuss the Preliminary Statement of Objectives and the Com-
e
runity Development Block Grant Program. The public is Invited and encouraged to
attend and ask
�
questions, comment on suggested programs, or put forward other+
proposals for program fund:n3A
Project Proposal forms may be picked up at City Hall for those groups or individuals
wishing to submit a request for funding to the City Council. Proposal forms should
t
ay
be returned to the Community Development Department by March S. 1982.
-
If you have any questions or concen., regarding the Community Development Block
Grant Program, please call Rick Marks, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Civision,
y,
989 -1551
,
�yj_d� � , ,FOSTOFF`C�110C1oi a RA,�CIIg CCCAwnSGtA CALIFnR�IA fir]o � RUIf3 >IISI A- .-_± °s�
0
f�
f
;k
Last year the City of Rancho Cucamonga was part of the San Bernardino Cooperating
Cities Program (this type of program is also authorized by the 1974 Housing and -,
Community Development Act). Earlier this year the City was informed that the 1980
Census of Population conducted by the federal government confirmed that the City
has a Population in excess of 50,000, thereby giving it status as an Entitlement
City under th° 1974 Housing and Community Development Act. The implication of this
change in status from Cooperating City under the County administered program to
Entitlement City are that the almost 30% of the grant award that now goes to the
County will remain in Rancho Cucamonga to be used as the City Council determines.
this change in status allows the City to select the programs it will fund, admin-
ister them, and overall, give the City greater local control over the program.
Statement of Commmunity Objectives
deral guidelines require that cities receiving Community Development Block Grant
money publish a Statement of Community Objectives in such a manner as to afford
citizen, an opportunity to examine its content and to submit comments to the City
regarding the proposed statement and on the community deve,epment performance of
the City , I
The City has prepared a Preliminary Statement of Community Objectives indicating
the kinds of needs Rancho Cucamonga has and the programs that have been recomm ended
to receive funding are as follows in priority order:
o Housing Rehabilitation
o North Town Street Improvements
o Neighborhood Center Expansion (Pricurily for Senior Citizens Activities)
o North Town Park
o Landbanking (for housing or community facilities)
The City encourages people to pink up a copy of the Prelimfnary Statement of Com-
munity Objectives at City Hall.
PUBLIC HEARING
ON MARCH 17, 1982, THi RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE COOG PROGRAM th ORDER TO HEAR THE PUBLIC'S COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROPOSED
Sr4TMENT OF COIMNITY OBJECTIVES AND TO GIVE CITIZENS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROPOSE '
JTHER PROGRAMS FOR FUNI,ING THE PUBLIC iS ENCOURAGED TO ATTEND AND MAKE THEIR
VIEWS t31OUN TO 71,� CIT: COUNCIL BASED ON TESTIMONY RECEIVED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING,
THE FIvAL LIST 0 FROJECTS WiLL BE DRAFTED AND USED IN THE APPLICATION TO THE DEPART -
HEAT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
9_i
_ BLOCK GRAW `RGGRAM
In August of 1974, President Ford signed the omnibus housing and Community Develop-
ment Act of 1974 charting an entirely new course for the nation's housing and urban
aid programs. The new law consolidated ten different categorical aid pro rams into
a locally administered Block Grant.Program and contained brrid revisions in the form-
ulas for distributing federal aid. The Community Development Block Grant program has
as its primary objectives the enhancement and maintenance of viable urban communities
through the provision of decent housing and a suitable living environment and the ex-
one pansion of economic opportunities, principally for low and moderate inc persons.
The act provides financial assistance for community activities toward:
o Eliminating slums and blight, preventing deterioration
of property, and providing needed neighborhood community,
facilities;
o Eliminating conditions which are'detrimental to hea`iih,
safety and public welfare through interim rehabilitation„
code enforcement, etc.; -
o Conserving and expanding housing stock for all, but princi-
pally for low and moderate income persons;
o Expanding and improving the quantity and quality of community S
services, principally for low and moderate income persons;
o A more rational utilization of land and other natural resources;
N.
o Reducing the Isolation of income groups within communities and
geographical areas;
Restoring and preserving p .Iperties of special value for historic,
architectural or aesthetic reasons; and,
o Alleviating ph•:mcal and economic distress through the stimulation
of private irvestment and community revitalization in areas with
population outmigration and stagnating or declining tax base.
Entitlement Cities
The Community DevelopaLnt Block Grant Program autcautically entitles titles with.a
Population greater than 50,000 t. block grants. The amount of the block grant re-
ceived by an entitlement city is based on a five part formula reflecting the ratio
of a particular community's population, extent of housing overcrowding, poverty,
age of housing, and growth lag to the average figures for all similar coa:uinities. a .
■
i•
9
a
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY 03JECTIVES
I.
NEEDS ASSESSMENT FINDING-
There is a need to continue City efforts to improve existing
housing stock that does not meet building or safety code re-
quirements yet is basically sound and can, with some improve-
ment efforts, continue to serve the housing needs of the City.
OBJECTIVE.
To develop a program capable of eliminating and preventing
slums, blight, and conditions detrimental to health, safety,
and public welfare that can aid in preserving housing stock
for people of low and moderate income.
PROGRAM STATEMENT: _
,'ousing Rehabilitation
Establish a Housing Rehabilitation Program that will offer
below- market interest rate home loans to persons /families of
low -or- moderate income and hone improvement grants for minor
projects to senior citizens and disabled or handicapped per-
sons. Activiti9s funded would include:
- Outreach /public irformation
- Home improvement loans
- Home repair grants (senior citizen, disabled, handicapped
persons)
II. NEEDS ASSESSMENT FINDING:
There is a need to redesign and Improve below standard neighbor-
hood residential streets in the City in order to move automobile,
bicycle and pedestrian traffic with a minimum of risk and delay.
OBJECTIVE
Continue City efforts to eliminate conditions which are detri-
mental to health, safety, and public welfare, alleviate physical
and economic distress through the stimulation of private invest-
, ment and community revitalizatton and improve the quality of com-
munity services
1. �15;*, �• VY� '4?yl:� %u_�h��':Tu1�.M°',i`e.. - I
f
'r
f•
E:
EP I
PROGRAM STATEIENT:
North Town Streets - Phase III
Complete the final phase of North Town Street improvement
Project (Phase III) begun with CoamLnity Development Block
Grant fends. This project involves improving Center and
Marine Streets between 26th Street and Humboldt Avenue. : +
Activites conducted as part of this project include-
earthwork
removals
paving
drainage structures and D1pe
curbs, gutters, sidewalks
drive approaches
manhole adjustments (to grade)
- various appurtenant work
III NEEDS ASSESSMENT FINDING: I t
There is a need within the City in provide an accessible flog -day
per week activity for an increasingly identifiable and active
senior citizen population.
OBJECTIVE:
To expand and improve the quantity and quality of commalnity
services, provide needed neighborhood and community facilities
and reduce the isolation of senior citizens living within the
city.
PROGRAM STATMNT: w
Neighborhood Center Exoansion (Primart7j for Senior Citizen Activities)
Construct a separate wing to the already existing City -owned i
Neighborhood Center for the primary use of senior citizens. '(
In addition to hosting activities, the structure must be able a
to serve as a staging area for tPa delivery of services and
information vital to senior citizens. Such a structure should
include the follaAng features:
- one large cococunity room `
- two meeting rooms
full commercial kitchen
- lavatories
- storage area
- paved parking
Preliminary Statement of Coewnity Objectives
_2- I
(• IV. NEEDS ASSESSMENT FINDING:
City -wide and particularly to North Town there is a serious
shortage of parks to meet the growing rerreational need of
City residents.
OBJECTIVE:
To provide needed neighborhood and %mmunity facilities, im-
prove the quantity and quality of cxrounity services and elim-
inate conditions datrimertal V. heaith safety and the public
welfare.
PRCGRAM STATEMENT;
Kurth Tarn Park
Purchase and develop a five (5) acre park on one of several
Potential sites within North Town.
V NEEDS ASSESSMENT FINDING:
There is a City -wide need for affordable housing to serve let-
and- moderate income families, indiulduals, and senior citizens
who are increasingly experiencing a problem finding and paying
for suitable housing.
OBJECTIVE:
To encourage and expand the production of housing stock, pro-
vide needed neighborhood and cx munity facilities, and use land
and other resources in a way that compliments City planning and
development policies.
1. PROGRAM STATEMENT:
Landbanking and Housing Development
o Purchase land that can be ht;d to reserve by the City until
such time as the land can be used as part of do incentive
f package to attract a developer in erested in constructing
affordable housing, particularly senior citizen housing.
o Develop incentives designed to attract a developer interested '!
in bufldfgg affordable housing, e:yacially for senior citizens.
Preliminary Statement of Community Objectives .O_
r
0
Attath°enc 1: Eligible and Ineligible Activities
basic ca°-xgories offs 4 by (Dated � �'ist 27. t979). --re arm sis f6:
ell;lbla ca:•�b +L'�tion end ) Basic ellgib]l ac:ivlties: 2)
Co-va +__• -en: aclivitiea; 4)Rellrratfon a,- tivities: 3) elia?i`e e=re �,:
en:_:les, t= i6"borFsad activities priva-e
co.— ,_rulans, or a� � imp'ascerttore- n= 'atfon. + +•� -x..:
Ld urban e.:ti:er...entL deai�� der local davas
b7 xsta, and; ti
Of L+' SA alalble
An i_a a•minlstrsti:M ca:a.
.ic:>lensedfof= -;L,, r bulatl "Id be noted. Pirstbl0�yt es is given
to t`e project is elfabla ai'olified; t.•.e fial dectaae list is
or--, ,:,8ti..t�10 -s. 8e x3. anT elf��I. be.� b7 reterr! -s a, as
;0
4
5
6.
7.
a. •a eec ien ^ +•" s tbe
F= A to ecsiderai c dLrg vi =`-la desio-s.ei rOY°=l 8r„ _=�a
�aitlrt o_' Pssl °-c_e^
_ �zlue e d,ero`a e : d +roet =sat ce b c=,aai va a d a, a h!r,_aciv+LY• -�:�ty se:vi a , •or
for L•1 e•.o =�
3 aru.red toter the aW ,nr •
Al- --Un ien. Cer:at: Uc cn. Psb_bllr•ztior.. or Irs n
ttraln ^ oeer, t es. sort eo ._cn of
b. Senior Certe:a
Pat°. Plg7e .,'a
c. Cmtera for the d• "'°1 =_�lu :eF 4a l 1ca
d Neiahtonccod ?aeiities 1 YeTi iecii. Pro e �'t
ias
g• :- Il-tiea and ^
4ui ant•
h• Street L^ ;rove-anta
1. Yata: cnd Se;e; te3
J• Po-doat: fart :t +tic L.� Y �+
1. Q ° t:ol zed :3 vitDral.-aarovnts
:rovaa]`+
to S a ca=— tcdh'a dawlc, =ar•
Clas = -ce _ -3 de:tili ::ea of da:
W",
zV ce a f L`a:l.ra:a_ bullil:.3s and IL�
p- i3'6'tart3 or ; :1: =:a L`•=
= "ia•v, or ::ash l:d aa:ti ..J 3L=ee:3.
ae::] •a: zc:..� ; lbr:a di_ :=:"°1 «� L�sl: h
F::t:n: cf ,t._:.. -•• °� c: lca3 c=
• 9 .
m
• •
n
0
3. =: clbl.r Pe?ub -�1en �� Pnaervation Aet!v!tNa
�J Ur'er :.':1: uc- "cn CLm: flUr4; c;7 be used for the •. . of
: Of A im7cn- -enta, both =ubl!e " !.,ivstel7 OW.ad Zt,
g :Ysticm =Zhori:ea to , .
a A re!ab111 :o :1es f rim s— for Cvr`iS • ac l ait!ar oz,
for tea;o ::rl relontirn aasistarrp l,RCeds�e ,r:fai, !t also pr:vl�a
F.eaenttlon aclAvi:iee. 7r:e: +nt, W historic
=� C. Fr'!aible °crncic Dovelat=en: Aetiv -
TTelghbcr. -Ocd based :'>c:`pro=t crt- rinatiore, arml
Crin`�t12L -ds 70etl devaloFsnt cor;oraticna r.-e eligible for
�P- eaerrt ceraln ecarr_ic de..; as =ctrl arA c^ :::a?,
rs%dUll -a:ion acti•ritles. 2:s t'- ^ „Cia2 asaiataao: rst: L`:e
&'an'a, loans, lost guo.:a- :Laser or techniry aaais•.�.,N to
- - busL-ass. Tla aiove�a p es: um aaee rsiitroriccd sr:_F:of!: .
ibLoving Furpoae:s: Yor4ir Blx� Grant tLL'Aa for the
` Ta."c:sse, FurNa9a of a 'g rnelta2, operstlorsl fjrds, ]as'.
ovaz:r;s,n= and SSx-ures, ers:g7 cC- ':stnc:iea
lrra±2a :icr oY c�rctlal �ar3 StA:rst ' ,� r_bssili:at!cn, or
Ct=L!r.* private �a d p,bll!:1"a coat =at ttbo yIk• critarrla:
d:terion -jen or new Llle laves =c-•a tcrard a12ev�iaticg .dgV,C2Z .
ir..� a� . distress !a a Ali: 21 2e:s_fi: 1. ^:a:
cre:. =i ::i h_A da;;ed penc s b7 Ftsv!dL -.g Jobs; 3) an3 L: !ate a.;
�. lo;== atra:eg7. - ,
D• ?r= ._:!:r arA AL- !.•i!atra5icn arses - t..
S .! 13 are "thorL -ed for the follcvirg aC.tvitiea:
,�.1 ' • �;s+ =d '�..ro?nnslw C==r t7 deve2epe.•r:
2• Pnsg?`iaBlcn, eccc=ic dee plats for land use h!s•.o -.i
Ccr�c devslo, -ten :, ar-d reig"-:orhncd ;reserve :!:”;
3• AtS :e cos: relating to the g -P• �a�..en
Of t7 develop =nt arivitlea. pl�r aM im !At . t•
Irs2.'_ bl� a
r
T-0 fou""iryg rtypes of activities are Be" rally lnallg!ble- ,.
° 1• lwzd os, conventr csn:er�, concert hx22s, cis hmLiA, reg'•ra'_ -
1 for -, .aro for p;r.2... eye., errc!es (buS7A, -z2 r:A fzc!_!:!ea -
ganer1.ccrAuc. of gcverer.:).
2. Pin stations er-d egtd; =nt in tare t area vhs:a rn Q.
ao:!v!t7 is o"• : :!rg !r :le �, prC�.--a gecr.
r 3. P..c!2!:!as for axcl_!ve r.e t7 crs - -
c' p or crZ- !_x:!: r. -
4. Fia!a:ar_a:s aM e:cra:!:n etti._ea,
aia:an:ss.
r.
,� - g• c'V;2!cr:!r2 ex:e;. '». a :s!e: : : :.•. : :: state;- iaz`!�3.:;. ..
7. -
Fa;::ys. r_- .=aa i•A
=he: _ac!_!:!!a. _
�.� B• A!.,:::a, sar�;q, liras,
!sre Cf
4
REHABILITATION LORI PROGRAM i- RANCHO CUCAMONGA
vrogr.ta rear Huger o Rei ao M tTatad
y
j Housing Ur its
79)7 -7g 10
1978 -79 5
y 1979 -80 2
19£0 -81 4
1931 -32 (as of 'Z/31181) 0
* iC. d
21
�y
Total pendea or ari
$ 67,931
29,696
16,896
23,832
-0-
$138,355
L:rir., tae tice the prograa has been in existence, Interest rates have varied
fr:-' a IM-4 of 3: to a MIA of 711; in cases of eyt,V a need, the Rehabilitation
P -- -r:l extends a deferred loan to applicants which, to effect, constitutes a
grant (raney is usually not paid back).
REPAIR SERVICE PROGRAM IN RANCHO CUCAHONGA
Pr:gr.a rear NmRer of ° ^using Units Repatred
1977 -78 25
1973 -79 77
1979 -30 48
1920 -31 22
1931 -;2 (as of 12/31/31) 22
TM L 194
0
focal Da ars Expended, -;
$ 12,500
38,x37
21,828
11,055 �
22,195
$106,103 a
Srurce County of San Gernardiro, Erviromont31 Public Worts Agency,
O"Ice of Cc.=unity Cevelgtent
E
Program ,ear
co marniti Dovelopment Clock Grants and Funded Projects
to Ranchr Cucamonga
( Cost•ined 2 year Grant Project
2 (1977 -76) 4462,684• Neighborhood facility
( )
7 (1960 -81) $517,600 Street Improvements:
North Torn Phase I
Phase II
Total $980,284
Source: County of San Cer,rardino, Environmental Public Works Agency,
Office of Community Development
• Information includes total facility and related costs (land acquistion, design,
street improvements, construction)
kio "
` t. Project fllplblilry. (TMs Projatt PILL: CHECK ONE)
R
_Arl"111411Y ben flt la and rodents fntone parsons. (State tM
OPMxl to Moser of benfnctarfes and d9l"Ibe nor they rt/l
L
)
x a
be allarlaottdf) rmt flu¢ or,. .pht (Describe caaditlon to
Elbfrute an fsalM t threat m gAtle "Its. safety or WfAre.
(State the Ntpn of the problm and ..r. flea at which it originated.)
Othor ODJeetfe s (Captain her the project mould stet the purpose
of the =1 Prugran.)
A . (
lI``: h4G'1tltt�itteC93Cfni}2>wA�t'ti /d.`�" ��.
t
i°
1
.r•'YMN'n rM.�. i�r.. .r
�
� `�
J
ti
.
PWJECT PkTpSX
x'
CET Of tuNO1O CIKAAOhGA COI1Aart1Y xmopMv CCpA TNW
!; -•_.
mPPERIM OEYEIfPIRIrt [LOCK GAANr pffD"
I
/
Baton awlettny this Project proposal ion, umultr road a avgh the entire
ton. Amrer ell Aunttona %hich en epPlicablt to yatr proJtct as
[putt nunr
u Dosf tbla. 1f ssxn spas to nadad, cttaU separate shpts. TPE OR PAINf.
A. GOMM IKFMUTZOK.
1. Area of City to tmich prApostd or4;ect is to be located:
'
L Date Sutrltted:
7. Applfcant/Oryaniutt".. --
Adapts•
Cc acct Parsan:
pie' _Jim Arattabla:
•
B. PAOIECT SLWAAY INFOWf:ON
1 Project lnforastfon. (Gin a brief descrlptloo of proposed project)
` t. Project fllplblilry. (TMs Projatt PILL: CHECK ONE)
R
_Arl"111411Y ben flt la and rodents fntone parsons. (State tM
OPMxl to Moser of benfnctarfes and d9l"Ibe nor they rt/l
L
)
x a
be allarlaottdf) rmt flu¢ or,. .pht (Describe caaditlon to
Elbfrute an fsalM t threat m gAtle "Its. safety or WfAre.
(State the Ntpn of the problm and ..r. flea at which it originated.)
Othor ODJeetfe s (Captain her the project mould stet the purpose
of the =1 Prugran.)
A . (
lI``: h4G'1tltt�itteC93Cfni}2>wA�t'ti /d.`�" ��.
3. list other sound of funding Which Mw been Soviet but denied.
_ Praefds the nth Of the sarte(s) from witch the fwds rn sought.
the APPMRI"te data MIT'wre saght, and the rotor they Were denied.
CSIPLEI70 PROJECT PROPOSALS VO.'LO BE SUBMITTED TO CONWITT DEVELOPMENT DEPA"MT,
CITY
�NOr RAMI) CUCAUENW, P. 0. B05 807, AAOpq CUCA1NIGA, CA 91730. ATIENTIMMICC P(
u�.
-Tor Assistant or Infornatlo regarding this fore, till (111) 989.1851. - r1
i
1
. u
I Historic Preservation
is the structure to gYGniw listed. or eligible to M listed
'
on W Xatldai Register of Historic Plans or the tAllfonta
Register of NittOMC Planst Located Within a 41SWC district.
Or otherwise recognized as a signifiGat landmark? If so. Olean
Galata.
'
C. ESTIMATED BUDGET
u
'
Provide the financial data requested below. Costs should be based a the
,.
ben tof*mtlm available. When Preosrlag this data. Consider these
Acton:ap(e) Protect should be =Wlated 10 aG Phase 'f O:nible, or If
oWrrl'(b) a tPh"fE C bee Pr/oriti ed ama
Jtct sshhould 3r kn n IInatotdiitint
..
parts. With 'snaked cast and "Twit, for each Part{ (c) apply federal
pmait IN Wage "us to construction Protects war 57.000; -
1
I. Soul Estimated Cot of Project.' S _
L Estimator's Qualification:
5. Amount of funds Requested:$
i
1. forts to be received Trans, other swmn:S
D. MAINTENANCE AM OPEnATIOR CASTS
'- "swww�'n./+yraStPes6.�.aMii
All capital will require a onnta•.unce and Go,
ation (X A 0) contract With es N { 0 entity. will the Ora
®
posed protect haw ongoing aintanance and operation coats? As W.
Mat are the estlated X { 0 U:t per year for this pr7teeti
ICUt public/guasl- public entity will X f 0 S
L OTHER a1d10I16 souKu
It 1s lgwrtmt for YOU Or your Organisation to try to *Ulm Other funds
to M•0 offset the doomed for fiaind eaemoity denloprnt funds. If your
t Ian ins a newel of funds each the City cannot
�'e year, guarantee
i. I'it the aaawnt of other funds (omiclpal. guts. Iccal, church.
servin organisations, talwsses. fro,
prime au.) each source that
Will be used in addition u Cavity Dmlopant fwds, and the purpose
far Mitch they Will be used.
y. If Cav Wlty CeeslopRnt funds are needed to secure NWUy funds
from JAOthtr sourn. auto the source and the annum[ of fund[ to be
atoed.
3. list other sound of funding Which Mw been Soviet but denied.
_ Praefds the nth Of the sarte(s) from witch the fwds rn sought.
the APPMRI"te data MIT'wre saght, and the rotor they Were denied.
CSIPLEI70 PROJECT PROPOSALS VO.'LO BE SUBMITTED TO CONWITT DEVELOPMENT DEPA"MT,
CITY
�NOr RAMI) CUCAUENW, P. 0. B05 807, AAOpq CUCA1NIGA, CA 91730. ATIENTIMMICC P(
u�.
-Tor Assistant or Infornatlo regarding this fore, till (111) 989.1851. - r1
i
v>
7 ,
t "
f?
i
z
fa
RESOLUTION NO. 1 .2 - S (°
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PROGRAM FUNDING FOR
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, in the next program year the City of Rancho Cucamonga
will become an Entitlement City under the regulations governing the
Community Development Block Grant Program; -nd
WHEREAS, the City's Planning Divii ion Staff has conducted a
needs assessment and held discussions with local organizations to determine
City Block Grant Program needs; and
WHEREAS, the City released a Preliminary Statement of Community
Objectives indicating staff recommendations for Block Grant Program
funding for the next program year; and
WHEREAS, the City Councii has held a legally noticed public
hearing in order to give the public an opportunity to respond to staff -
recommenlations for program funding and to put forth for Council con-
sideration recommendations of their own; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has heard public testimony and
received all public input regarding the City's Community Development
Block Grant Program for the next program year.
NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby authorize the funming of the following
programs and supporting costs to be funded out of the City's Community
Development Block Grant award:
Program Mount %
1. North Tom Streets $120,000 33.3%
Phase III
2. Neighborhood Center $ 81,000 22.5%
Expansion
3 Housing Rehabilitation $ 84.000 23.3%
4 Contingency $ 17,387 4.8%
5. Local Costs - Program
Implementation
(a) Administration $ 6,255 1.7%
(b) Program Management ! 51.358 14%
$360,000 100%
�i
Resolution Mo. r
Page 2
' .ut.. . •�xi3
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 17th day of March, 1982.
• :,
AYES: .,
NOES: 'e
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Lauren N. asseNOn. ty e
PhilliP D. Schlosser-7FUFF
n
L.I
5`a.3.r:.�+C. ^fit'''
6V
i.3°j-
i
t .
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
:,.
STAFF REPORT°
a
8
D.1TE: March 17, 1902
TO: Members of the City Council and City Manager
FR04: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development
BY: Michael Vairin, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PUUI AMEIRI�MENT 82 1
�-
A - request to amend a portion of the General Plan
extT9 ction Ill page 30, relating to tte development with-
in the Planned Communities area prior to adoption of the
Planneu Community Text.
BACKGROUND: The Lewis Development Company has requested an amendment
To
the text of the General Plan that would allow the City to consider
r
development plans within the Planned Community area prior to final
adoption of the Planned Community Text. The Plannin,l Commission held
a public hearing on February 22, 1982, to consider such an amendment.
Attached is a copy of the February 22, 1982 Planning Commission Staff
Report and the Resolution which was adopted by the Planning Commission.
Presently, the General Plan sates that the Clty shall not consider for
approval any development plans within a Planned Commnity area until
such a plan has been reviewed and adopted by the Citf Council. The
Lewis Development Company is requesting that this be modified to allow
some flexibility on the City's part to allow some development within
the Planned Community
area. The Lewis Development Company has indicated
that they have need to relocate their headquarters and would like to do
.
so within the Terra Vista Planned Community area.
The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the General Plan
amendment as listed -n the attached Resolution. The Planning Com-
mission added to the language that was originally proposed by the
Lewis Development Company, which would limit such an exception to a
one time only basis and the amount of area that could be affected.
The Planning Commission Pound that this cmendment will not cause
significant adverse impacts upon the environment and recommends that
1'e
a Negative Declaration be adopted for the General Plan Amendment.
*s
Y
• •i
General Plan Amendment 82 -01 - A/Lewis
City Council Agenda
March 17, 1982
Pay, 2
+a
Attached for your consideration is a Resolt,ion of the Council approving this
General Plan Amendment as well as General Plan Amendment 82-01 -C which is also
4r on this agenda for your consideration.
REC017iER08NOF'- The Planning Commission has rectmnended approval of the above
i escr bed nera Plan Amendment as set forth within the Planning Commission
Resolut in 82 -24.
Yespectf lly submitted,
Director of Community pevelolment
JL:HV:Jr •
Attachments: Planning Commission Resolution 82 -24
Planning Commission Staff Report of February 22, 1982
City Council Resolution of Adoption
/O%
w;
0
N .
C
t. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -24
_ COMMISIONORECOFMENDINGCAHENDIIENTSII TOPT�IiEHING
ADOPTED LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE RAN CHO CUCA11p0GA
GENERAL PLAN TO THE CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS. the City Council has
cycle. Plan Amendment cycle) and activated the optional General
Public hearing o Planning
comments the ProposeduGeneralrPlan
Am—.lment,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve
the following amendments to the land use element of the General Plan.
first
SECTION ofnthheentaid Use Element (page Under
the
shall be changed to read as follows: (Page 30)
'The City shall not generally consider for approval,
any development plans located within the Planned
i • Community area,
has been t time adopted e Planned
Council However, the City may approve minor exceptions
to this Policy, if in its Judgement, the plans are
consistent with the Planned Community and General
Plan Goals". This exception shall be limited to,one
Y Per planned community area and shall not
encompass more than St or 50 acres of the planned
comwnity area, whichever is less.
SECTION 2• General Plan Amendment No. 82 -01 -C: An amendment
Of the Genera Pan Land Use Map in the area north of 4th Street extending
approximately 140C' east of the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe railroad
tracks
be Etiwanda Avenue as
GeneraltPPllaanoasaGeneral Industrial +Land
Use
adopted fo—r these
I 3eneralinitial Study
a recommended that a Negative Oeclaratlon be
findings of the mendments, based upon the completion and
APPROVED AND ADOPTED 'HIS 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1982
PLAUNIUG CO114ISSIOII OF JHE CiTY OF RANCHO CUCAHOIIGA r
BY:
K 9, bb man
J6$ _ -
��
=a
awl •[ton tto: - 8L= 24::%`' =°'.' "Y" �' ?� , -' r� �r r:��r - z,y:y,�� c ,
Page 2 '
•
•
'ATTESZ:�
,4i
ec o the P ann Comm ss on
. .
it
I, JACK LAM, Secreta�v of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby . rtify that the foregoing Resolution was duty and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of
..
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 22nd oay of February, 1982, by the following
Vote -to -wit:
AYES WHISSIONERS: Dahl, RemPLI, King
NOES: C"ISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sceranka
ABSTAINEo. COMMISSIONERS: Tolstoy
aim
.f
LMMIN
i69
•
•
i
•
®• INDUSTRMLPARK
MIT GENERAL INDUSTRIAL
GENERAL INDUSTRy[/
RAIL SERVED
't
U^ HEAVY RDUSTRIAL
A 82-01
7
v
i
4
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
l 1
DATE: February 22, 1982
T0: Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development
BY: Michael Vairin, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 82 -01
K - Lcwu - e request to amend a Portion e enera an
text, ection iII page 30, relating to development within the
Planned Community areas prior to adoption of the planned Com-
munity
SUMMARY: Lewis Development Company has requested an amendment to the
text of -the General Plan that would allow the City to consider develop-
ment Plans within the Planned Comity area prior to final adoption of
the Planned Community text. Attached 1s a description provided by Lewis
Develepment Company which explains the reasons for such a request.
ANALYSIS: The Policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan
Presently state that:
'The City shalt not consider for approval any
development plans located within tho Planned
Community area until such time as the Planned
Communities have been reviewed and adopted by
the City Council.•
As the Commission is aware, the Lewis Development Company has submitted
the Planned Community text for Terra Vista and review of the text is
currently in process. The Applicant has found a need to relocate their
headquartprs and would like to do so within the Terra Vista Planned Com-
munity area The Applicant's time frame requires them to be relocated
into the new office building by the end of the 1982 cclendar year. Since
the Terra Vista Planned Community just began to be reviewed by the Plan-
ning Commission, it is not Possible to have the entire Planned Community
text adopted by the City Council in time to allow the submission of devel-
oPment plans and construction of an office building by the end of the year.
Therefore, Lewis Development Company has requested we amend the General
Flan text to allow some flexibility on the part of the City to choose
whether or not the City should approve development within the Planned Com-
o:unity area prior to adoption of the actual Planned Community text.
' - - - ITEM 8
General Plan Amendment 82 -01 A/L(wis
Planning Commission Agenda
February 22, lga2
Page 2
0-
<k The Applicant has suggested the following wording that would replace the policy
, statement contained on page 30 of the General Plan:
'The City shall not generally consider for v�proval ary development
plans located within the Planned Communities, area will such time
as the Planned Communities have been reviewed and suopted by the
- City Council. However, the City may aporove minor eac2ptions to
this policy, if in its judgment they are consistent with the Plan -
` reed Community and General Plan goals.'
This suggested wording allows the City not to consider approval of any development
within the Planned Communities area if it feels that it is a major deviation from
the intert and goals of the Planned Community area or the General Plan. If the
,y City did reel that the proposal was in keeping with those major goals, then the the voaconsider ca for ndo . tI still -otL ^to deny the projitIf it finds reviewthat itsnotWithin the -
• )ectations of the Planned Community area or the Cenerel Plan.
Since the Planned Cerndniity text is not adopted and decisions have not been made
regarding development standards or design quality, the City would have to review
the proposed plans based upon current City development standards and design polictas�
For instance, the Lewis Development Company proposes a reduction in the required
amount of psrking for an office use within the Planned Community area. The standard
which the Applicant is proposing is less than the standard pre sently used by the
for ya lesser famountiofeparkiCityha !plan made any policy decisiQtheocalllow devel-
opment standards.
This policv statement of the General Plan basically applies to the Terra Vista
Panned Community area since the Victoria Planned Community has already been
adopted, She Terra Vista Planned Community has been submitte: and the Commission
has become ;onkvhat familiar with it to make decisions regarding the design of
an office building within the office area of the Planned Community
Attached is Part I of the Initial Study which describes the General Plan amendment
and any associated environmental impacts. Staff has crimp' •ted the Environmental
Assessment and has found no significant adverse Impacts upon the environment.
Therefore, if the Planning Commission decides to recommerd approval of the General
gran amendment then they should recommena approval of a Negative Declaration to
the City Council
f
W n�
General Plan Amendment 82 -01 A/Lewis
Planning Commission Agenda
February 22, 1982
Page 3
RECOMEHDATIOA: It Is recommended that the
lear i ng to-consider input regarding the prop
finds that the amendment is appropriate in t
find attached a copy of the Resolution rem
the City Council.
Resp:ctfully submitted,
,
ICP -
Director of Community Development
JL HY:jr
• Attachments. Location Hap
Description of GPA
Part I Initial Study
Resolution
9
I
Planning Commission conduct a public
aced amendment. If the Coamission
ight of the circumstances, then please
amaending approval of the amendment to
r,
r
yz�
�m =
' % � t0 n1 �J � u�►
o�
A '
n
O
,oj m te
�
4, iuj �$ zW z ...J
y
L
a '
Q
a cc
Z
nxi >�
._
M
N
�$
w I
i RGSONS FOR THE MOMSMl CM=rAL PLAN MM.D W,
We intend to move Our Corporate office -0 Terra Vista an the coamunUy's first
office building. This will help us oversee the day - today da "loraent of Tarn
Vista and will also help demonstrate our commitment to the project. Th -s
office development will beesf!t the City by generating property tit, business
license, and fee reveece, along with the business of our 300# evplcy"s.
It is a major benefit to the City to start the development of Tema Vista,
which will be good for the City io many ways.
A major caa@aoy, which leases the building next to our present office, wants
to expand into our building. Recently, they have set a detdlinu that they
must be able to OCCUPY our present building by the aM of the year. 7ith the
Oxtanded Planned Community hearing schedule just adopted by the Planning
Commission, it will be "ry difficult for as to meet this deadline. Failtre
to meet the deadline would cause a maj.w loss for us, since both t1m building
we UCCAPy and the One OccurLed by the tanant would beeces vacant ms soon as
we mow into our new office in Torca Vista. This seems an unnocassary hardship
sinot wo would be moving Leto wr new office within a fa+ months altar the
deadline had pasted.
It is possible for us to he" our new office in Terns Vista built and occupied
by the and of this Fear, if we can submit plans shortly and haw them processed
at the same tics thtt t:.- Planned Community is undergoing public hearings.
It requires a tight scho.rule, but it Can be done. The problem is that s
statement in the Conecal Plan may be Interpreted as prohibiting this. ^_he
statement (which eprwrs on page m) says that no development in the planned
eomvnitios area will be processed until attar Planned Coesmity app-. al
• by the City Council
wa believe we are complying with the spirit and intant of that provision.
After many scathe of work, Our Planned Community has been submitted and will
begin public hearings Or. Pabruary 1. By working with staff, we belie" wu
could accelerate the dewlo(aaent of this single building with no detriment
to the owrall Plann.•d Cocounity. The site plan and building design would
reflec_ the intent of the PC to the best of our ability, and by working with
staff red officials we would try to accomplish a design that everyone would
be happy with. roan would of muse be some risk that during he Course
of the ?lanned r..- =tty hearing#, changes would 1•r made which would require
us U change the office plans 'is are willL,g to take the risk that redesign
would be required at a later paint. Right now we only rant to be permitted
co sibmi, the plans and begin pneeseing them, since project design and review
will take several aonthe
The '•eneral Plan shows offlcJ use at too site we haw in mind, which is a
7 1 -mere pareol on Hawn south of Church. `a project would consist city of
our ce office parking, and landccaping. we _ould submit conceptual lite
Plans for the surrr,,nding area to show ! +. larger office park of which our
building woul4 be . part. ire would arwnd our Planned Coannmlty submittal
to tG:hnically seclude this parcel a
l so that It could proceed through normal
it nvicw in the near future
psewoul V LBW6 0[q0-1DPMS1T co.
T! 5
` �,•
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
INITIAL STUDY
PART I - PROJECT INMRMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant
Environmental Assessment Review Feet $87 00
FOV all projects requiring envirorunental review, this
"
form must be completed and submitted to the Devolopa,cnt
Review Committee through the department where the
Project application is made. Upon receipt of this
applicat ?on, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare
Part II of the Initial St:tdy. The Development Review
Committee will meet and take action no later than ton
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
proje,:t is to be vivard. The Committee will make one of
three determinations.- 1) The project will have no significant
F
environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be
filed, 2) The project will have
a significant environmental iagact
and an Environmental Impact Report will to priparred,
or 3) An
additicval information report should be supplied by the applicant
giving further information concerning
the pronosed project.
PROJECT TITLE: Acendaeat to Gecer_al Plan teat
APPLICAAT'S NAHE, ADDRESS, TELEPRONE: Levis Davelopment Co..
1258 N. Nn ..rt f A
1
9 - _CA g77A 6. )14 -eP5 -:071
i
4
-
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TC BE CONTACTED
CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Ri:hard Levis
LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREFT ADDRESS AND ASSCSSOR PA'.CEL NO.)
Not
Imallclhl
i
a
s
i
LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE
FEDERAL AGLNCICS AND THE AGENCY
AND".'
ISSUING SUCH PERMITSt
v�
ll ,• . . C
• PA)JECT DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: To modify the language of the
Gateral Plan taut regarding ava opment u c &uM 14&AM00
Coaaunities area. Please see attached letter.
ACREAGE OF PPDJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OP EXISTING AND
PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANy: Not aosliept.o
DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONpNTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE_
INCLUDING INFORKAMON ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) ,
ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE
OF S:IRROUNDING PROPERTIrS, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF A:IY
EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS):
_ Nnr noel lrnhlw'
1
c
Is the Project, part of a larger project, one of a series
Of cumuiativo actions, which although individually smsll,
may as a whole have significant environmental impact?
No
- x -z
117
Is the Project, part of a larger project, one of a series
Of cumuiativo actions, which although individually smsll,
may as a whole have significant environmental impact?
No
- x -z
117
, (
.. _ _
,' ,
•gin, ,
� .
- V
VILL THI_ROJECTS
Yy7S
S
--• ..i 1
1• C
Create a substantial change in ground S
Contours? ,
X
--- 2
2. C
Create a substantial change in existing
noise or vlbrrationI
�- 3
3• C
C.:eate a substantial change in demand for
municipal services (
(police, fire, water,
sewage, otc.).
-- ; 4
4. C
Create changes in the existing
general plan deaignationsl g
-- E 5
5: R
Remova any existing trees. How awny?_
-- 6
6. C
Create the need fo: use or disposal of -
pJtentially hazardous materials such as
toxic substances, f
fla=xbl�s or axPlosives7
Explanation o
of a
any MS answers above:
'---
If the project inv.-Ives ihs construction of
residential units, complete the form on the
next pare. got appl:eable
CLRTIFICATIDN, I hereby certify that the atatemsn _s furniai�ec
above and in t''e aLtoche,] exhibits presert the date and
iniormation required f:r this initial ava14the d to the
beat ma my ability, and that the 'acts* statements, and
information presented are true and correct to the beat of
my knowledge and belie: I further unaerstand that
additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate ovaulation can Su made by the Cavalop t
Review COrmitLee '
LDIIS DV&-Wrm"r Co
Date January •S. 1982
r Signature �jj. Tit le G .. / i_'
Page Z
A.:
As strted above, we oalteve we ate ccrplyin•H with the intent of the Cuwril
Plan provision and can continua to do w with rorpact to the office if it
Is allcwd to move forward, We fccl that the development of a single office
building to meat an rnuaual situation does not violate Um intent of the
policy. However, since'thore in an= Baling that interpretation of the
policy as written prohibits thin, w am asking for a change in wording,
_ This change would not man that the City swat approvw our office develop-
went. but would provide flexibility for thrr City to approve the project if
it wishes.
It in our request that the paragraph to question, on page 30 of the General
Plan, be reworded more or lase as followo
i•
The City shall. generally not consider for approval any development
plans located within the planned ° m cv ties area until such time as
the planned ctnxunities have been revioved and adopted by the City
council. However, the City my approvw minor exceptions to this
Policy if in its judgment they are consistent with the plowed
coomwity goal.
woo hope the City finds this an acceptable axdification that does not
cor.travene the general Volley involved, sinca early developmmmt of the
office project would benefit tha City as well as our company.
J..
1
Y~ i
1
J
•t
r
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA31ONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 17, 1982
TO: Members of the City Council and City Manager
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Co rmnity Development
BY: Tim J. Beedle, Senior Planner
SUBJECT- GENERAL PLAN AlIENEtEMI 82 -01 C - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHOHGA -
An amendment to change property trintlng the north st a of
4th Street, east of the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa re rail-
road tracks, and west of Ettwanda Avenue from Heavy Industrial
to General Indust .-tai. _
ABSTRACT: This report Presents the staff analysis on a General Plan
amendment and recommends that this amendment be approved with the
Issuance of a Negative Declarationi.
BACKGROUND: This General Plan amendment is to cover approximately 150
acres cant land extending from 4th Street 1400' north between the
Atchison. Topeka, and Santa Fe railroad tracks and Etiwands Avenue.
This site is located at the most extreme southeastern boundary of the
City Limits At the time the General Plan was being prepared, this area
was considered for all Heavy Industrial land `e: however; during the
preparation of the Industrial Specific Plan, many concerns were raised
regarding the acceptability of Heavy Industrial users located along 4th
Street. Attention was drawn to th!s issue when property developers for
the Pic 'N Save warehousing showed an interest to provide a retail out-
let located along 4th Street. The Heavy Industrial category did not
provide for the retail operation nor any General Industrial cr Office
type uses Therefore, the Industrial Specific Plan established this
area as general Industrial category which would provide for both light
and mad(um industrial operations along with warehousing, office, and
commercial uses
Essentially, this General Flan amentlnent will change the General Plan
to be consistent with the Industrial Specific Plan The issues have
already been addressed through the completion of the Industrial Specific
Plan It is necessary, therefore, to have the General Plan and the
Specific Plan consistent with each other.
The environmental analysis of this change has been studied through the
environmental process of the Industrial Specific Plan. No increased
environmental impacts will be developed throua;i the amendment of the
General Plan. Staff has completed the envirow4ental assessment and
recc-mends the issuance of a Negative Declaration.
lag 6
General Plan Oaendment 8201 C
Planning Commission Agenda
March 17, 1982
Pago 2
Tie Planning Commission considered this matter during their meeting of
February 22, 1982 and approved the reconcended change and Issuance of a
Negative Declaration.
RFCMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the
accompanying solution amending the General Plen as shown on Exhibit "A"
and approve the Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
Respectfully submitted,
JACK LAM, AICP
Uirector of Coo amity Development
JL:TJB:jr
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Land Use Map
Initial Study Part I
Resolution
MIN
/ / / %;
�� � �
L
1J GPA 82 -01 C
U
n_i
e
•
h�
CITY OF RANCHO CUCJL%WGA
. INITIAL-STUDY
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant
Environmental Assessment Rovime Fast $87.00
For all projects requiring environmental review, this
form must be completed and submittad to the Davalopmnt
Review Committee throagh the department where the
project application is made. Upon receipt of this
application, tho Environmental Aualysis staff will prepare
Part II of the Initial Study. Tho Davelopmeat Raviev
Committee will meet and take action no later than ten
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of
three determinationss 1) The project will Have no significant
environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be,
filed, 2) The project will have a significant environmental inyact
and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 0) An
additional information report should be supplied by the applicant
giving further information concerning the pronosed project.
0
PROJECT TITLEt GPA 8241 C
APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE:
City of Rancho Cucamonga; P. 0. Box 807; Rancho Cucamonga, UY�--
s
(7141 qFtg-lV5l
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO -HE CONTACTED
CONCERNING TlIIS PROJECTt Tim J. Beedle. Senior Planner, City
of Rancho Cucaranaa R
LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL N0.)
_4_th Street. north 1400' between AT A SF Railroad tracks and Etiwande
Avenue
LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL. STATE AND „
FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH 1,=41TSt N/A
I -1
R
PROJECT DESCRIPTION -
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT= General Plan ane i ment to the
FAM 1n charm. rw. . u.....
ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND
PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANYs N/A
DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE
INCLUDING Im EWNTION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) ,
ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE
OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY.
ECISTINPI STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS)t
N/A
Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series.
_ 0f Cumulative actions, which although individually small,
may as a whole have significant environmental impact?
ti _Nn
CERTIPICATMR: I hsreby certify that the sta.ements furnished
above and .a the attaehee exhibits present the data and
information required for this initial evaluation to the
beat of my chi.ity, and that the fects, statemer.ts, and
information present•,d are trus and correct to the brat of '
my xnowledve and belief. I further understand that
additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evauuation can be wade by the Devalopment
i
Review Comm,ttee. `
Date Fetruary 17. 1992 Signature _
Tim J. 9eeale
~.� Title Srnior Planner
i r
WILL THIS
PROJE -,Ta
YES
X
1. Create a substantial change in ground
contou:a?
X
2. Create a substantial change in existing
noise or vibration?
_ _IX
3. create a substantial change In demand for
municipal s3rvicea (police, fire, water,
seeagr, etc')!
•
_ _ -X
4. CreaLe changes !n the axisting zoning or
general plan designwtion-1
5: kemove any existing V.eos? How many'i
6. Create tLe naed for use or oiapocal of
pctentiaaly hazardous aatsrials such cs'
toxic substances, flemmables or explosives,
Ftplanation of any Me nnsA,ars m1mve,
IMTnRTAH'f:
If the project in-.alves the ccn3tru�!tion of
r'
residential milts, complete the form on the
;•
next page.
CERTIPICATMR: I hsreby certify that the sta.ements furnished
above and .a the attaehee exhibits present the data and
information required for this initial evaluation to the
beat of my chi.ity, and that the fects, statemer.ts, and
information present•,d are trus and correct to the brat of '
my xnowledve and belief. I further understand that
additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evauuation can be wade by the Devalopment
i
Review Comm,ttee. `
Date Fetruary 17. 1992 Signature _
Tim J. 9eeale
~.� Title Srnior Planner
i r
J
RESOLUTION NO. S 9-S %
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANChO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AHENDINO THE
ADOPTED LAND USE ELE".ENT OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA
GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the City Council has activated tia optional General
Plan Amendrent cycle; and
WHEFEAS, the City Council has held a duly advertised public
hearing to consider all comments on the proposed General Plan Amendment.
NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, tha. tie Rancho Cucamonga City
Council does hereby approve the foilnwing tmendaents to the land use
element of the General Plan.
SECTION 1: General Plan Amendment No. K-01-A: Under the
first policy slant, paragraph 3 of the Land Use Elcment (page 30)
shall be changed to read as follows* -
"The City shall not generally consider !or approval,
any development plans located within the Planred
Communities area, until such time as She Planned
® Cocaunity has been reviewed and adopted by the City
Council. However, the City may approve Minor exceptions
to this policy, if to its judgement, the plans are
consistent with the Planned Ccaea +ity and General
Plan Goals" This exception shall ba limited to
one time only per planned community area and shdll
not encompass more than 5% or 50 acres of the
planned community area, whichever to less.
Wr
SECTION 2: General Plan Amendment No 82 -01 -C: An amendment
of the Geneal —P?lan Land Use Map in the area north of 4th Street extending
approximately 1400' east of the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe railroad
tracks and wast of Etiwanda Avenue as shown on attached Exhibit "A ".
This area shall be shown on the General Plan as General Industrial Land
USe.
SECTION 3• A Negative Declaration is hereby adopted for these
an
General Pl amendments, based upon the completion and findings of the
Initial Study.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 17th day of Borth, 1982
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
r
YI
iii
■
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL PARK
p• /,
GENERAL INDUSTRIAL
GENERAL INDUSTRIAL/
RAIL SERVED
HEAVY PIDUSTFIIAL
1.
woo•
3E TO
IAL
TRIAL
EXta�`3�T"
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 17, 1982
TO Members of the City Council and City Manager
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development
BY: Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 82 -02 -
TENTATIVE TRACT 11615 - LEWIS P ERTI - A change of
Z one rum - o gh a oale cc+anerc a to R -3 1PD (Multiple
Family Vesidential /Planned Development ) and the development
of 152 condominium units on 10.4 acres of land locateO north
of Base Line and west of Archibald - APN 202 - 161 -37 end
202- 151 -34.
4
SUMMARY. The prelosal before the Council is for a total Planned _
ve opment of 152 condominium units on 10.4 acres of land In order
to approve the proposal, City Council will need to approve the Zone
Change from C -1 to R -3 /PD and to issue a Negative Declaration. The
Planning Commission, at its meeting of February 10, 1982, held a duly
advertised public hearing to consider the above- described project and
approve the related Tract Map with Conditions as attached and recommended
approval of the Negative Declaration and change of zone.
Please find attached a copy of the Planning Commission Staff Report,
which full) describes the project. The project as proposed is con-
sistent with all related City Ordinances and plans. The proposed
density of 14.6 dwelling units per acre isconsistent with the General
Plan Land Use Designation of Medium High Residential (14 -24 dwelling
units per acre). No adverse environmental impacts are anticipated
es a result of this project.
CORRESPONDENCE: To date, no correspondence has been received either
or or7— ago n�5is project. This item was advertised as a public
hearing and notices were mailed to property owners within 300' of the
project.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission has recommended that the City
Counc approve Planned Development 82 -02 for the above - described project
througn adoption of the attached Ordinance.
JAR LAM, AR
Director of 1
Attachments:
I blivWW
y Development
ng Commisslon'Staff Report and resolution of Approv&I
CITY OF RANCHO CUCaMONGA CN_
STAFF REPORT
c
o 8
A
z
DATE: February 10, 1982
TO: Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Conrunity Development
BY: Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PUNNED DEVELOPMENT 82 -02
1 TT 11615) - LEWIS PROPERTIES - A change o zone from
e g or oo Commerc a to R -3 /PD (Multiple Family
Residential /Planned Development) and the development of
152 condominium units on 10.4 acres of land located north
of Base Line and west of Archibald - APN 202 - 161 -37 and -
202 - 151 -34.
SUr MY: The Applicant is requesting review and approval of a Planned
Development and associated Tentative Tract Map (Exhibit "C "). The
protect will consist of 152 air space condominium units on 3 lots to
be located north of Base Line and west of Archibald Avenue. This pro-
ject was originally filed as two Tentative Tract Maps and a Zone Change
request by the Robert Narmington Company. The property oyner, Lewis
Properties, acquired the project and combined all three applications
Into a single Planned Development application. The proposed project
meets the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance requirements and has passed
the City's Growth Management and Design Review process. Therefore the
Planned Development, Tentative Tract Yap, and issuance of a Negative
Declaration should be considered by the Planning Commission.
BACKGROUND: The Applicant has requested review and approval of a 152
unit p -o ect on 10.4 acres of land located north of Base Line and west
of Archibald Avenue (Exhibit "A"). The project site is currently vacant
and contains some mature vegetation as indicated on the Existing Tree
Plan. Exhibit "11% The sits ws currently zoned C -1 (Neighborhood Commer-
Lial) and is designated for medium High Residential (14 -24 dwelling units
per acre) on the City's General Plan The proposed project density is
approximately 14.6 dwelling units per acre and is therefore consistent
with the General Plan
The project site is bounded on the north by the San Bernardino County
Flood Control Ch4nnal and the Pacific Electric right -of -way, on the
northeast by Hoyt Lumber /Ace Hardware, on the east by vacant land General- e
:. '.`%.
,.rte 3
;� ^--;•-= _:,- __.:•�.. .._ 0 ITEM G -
�0. ,. _ /
Planned Develomment C J2 /Lewis Properties
Planning Commission Agenda
February 10, 1982
Page 2
Planned for office uses, and on the south by an existing neighborhood shopping
center and an approved, but still undeveloped, two -story office building, r7n
the west, the project abuts single family residences and existing water reser-
voirs. The surrounding zoning and land uses are shown on the Site Utilization
Map (Exhibit "B ")
This project has been reviewed and rated by the Design and Growth Management
Review Committees in accordance with the Growth Management Ordinance. The
project received a point rating in excess of the required threshold and is there-
fore eligible for Planning Commission review. In addition, the Conceptual Grading
Plan has been reviewed by the Grading Committee and received conceptual approval
contingent upon preparation of an oa -site hydrologic and drainage study and con-
nection of the on -site drainage system to the existing basin to Prchioa'd Avenue.
ANALYSIS: As noted above, the project would consist of 152 two -story
niTur plex or eight -plex arrangements as indicated on the Detailed
Exhibit "D" Only two basic models are planned; a 1,080 square foot
and a 1320 square foot plan 08" (Exhibit "F ") The parking provided i
standards of the Zoning Ordinance as each of the dwellings has an attr
car garage and thirty -nine additional open parking spaces have been pr:
(thirty -one are required) throughout the project site. However, six :
parking spaces at the southeast corner of the project site are locate:
south project boundary which is adjacent to the Alpha Beta loading do:
as shown on Exhibit "0 ". Staff recommends that these six parking stal
eliminated oi relocated elsewhere on the site in order that dense lan:
may occur at this location for screening purposes. Elevations have be
in the attached Exhibits 'E -1 and E -20.
to Plan, _
an "A
ats the
bed two
ided
these •
%long the
area,
be
:aping
: provided
'i Each unit has been provided with a 225 square foot ground floor patio en:.losed
- by fences In addition to private open spaces, the 33,977 square foot lot "A"
2 . of the Tentative Tract Hap is designated as a recreation area. Recreation facil-
ities in this area will include a swimming pool, spa, recreation building, and
tot lot as shown on Exhibit 01" Common greenbelts with meandering sidewalks
have been provided throughout the project site.
Access to the project will be from a new street, Lomita Court, from the project
site to Archibald Avenue In addition, a secondary emergency access point has
r been provided at the southwest corner of the project site and will include a
crash gate for emergency vehicles only. Pedestrian access will also be provided
K at the southwest corner of the project site as well as from Lomita Court. As
^= shown on Exhibit %% the Lomita Court cu'.- de-sac will include a circular land-
_ - scape median Island and stamped concrete. Private drives have been provided
through the project for Interior circulation. As shown on the Conceptual Land -
)p, scape Plan, Exhibit "H ", a continuous pedestrian circulation system has been
-_ provided which includes meandering sidewalks and greenbelts and stamped concrete
s; ; pedestrian crossings at appropriate locations.
.,
C
Planed Develcpment 82 -02 /Lewis Properties
Planning Commission Agenda
Febrtary 10, 1982
Page 3
Based upon the Grading Committee's recommendation, ConJ'tions have heen provided
to require the project site to be drained to an existins basin in Archibald Ave-
nue Originally, the project was designed to drain through the parking lot to the
south through a drainage easement adjacent to the Sizzler Restaurant, however,
the Sizzler Restaurant was constructed with an under - sidewalk drain which is not
adequate to handle the amount of water draining from the project site. The final
Grading Plan will be revised as described above.
The Corceptual Landscape Plan, Exhibit "H", provides for in abundance of land -
sceping throughout the project. The Design Review Committee recommended that
special attention be given to p.,oviding dense landscaping to screen and buffer
the project from adjacent land uses In particular, the south project boundary
abuts an existing neighborhood shopping center and loading dock areas and re-
quirrs special landscape treatment including specimen size trees. The Appli-
cant has proposed a six -foot perimeter wall at this location to screen the first -
stcry and vertical conifers and canopy accent trees to screen the second story
of the residential units, as shown on the cross section, Exhibit "J ".
The attached Exhibit "N" indicates existing on -site vegetation, proposed to
•emair, or be removed. There are a total of fourteen existing trees, tvelve of
which are cf the Blue Gum Eucalyptus variety. As shown on Exhibit "N ", thirteen
of the trees are proposed for removal because of conflicts with building or other
hardsc "ne locatibns Under the provisions of the Tree Preservation Ordinance of
the City of Ran_ho Cucamonga, the Planning Commission could condition this project
to replace these trees with new trees of an appropriate variety and size.
t The Design Review Committee reviewed the bullding elevations and architectural
design and has recommended approval of the project. Staff and the Design Re-
-• vier Committee have worked extensively with the Applicant in revising the eleva-
tions as shown on Exhibit "E -1 and E -2 ". Colo.ed renderings and elevations of
these buildings will be available for review anu comment at the Planning Com-
mission meeting.
Attached is Part I of the Initial Study as completed by the Applicant. In addi-
tion to Part I of the Tirtidl Stuay, an expanded Initial Study was prepared am.
is on file. Staff has ccmpleted Part iI of the Initial Study and found no sig-
nificant adverse impacts on the environment as a result of this project. Staff
recommenjs Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
CORRESPONDENCE: A Notice of Public Hearing was placed in The Dail Report
newspaper. —Ire addition, approximately twenty -three public ear n� i g notices were
{c mailed to surrounding property owners. To date, staff has received no public
}5;{y input regarding this project.
� 3a
f
I
M
q
-
Planned Development 82 -02 /Lents Properties
Planning Commission Agenda
February 10. 1982 4
Page 4
RECOMIENDATION: It is recomaended that the Planning Commission review the
propose anned Development and Tentative Hap and cor4uct a public hearing to
consider all public conments. If, after such review, - Comsission concurs
with the attached findings and proposed Conditions o .Pproval, a motion to
adopt the attached Resolution of Approval of the Tentative Tract Map and Reso-
lution of Approval for the Zone Change would be appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
JACK LAH, AICP
Director of Community Development
JL OC:jr
Attachments Exhibit 'A" - Location Map
Exhibit "8' - Site Utilization Map
Exhibit "C" - Tenta0ve Tract Nap
Exhibit "D" - Detatlad Site Plan
Exhibit E -1 8 E -2" - Elevations
Exhibit "F" - Floor Plans
Exhibit "G" - Conceptual Grading Plan
Exhibit "H" - Conceptual Landscape Plan
Exhibit "I" - Recreation Area
Exhibit "J" - Sections
ilbit "K" - Typical Driveway
Exhibit 'L' - Lomita Court
Exhibit 'M' - Phasing Plan
Exhibit "N' - Existing Tree Plan
Exhibit "0" - Proposed Revision
Initial Study Part I
Resolutions of Approval
Conditions of Approval
, ,,
i
rior
ti y�Y' -AGiA CO,NA 1 YacoNs
R - 3 M- R- T
.G COHHFec/ 4,
4Y C -3
SCHOOL GROUNDS
u- - - \���•� C -1
tip \ C -1
VAcmi
R-5
«
=" \\ \
VI.V6 YARD 'WIq
C -1 OGtNlRUAI�
� R01EROf 17 ,
vCL4
k FAM /Gy
VACA�3T CCFAW -mG1A/
`•' - — — BAS£. LItJC
G l;^vFL PG.tN - MEDIW HZH 6 +-Z4
��'�• ZON.' r 'UN09RY 4/NE
CITY Or
RANCHO CUCA\IO\GA ,SILL
PUNNING DIVEnN E \IImm_�
1
Ic
V
NORTH
s'
G� / /�/ r_ •{fir rj�+��..�
_T
uY b/ 1
r •. /" Tsai
i IIN1
Nom
CITY OP rmm. P'PIZ 3Z—(r meL1 '
RANCHO CUCAIMO GA TM.L � T1Ur, r•Lgp
zr, 111 \G MOON EXH11im— �� SGUE,
F �—
•y�"R4�� ✓W;�•+•"S+ - '�.t�,u, ti1.3 >�..�4dsc�= t`.tl l:�;n .r .. ..I :.s,t .w:.i�
■
e /
l
r
0
,
N.Iw�� rr
'1
v V
CITY OF
RAi\CHO CLCAIN,10. A Tnu. ��T ,� �L�a ►!
PI- 14 \'.VI \G D!VLSIO.N G \IIICfI _�
SCALE
137
FROOWf ELEVATION DUILDPIO TYPE A
J
L'
HEAR ELEVATION BUROWO T?PE A
CITY OI
RANCHO Ci;CAMO\G1
PUNNING DIVMN
1L
V V
nvtrm
rrew _FD 9% -oz `T rldrs
:■
I
BBB �
M;
FRONT ELEVATION E=INQ TYPE C
0.0
J I
NEAR ELEVATION BUILDING TYPE B
V r
. w AORfFi
8I0B ELEVATION BULGING TYPE A g .'
CITY Or rrE�u �D �Z -az �'11'lIGtS� ;;i
RA \CHO CL'CAjNICn \r,A -r,T,,�larlcrls uNI-r'g'n
PL,%iNNL \G DIVISIQN E\Ilnrr- -a-:�5G%LE, °
nt'
_45i''' ^.iC�rr:�^. ^Y
4••
f•
C
t
A •
i Mme' VII
,J
• NIT A
n
tliy
I �
I
I�x
I �I
rw
wS'
UNIT B
1
R a
4 PLEC
1 A — I I
113 mi
."m
!LL
..max
V V
nnRTH
CITY or rMlt pA ez•az
RAi:CI40 CUCANION JA TaLG_
k�• , 104;
k
1`
_
F
•
1
IIIii'
nnur Itp111 bpL <Ibr
rrr,[l!If[rlb rY brrlr • OR
CITY OP r►L�u�� gZ•pZ �Tll[a15� ¢
RAI CHO CLCANIONG,A
PLUNVI \G D11'LS(OV EXHIMl-.A_SCAIZ -
SI
1411
. .1 1
A " , , I ff , r
■.'
r
0
CITY Or
t RANCHO CUG1,N,10\CA
P1 XNN1 \C Dl%gSIQV
N
✓ V
•
•
IiOIiT'H
E\IIJMT, - SG \LD '- t
a�
f '
\j
,1aM ISO`- J•Jgr �y
M>
6ECI:SV A-A
70) !41
TIM
PDX
SECTM B
0
swm PAQ^ENTY as SOMEN -PLAN
V V
MRM
CITY OF M6 —)
RAi\CI -10 Ct: UNIO \GA Tnu, SeeMO(415
PL N'4NI,\l; DIVISION EX' TT- -T SCALD r
Y
n.
Ty
r•
r
t
if
r
DrNEWME W
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY Or rre\►, �D 82.0Z �'if' IIGrS
%L A-\CI-IO CUGUNIONG1 Tnu--, -r pt gg kL, ► � WgY
PL %tNNI \G DIVISION E\Ii►IUT,_I&_SGLE, _
Pi
2
Y
J
LONRYA oo 'R,T
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
• r r v
f�
nam t
CITY Or ,„ o0 8Z•o 4 (7fr!(ols)
r RANCHO Ct:CAN•10 \CA Tnu., (e rrA cmrr
ga PLANNING DIVERON _scALE.
c �
CITY Or
RANCHO CUCt1,vI0\(,,r1
PLVNNiI�G aNFOov
I•
,.E
A'OIZTH
rrc%1,
TM-C,- f}fAfvlNCG RAQ
lJ
���, i n ,�
" I� � a •
a
a �
U
F
L+
k
a �r
>r
�I
s
c
• :"1
VV
MIYi I
CITY Or rrrN I. _ Z • � l5
RANCHO CUC�1jI0. Gr1 ��, pP�f ,nom,,.. t
PUNNING DIXII N EXIIIISIT� scsaz r'�l
OPLASTIER
.
,• ,;,II
i ; ,,ll'
,�
6' HIGH PE
WALL
4' WIDE Sl
CONCREM
TYPICAL
--
EVERGREE
— TYPICAL
p
EUMWi,'(E
RcpIAC.G
l.A ONG
OoGv- ---�
—
__
---
—1
o-
—
--
M�ter�°'
VV
MIYi I
CITY Or rrrN I. _ Z • � l5
RANCHO CUC�1jI0. Gr1 ��, pP�f ,nom,,.. t
PUNNING DIXII N EXIIIISIT� scsaz r'�l
O
INITIAL STUDY
PART I - MJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant
Env.ronmental Assessment Review Fee: $80.00
For all projects requiring environmental review, this
form must be completed and submitted to the Development
•• Review Committee through -tho department where the ,
project application is made. Upon receipt of this
application, the Environmental Analysis staff -rill prepare
Part IT of the Initial btudy. Thn Development Ravia:l
Committee will meet and take action no later than ten
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of
three determinations: 1) The project will have no
environmental impact and a Negative Declarathion will be
Piled, 2) Ths project will have an environmental impact
and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or
3) An additional information report should be supplied
by the applicant giving further information concerning
the proposed project.
PROJECT TITLE: Tentative Tract No. 11619
APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS. TELEPHONE:
Ilse Robert P Kamdnorm r 16591 Hale Aymmin Irvine CA 97716
(714) 549 -8867
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO RE CONTACTED
CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Robert H. Odle- 16597 Hale AtTre�n__
Irvine. CA 92714 (714) 549_866
LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.)
Baseline Road and ArchiKild Avemm
AP No. 202 - 161 -37 907_151 -76
LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND•
FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS:--
N/A
Y -t
C�
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT;
ACREAGE PROPOSED OF HUILDItIGS, PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND
ZP ANYt _gate area•
_t'teht -nlex• 8 p • 1p 4 acres
25 cc. (15J x 551
Four -Olex• t. 87 (, 6aL -
DESCRIBE THE ENYM MENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE
IDTCLUDING IMPIUMTION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLAITS (TREES),
ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE
OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF Ahy
_XZSTLNG STRUCTURES AND THE1't USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS)e
4he project site is amR,�i...,,..,�.._1 .,_.
Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series
of c=ulativO actions, which although Individually snali_
1- 2
Y
x^
'r
V
YP
R 1. Create a substantial change in ground
contours?
X2. Create a substantial change in existing
noise or vibration? - -
--(_ 3. Create a substantial change in demand for
.unicipal services (police, fire, water,
- sewage, etc.)?
y (1)
4. Create changes is the existing zoning or
(2) general plan donignhtionsl
X _ 5: Remove any existing trees? Row many? 12
% 6. create tho'need for use or disposal of
potentially hazardous materials such as•
toxic substances, flammables or explosivas?
Explanation of any 'YS answers above:
(1) Zone ctnmga reTEc t ft= C -1 to R - ?a consistent with intet :m general p'
(9) See nrrnrh.d letter fore lanrlar earehltecr.
IMPORTANTI If the project involves the construction of
residential units, complete the form on the
next page.
CERTIFICATMV: I hereby certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and
information required for•this initial evaluation to the
best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and j
information presented are true and correct to the best oR
my knowledge and belief. I further understand that Y
additional information may be required to be submitted -W
before an adequate evauuation can be mado by tho Development
Review Committee.
Date IiC•C l2 . / yu"o l V l b'
Signature
Title Dizector - land Develarrsnt x•V
CJ
• � rrr.
f
• RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION d•i
The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga
iPlanning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the
s school district to accommodate the proposed residential development.
Panic of Devcl &per and Tentative Tract No.: TM NO. m 615
Specific Lots')
tion of Project: North of Bwche West of Archibald
' "• PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PRASE 4 TOTAL
1. Number of single
family units:
2. Number of multiple -
family units: 76 76 152
J'
Data proposed to
begin. constructions
3 -81
11-81 .
,i.
Earliest Bate of
occclancf:
7-81
11-81
Modal 0
'S.
and 4 of Tentative
Dedroons Price Rance
A - 2bdm: 8 78,000
38
38
•
8- 3bdrm 86,900
38
38
i
a.
153
■
i
i
r.
•
I
•
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -19
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLAANiNG COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT NAP NO. 11615
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Nap No. 11615, hereinafter "Map•
submitted by Lewis Properties, 'applicant, for the purpose of subdividing
the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of
San Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential Sub-
division of 10.4 acres, located north of Base Line, West of Archibald,
into 3 lots, regularly cam before the Planning Cxmission for public
hearing and action an February 2, 1982; and
WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map
subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning
Divisions reports; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the
Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered other
evidence presented at the public hearing.
NOW, 'HEREFORE, the Planning C=Jsslon of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings
in regard to e'ie-ntative Tract No 11615 and the Map thereof:
(a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable
interim and proposed general and specific plans;
(b) The design mr improvements of the tentative tract is
consistent tith all applicable interim and proposed
general and specific plans;
(c) The site is physically suitable for the type of de-
velopment proposed;
(d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury
to humans and wildlife or tneir habitat;
(e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious
Public health problems;
(f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict
with any easement acquired by the public at large, now
of record, for access through or use of the property
within the proposed subdivision.
,s
7' Resolution No. y
Page 2
(g) That this project will not create adverse impacts
.- on the environment and a Negative Declaration is O '-
issued.
attached hereto�N s herebyapprovedcsubjectotolallSofathepfollowingh 1s
conditions and the attached Standard conditions:
z
" ENGINEERING DIVISION -
1. The on -site drainage system shall Se connected to the
existing basin in Archibald Avenue as approved by
the city Engineer.
2. The east side of Archibald Avenue shall be widened
from Base Line to Lomita Court to provide for a left
turn pocket to the project.
3. Lomita Court from Archibald Avenue to the end of the
cul -de -sac shall be constructed with the project.
4. Private drives shall have a crown- section with a -
rolled curb an both sides.
PLANNING DIVISION
S. That pedestrian access must be provided at We south-
west corner of the project; details of which shall
be approved by the Planning Division prior to issu-
ance of building permits.
6. Dense landscaping shall be provided along the perimeter,
including columnar evergreens and deciduous canopy
trees, to screen and buffer the project from surrounding
land uses.
1. Samples of the roof aid siding wterial shall be wb-
` milted to the Planning Division and approved by the
Design Review Committee prior to issuance of blinding
permits.
8. A vsriet;y of stain or paint colors shall be usea on
the siding material to vrovide architectural interest
and shall be submitted and approved as above. "
9. Emergency access fire lanes shall be constructed of -'
•_ decomposed granite, covered with topsoil and planted
with grass In accordance with Foothill Fire District
requirements. ,,
}
>» 0
Ir
,
Resolution 11.82 -19
Page 3 C
C
10. Trash enclosure wood overhead structure details shall
be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division
prior to issuance of Building Permits.
11. That a tot lot be provided in accordance with the
Recreation Area Plan, Exhibit 'I'. Details shall be
submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior
to issuance of Building Permits.
12. This approval shall becoo* null and void if the
tentative subdivision cap is not , proved and recorded
within twenty -four (24) months from the approval of
this project unless an extension has been granted
by the Planning Commission.
13- That the si.t parking spaces shown at the southeast
corner ,f the project site be eliminated or relocated
and the area landscaped.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, IS&
PLAIOIING THISSION OF T i 'iTY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA
BY
1, JACK LAN, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamnga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
1 Commission held on the 10th day of February, 1982, by the following
•,• vote to -wit:
s
F,•• AYES: COITIISSIONERS: Sceranka, Rempel, Tolstoy, King
Nr,ES: COMIISSIONERS: None
ABSEIIT COWTSSIONERs: Dahl
�g
C
t
t
_¢g E
0 i9
'E s�$
3 rs ls� Ia =
' .X ell
ci
{
29 ass €I
X15 i3. ^s
ai $. #s .
ss
e ;i
all
a B • _ s d s ='rk
a0 -
$- $a3 r 4$ •$ a ° ' 3'E
.• -' r rsa
if it
R a S_o Er r 0 •3 ° a ;a
�� .,= 3s a�i sr
r r..
12 :! 6 i. :Sr a- A T EEg
'I-
i is r _ri' a rg. :a
3s= f�• $r it a �S: -A:- Ea •e;:
1 -
,� i57
i
s.
i'.
a £
ea _a
is 'i
�L
pe a
as s
s �
a
:r
3 ppjpp
? a!
= as
_s
r�
,y
9
• -a
.i
+- - +:
e
?j,
aL
sY 71
C
E
1
3.
S3
-its
iC
i i
8=
3j =§
a
€a-
]. ;
ZZ"
is
22
23
;
F
7
�E
��
Jd3��lpp!
it
!
'S
Ss F
��
C�
'rs.
-'.s
sg1?
re.
ar ,
;
g
r
S�
app
i
E
3-S d
?$Sda
_¢g E
0 i9
'E s�$
3 rs ls� Ia =
' .X ell
ci
{
29 ass €I
X15 i3. ^s
ai $. #s .
ss
e ;i
all
a B • _ s d s ='rk
a0 -
$- $a3 r 4$ •$ a ° ' 3'E
.• -' r rsa
if it
R a S_o Er r 0 •3 ° a ;a
�� .,= 3s a�i sr
r r..
12 :! 6 i. :Sr a- A T EEg
'I-
i is r _ri' a rg. :a
3s= f�• $r it a �S: -A:- Ea •e;:
1 -
,� i57
i
s.
i'.
a £
ea _a
is 'i
�L
pe a
as s
s �
a
:r
3 ppjpp
? a!
= as
_s
r�
,y
9
• -a
.i
+- - +:
�r
as
Fi
ja s�
�4 F�
e� I
J
=
C
=a
b3
3s
�i
R
9
45 as
�j;
L
•
=
a4
1
irn
a
`ea
a�
Ji•` -•
a
Es
rt
g y_
c�s
a
it
9
y
aid
.i
- a
i
ra
a
a
i
p3:
IL
Sri
?litr
i
3d:P
ilk
�3
.•
i��
i��F3�a3a
day
�3a3
yyrYUy
A+'�'# •i
:a =3
0
�r
as
Fi
ja s�
�4 F�
e� I
J
=
3
=a
b3
3s
�i
$aa
9
45 as
�j;
L
•
=
a4
1
irn
a
`ea
a�
Ji•` -•
a
Es
rt
g y_
c�s
a
�
�
9
i
s a
i
Sri
?litr
i
�3
.•
i��
i��F3�a3a
day
�3a3
yyrYUy
A+'�'# •i
�r
as
Fi
ja s�
�4 F�
e� I
J
-4b
_i-z
ana
'a3s
�r
F
:EE
a� s�
�¢a?
= 6
s3.
E?yy�e
�4
ISM
� a
°� 5a
s3s
_d ?f
L�
r »a
3
t�3
b3
3s
�i
s &3
9
45 as
a�
L
i
4C�
a4
`ea
a�
Ji•` -•
a
a
�
�
Sri
?litr
i
.•
i��
it
day
-4b
_i-z
ana
'a3s
�r
F
:EE
a� s�
�¢a?
= 6
s3.
E?yy�e
�4
ISM
� a
°� 5a
s3s
_d ?f
L�
r »a
3
t�3
b3
3s
�i
s &3
9
45 as
a�
L
i
4C�
a4
a ia _� 13 F_Yt se 'z as s
ii t. i'c s s z$f i1a ai
fz g 2F Sat u ax"
LEY FCC_ 0 r aG a== E�a
s5g _ ;a =le p'E _= ral"ac EO- Lt3a3 -a w p !33
a3= 8- sa saa !vr
.: r:3 a :3 71 "aSFa s �zna � r— uz ag St S-3 7
a a 11a 3_. 3 = 3 is; i H -. .'i = E a
FS B ae _ d i f-S as 63 . _ a
afi ^s ?3 ag= '� g3i s 3 =a "
is- a¢ °dse
a 2r
?
._al ::
3S �L3
3
L
=:J$- e? IS 833$ =$! !S ?�i£ c333 :g ?'!
.5�� ab3e $ !�d SSe 'a:i rr-g- = i z Is a3 z:
r ?iiiisx= 3i_FE =� s 'ei= I--=. =iaax ega= S a$! i ==s'
a33'Si:3? M 01 , 3a "r s3� ; =.3 ipis E. :3 s- s. is
i 2.e� - 3e - 7jj7�� a 7 3
34.�'�7:St1 ic�r 'S 9 � SSL �-,.` !� la E$
y' 3i 1 -s EsYS ;ati 3 :F3 '$ 'a 33� r= . s � a i E s3i =
i - e_[ Y 3
EE
aS:s ye it _ "zaa B vY i-r$ `Si ^= ;S3$ a s5 'a4 ;- n _!
3* sit zzat ji
€7'= a3a3 g9 ;l3 5 338a ijca i�.g9£ i; =�. 3- vii is F3 s3
g_
F:a=.3d =s?E e_•i �lEr $_ E3;z= a_ a::_ "x z i. =3
ci:sfi eSssJ ., d� =.F'a
! `° _
n
IA
3
s
1
=
t
x;
r
SS
-��
ra
•
tit
-
t
I
Sa.
3
�Io1
Ff
�i.s
y
iea
3j'sa
x
151i
s
Y
SE
s:
S!
33
ZI
i-
.s
E
s3
?
1
p�e
p
s
L�
I
EI
i92
85
a
f9;s
3
:
a:
-s
Qe
zes
is.
3
ax
QQ
tE;
c
"x
E
ate-
_-
a
.
Is
Si"
r.
•�
°iC
L
.
EC
e3
-Y�E
•=
i
e
as
Ys
3E
a
1
22
11
J
■
C
3
s
1
=
t
x;
r
SS
1�
ra
•
Ira
F -
t
I
Sa.
3
�Io1
Ff
�i.s
y
�fi
3j'sa
151i
s
Y
SE
s:
S!
33
ZI
i-
.s
E
s3
?
1
33
-1
E
L�
I
EI
i92
85
a
f9;s
3
:
a:
-s
Qe
zes
is.
3
ax
QQ
tE;
c
"x
a
:i
Is
Si"
r.
xSi
gi=
■
C
3
s
1
=
t
x;
r
SS
L
Ira
Y
c
I
Sa.
3
�Io1
�i.s
y
�fi
3j'sa
151i
s
Y
SE
s:
S!
33
p.
i-
.s
E
s3
?
1
33
a
"a
L�
5•
g
fad
:
ey
--
E
3
:a
3
:a
"x
a
:i
Is
Si"
r.
xSi
gi=
r
e
as
22
11
■
C
3
s
1
=
a
F2
Ira
Y
c
I
Sa.
3
�Io1
�i.s
y
�fi
3j'sa
151i
r 1
Y
SE
s:
S!
33
� C
i-
.s
E
s3
?
1
33
a
a=
At Aa
i�
�Lx1s
is
ey
sEi33
3
:a
3
a3E
xSi
r
pas 't a
pie ;der
a'al Pa. cE5 � €I=
v _ag.
3!1 3^aCi
1:
a iii
aP_ ,
a -
gai j�_Qi
Y
►Go
3i •
3
s
1
a
Ira
Y
c
I
Sa.
3
�Io1
�i.s
y
�fi
3j'sa
151i
31
EMU
33�a
i�
�Lx1s
xs�a
sEi33
3
:a
3
a3E
xSi
I
• ®
all q
■! a
_!
,l
�!.
�
H £
| : log
!
&!l \!'. £� ' ' � � 2 �E• -
� |§! !. � � �| g� •| �
|�@
! h %3
! §4IN $2. ! §._ t ;
(2 /! J`; ƒ QJ & \ ;gZ!
j k >
q
�
.�
�
I
• ®
all q
■! a
_!
,l
�!.
�
H £
| : log
!
&!l \!'. £� ' ' � � 2 �E• -
� |§! !. � � �| g� •| �
|�@
! h %3
! §4IN $2. ! §._ t ;
(2 /! J`; ƒ QJ & \ ;gZ!
j k >
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -20 _
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING •
CMIMISSiON RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT NO. 82 -02 REQUESTING A CHANGE IN
THE ZONING FROM C -1 TO R- 3 /P.D. FOR 10.4 ACRES
LOCATED NORTH OF BASELINE, WEST OF ARCHIBALD
WHEREAS, an the 29th day of December, 1980, an application was
filed and accepted on the above - described project; and
WHEREAS, on the 10th day of February, 1982, the Planning
Coamission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section
65854 of the California Government Code.
SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made
the follow n� findings:
1. That the subject property is suitable for theluses
permitted in the proposed zone in terms of access,
size, and compatibility with existing land use in
the surrounding area; -
2. The proposed zone change would not have significant
impact on the environment nor tha surrounding •
properties; and
3. That the proposed zone change is in conformance
with the General Plan.
SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found
that this pro act will not create a significant adverse impact on the
environment and recommends to City Council the issuance of a Negative
Declaration on February 10, 1982.
NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the
California Government Cade, that the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby
recommends approval on the 10th day of February.
1982, Planned Development No. 82 -02
2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the
City Council approve and adapt Planned Development
No. 82 -02.
i
z
"' •
Yea.
D_
I I -*
i
Resolution No. 82 -20 '-
Page 2 ( /
3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and rela.ed
material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission
shall be forwarded to the City Council.
4. All conditions of app, wal applicable to Tentative
Tract No. 11615 shall .,,Ply to this Planned Development
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF FEBRUAR;, 1 ?82.'
PWINING OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCA46NGA
"1 ISSION 7/1
BY
I. JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly lotroduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Con mission held on the 10th day of February, 1982, by the following
vote -to- it:
AYES CC7IISSIONERS: Sceranka, Rempbl, Tolstoy, "ing
NOES: C(MISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMHI5S10NERS: Dahl
(03
e
..
a
= .,
E:
M�
ORDINANCE N0, 03
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER
202- 161 -37 AND 202 - 151 -34 FROM C -1 TO R- 3 /P.D., LOCATED
NORTH OF BASE LINE AND NEST OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California,
does ordain as follows:
following: SECTION 1: The City Council hereby finds and determines the
A. fiat the Planr,'ng Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, following a public hearing hgld in the
time and manner prescribed by law, recommends the
rezoning of the property hereinafter described, and
this City Council has held a public hearing in the
time and manner prescribed by law as duly heard and
considered said recommendation. _
B. That this rezoning is consistent with the General
Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
C. This rezoning will have no significant environmental
impact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed
herein.
rezoned inSECeC_�ION per taa�;laanddntheezoningd paisphereby amended by
accordingly.
C -1 (Neighborhood Commercial) to R- 3 /P.D. (Multiple
Family Residential /Planned Development) said property
is located north of Base Line and west of Archibald
Avenue known as APN 202- 161 -37 and 202 - 151 -34.
Clerk shalSEcause 3. saamme�toobespublished within fifteen and 5) days
after its passage at least once in The Oail Re rt, a newspaper of
general circulation published in the ty o ntar o. California, and
circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of 1982.
AYES:
HC =S:
ABSENT•
m
.•
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 17, 1982
TO: gembers of the City Council and City Manager
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director or Community Development
BY: Michael Yairin, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING CO144ISSION DECISION FOR PREPATION
NY N. T MP CT REPORT FOR THE DE ELop
EN. `
9 3 - deve opment o a total
Planned resfUe—n-tTaT eve opment of 185 single family
detached units and 14.6 acre park an 95.5 acres of
land to the R- 1- 20,000 zone located on Hermosa Avenue,
north of Hillside.
• BACKGROUND: The aprm
the ounC at its me(
ApPlicant had request<
Subsequently, the hear
request of the Applica
months, the Applicant
of Community Services
for the possible acqui
Hermosa Avenue for a m
of this project was originally introduced to
9 of October 7, 1981. At that meeting, the
ontinuance of consideration on the appeal.
on the appeal has been continued at the
to tonight's meeting. Over the last several
been negotiating with th'i City's Director
the Parks Subcommittee of the City Council
ton of the west portion of the project along
is park.
Please find attached a copy of the October 7, 1981 Staff Report to the
City Council which outlines the issues of the appeal. In addition,
excerpts from the Planning Commission Minutes of August 26, 1981 and
the Commission Staff Report have been attached for your review and
consideration. Since this project has been continued for some time,
a final decision by the Council is urged in order to allow the con-
tinuing processing of this project.
ANAm.YSIS: Currently, the official application and project on file
n the annfng Division encompasses 95 acres of land located on
both sides of Hermosa Avenue, north of Hillside Avenue. The require-
ment for the Environmental Impact Report that the Commission made was
based upon the implications of this total project. A decision of the
Council is needed in regards to the Planning Commission's decision for
CCit requiring
yCoun he
cilup a
EIR for the then an Environ -,
mental Impact Report would have to be prepared for the total project if
.y
Appeal of Planning Commission Decision r
City Council Agenda
March 17, 1982
Page 2
t
the Applicant elects to proceed with the project as presently submitted. Since
the Apolicant is negotiating with the City in regards to the purchase of a park
site, the project design and character may change significantly which could
change the implications of environmental immact. If so, then the Applicant
+ would need to refile a revised project and staff would conduct another Initial
Study to determine if an Environmental Impact Report would be needed on the
revised project.
Therefore, the Council's decision this evening is to the total overall project
as it is now presently submitted on file in the Planning Division. The Appli-
cant's options are to either withdraw the appeal, withdraw the current project s
and submit a revised project, at wntch time a new environmental assessment will
be conducted, or continue with the present project as submitted in accordance
with the Council's decision on this appeal. _
RECOVIENDATION. It has been recommended by the Planning Ccmmission that an
v ronF—i a5entT7mpact Report be prepared for the development of Tentative Tract
11933 as presently submitted and on file in the Planning Division. If a revised
• project is desired to be submitted by the Applicant, then a new environmental
assessment will be conducted to determine if an Environmental impact Report is
still needed.
ResDectfull submfitted,
'l
' JAC ' ,
Director of Community Development
JL:MV:jr
Y Attachments October 7, 1981 City Council Staff Report
Excerpts from August 26, 1981 Planning Commission Minutes
Planning Commission Staff Report of August 26, 1981s
�I
4
L .-M
4X
iv
s
F
t
f
s
c
C OF RANCHO CULON ,A
STAFF REPORT
OCTOBER 7, 1981
�i
TO: Members of the City Council and City Manager
FROM: Jack Lam. Director of Community Development
BY: Michael Vairin, Senior Plainer
SUBJECT APPEAL OF PLANNING CDW.TSSION iSION FOR TP PR P
aeve,opment an 95.5 acres of land located on
north of 11111side
ABSTRACT. The Planning Commission, at their meeting Q August 26, 1
required the preparation of an Environmental Impact Repo thx d
ment of Tentative Tract No. 11933. The Commission's decisicn was case
the Initial Study which was prepared in accordance with the State Envi
mental taws and which indicates that potential significant adverse imp
may occur as a result of this project. The Planning Commission Staff
and an excerpt from the Planning Commission minutes is attached for yo
review. It is recommended that the City Council uphold the Planning C
decisicn to require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Rep
this project.
BACKGROUND: Attached is a copy of the letter from Richard Scott, Chairman
or [lie Board for Woodland Pacific Development, Inc. who has requested an
appeal of the Planning Commission decision for the preparation of an Ervio-a-
mental Impact Report on the above- described project. Mr. Scott's reasoni,-
for the appeal is not based upon the Commission's review of the Environmental
Assessment and the type of impacts that are associated with this project, but
rather based upon reasons that previous discussions on the project, prior to
its formal submittal, did not indicate that an Environmental Impact Report
would be required. Mr. Scott's letter refers to a number of projects being
submitted for review during he last 12 months. None of the projects which
Mr. Scott refers to were formal applications, but were conceptual plans that
were being shown to the Commission and Council during the General Plan process
to show the type of development that could occur on their site. The majority
of the site is General Planned for park and the developer was trying to per-
suade the Council, during the General Plan hearings, that development could
be compatible to the area.
►(07
,
B]
r
y
el �
1 t• -p,
September 2 1981
The 'Ity Council
City of Rancho Cucamonga
c/o City Clerk's Office
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, Ck 91730
ro
fidpio
DEVELOPMENT, INC.
RE: Tract 011933 P08103 - Froperty located on both sides of
Hermosa Avenue, north of Hillside
Gentlemen:
Please consider this letter to "astitute our appeal of the -
Planning Commiasion's requirement of an Envirnomental Impact
Report in connection with the propesed development of this
property
During the last thirteen months, a number of projects have
been submitted for review to planning staff, Planning Commission,
and Council, through our consultants, The Planning Center, and in
no instance has there ever been mention of the requirement of an
Environmental Impact Report. Inched, on s number of occasions,
there have been specific conversations in which it ads stated
that an Environmental Impact Report would not be required.
In addition, in a meeting on April 2, 1981, attended by the
undersigned, Hr. Barry Hogan, Hr. Jack La-a, and Mr. Lauren
Wasserman, this project was diocussed in data and assurances
were given to the undersigned that if we were file during
April, 1981, that planning department process%,.& would be ex-
pedited The general tone of that meeting was that the City of
Rancho Cucamonga was sympathetic to the problems of our having
waited for several years to move this project :orrard, and that
needless and time consuming processings and submissions would be
avoided
He th.,nk you for your consideration in this matter.
Ve� sincerly your
Richard N. S tt, Chaireun of the Board
Woodland Pa 'fie Development, Inc
R71S /bb3
1111 WISTNIN711 STREET • UPLAND. CALIFORNIA 91799 • 714•94e.1e02
s
Staff Report
EIR for Tr 11933 -2- October 7, 1901
During review of the Conceptual plans at the General Plan hearings, no
environmental analysis was done since no formal application had yet been
submitted. The applicants submitted an application on April 29, 1981
and staff notified the applicants on June 1, 1981 that the project
application was incomplete and additional material was needed. Following
the submittal of additional material the applicant was again notified
on June 26, 1981 that his project was complete for Processing and that
final acceptance iq not made until all environmental documents and findings
are complete as required by the California Environmental Quality Act.
Following a notification of acceptance of the application for processing,
the project was scheduled for resign Review Committee and Growth Management
Review Committee on August 4 and 6, 1981 respectively. Followigg the con-
clusion and findings of those Committee meetings, staff's environmental
analysis was completed which resulted in a finding of potential significant
adverse impacts on the environment as a result of this project. This
recommendation was then forwarded to tho Planning Commission who acted is
favor of the preparation of the EIR. At thb olanniwy Commission hearing,
two citizens in close proximity of the project, tgs,ified before the Com-
mission asking for the preparation of an EIR because of the environmental
factors related to this orciect.
Our Attorney has indicated that environmental review has been an active
area In the courts and some standards for judicial review have been developed
regarding the requirement for environmental reports. The Attorney indicated
that if reasonable minds are questioning whether or not significant impacts
will result because of the project then the w urts have upheld the decision
for the preparation of ar Environmental Impact Report. Further, tho State
Environmental Guidelines state that where a subst %ntial body of opinion
considers or will consider the effect of a project to be adverse that the
lead ager•:y should Prepare an Enviornmental Impact Report to explore the
envionmental effects involved with the project.
RECOr4ffNDATION: It 1s recommended that the City Council uphold the Planning
samFTs%n decision to require the preparation of an Envionmrenral Impact
Report for Tentative Tract No. 11933
Raspec£ ulllly� s(vybm tted,
-,.
JACK LAM, Director of
t Community Development
JUMV:cd
Attachments: Letter of Appeal from Woodland Pacific Development Inc.
Excerpt from the August 26, 1981 Planning Comvfssion Minutes
Planning Commission Staff Report from August 26, 1961
0
0
.r
'WS.V
Excerpt from the 0 ctal City of Ran•.Im Cucamonga ( fining Commission Minutes
of August 26, 1981
G. TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 11933 - WOODLAND PACIFIC - A public hearing to consider •
a
requirement for preparat on o an nv ronmental impact Report (EiR) on a -
total planned residential development of 185 single family detached units
and a 14.6 acre Dark an 9i.6 acres of land 1n the R -1- 20,000 zone located
on Hermosa Avenue, north of Hillside.
Michael Vafrin, Senior Planner, reviewed the Staff Report.
Chairman King asked Mr. Vairin if what was before the Commission at this meeting
was the determination of whetier or not the project in question needed an Environ-
mental Impact Report.
Mr Vairin replied that this was Staff's intention.
Commissioner Dahl asked if the density of the project '+ad any bearing on #J.e
draft EIR
Mr. Vairin replied that the density was over the 2 dwelling unit per acre desig-
natlon of the General Plan and would, therefore, require a General Play amendment.
However this is not the sole reason for an EIR.
Commissioner Dahl wiled attention to the fact that a Resolution had been adopted
by the Planning Commission regarding lots in the R- 1- 20,000 zone classif' cation
that the lot size would be 20,000 square feet net
Mr Vairin stated that this would have to be resolved by the applicant in the EIR
process
Mr Vairin stated that the EIR would cover many aspects of the project, one of them
being the land use category.
Commissioner Dahl stated that the General Plan designation on the west side of
Hermosa is a Park designation.
Chairman King opened the public hearing.
Mr. Peter Templeton of the Planning Center in Newport 8eaw represented Mr. Dick
Scott of Woodland Pacific. He stated that this project began approximately a
year ago and at that time representatives of the Planning Center had not with
City Staff to see what the requirements would be for this project and if an EIR
would be necessary. Mr. Templeton stated that Staff informed him that an EIR
would not be re qufred He further stated that geologic, soil, and hydrology
reports had been obtained by the Planning Center as well as the study into
various types of fire retardant materials. He said tt.st the applicant would
be willing to sell the property to the City as a park as well as rany other
alternatives. He stated that Hr Scott would be placed under financial burden
If this project were PoctPoned another five to six months while an EiR was
being processed.
Commissioner Dahl stated that the property is question has been for sale since
April and that thisapplicant may not necessarily be the person who would develop
this property, therefore he felt that it could not be deemed a hardship that the
Commission would br placing on the applicant to request an EIR.
Plonnfng Commission Minutes August 26, 1981
-. 170 -
'f
c �
Mr. Templeton replied that this was placed in the newspaper approximately nine
mnths after submittal and at that time Mr. Scott felt that he was getting no
where with his project.
Mr. Vairin stated that he would like to clear up three items which Mr. - empleton
,. commented on. One comment being the length of time since the project was filed.
Mr. Vairin stated that the project was not officially filed until April of 1981.
The second issue is not whether or not the City would be losing a park but is that the
area is General Planned for a park and the person who develops that land will
have to deal with the issue of whether the City wishes the development of a
dark. The third issue was the density factor and this would be one of the
points of the EIR.
Ronnie Stevens, who lives in the area adjacent to the project site, stated that
she was in favor of an EIR because of the very serious drainage, circulation,
and police and fire problems in the area
Christine Benoit, Alta Loma resident, asked if the project would be brought
back to the Planning Commission for a puuiic hearing after the completion of
and EIR
Mr. 'airin replied th it the EIR would be used to help mold and design the fin- _
ished project or help the decision makers to decido whether the project . hould
be app oied. He explained that the EiR is a tool to determine the kinds of
impacts as a result of this project tie way it is proposed or alternatives to
the project.
. Mr. Lam stated that the developer of th.: property would have serious drainage
problems to consider as they are at the top of the Alta Loma Channel and this
issue would be a consideration of the 6eveloper,
Coln+issioner Sceranka asked for an explanation of what the Commission's respen-
sibilities were when a project such as this was filed with the City.
Hr. Lam replied that anyone is free to submit an application to the City with
what ever proposal they have.
Christine Benoit stated that she hoped that the Commission would keep in mind
that the beauty of the area was the reason for lesignating the area as park in
the General Pltn. -
Chairman King asked if there were further enmments, there being none, the public
hearing :as closed.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he was very conceraed about this particular
piece of property. Ha stated that very few cities in the area are fortunate
to have a forest and it was his intention as a Planning Commissioner to retain
this piece of forest as the General Plan designation of Park. He further
stated that economic considerations of the applicant were not an issue that
the Planning Coamission should deal with. Commissioner Sceranka stated that
he was totally opposed to any mechanism other than an EIR for this project
which would discuss the issues presented by Staff.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- August 26, 1981
� C
Chairman King stated that hi fait that an EIR should not be required for the
property. The type of devn'ocr4nt he felt was appropriate for the area would
be of such extremely low density that it would not mitigate environmental
impacts. He further stated that everyone was aware of the mitigating circum-
stances of the fault zones and drainage problem plus all of the other areas
addressed in the reports attached to the Staff Report and it was his opinion
that if the property erere planned properly at a very low density that there
would be no impacts. He felt that the project as proposed would have many
impacts, but if it were planned properly it would not.
Commissioner Dahl stated that density would have a tremendous amount of impacts
and the decision at this meeting must be based upon the Tentative Map as it was
submitted to the City. He asked if the Commission could state that, based upon
the density shown, an EIR ,ould be required; however, if the developer wished
to come back with a lower density, the EIR would be reconsidered.
Mr Vatrin replied that the decision is to be made on whethe" or not an EIR
must be made on this Tentative Map as submitted. If this statement is made
to the developer, they would have the option to drop this tentative and draw
up a completely new project thus necessitating a new Initial Study to deter-
mine shat potential Impacts would be created from that project.
Bob Doughe *ty, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the area of environmental -
review has been an active area in the courts and some standards for judicial
review have been developed to either require or not require EIRs. He further
stated that the trend of the decisions have been toward: the requirement of
an EIR if ttere is any doubt on how tire issue should be resolved. If the
question of whether or not significant impacts are a rusult of the project
is debatable, then the courts deem that an EIR should be prepared. The
effect upon a developer in not requiring an EIR when one should be required
could be more severe than if a Negative Declaration was issued and a court
ordered an EIR prepared a year or so later. It could have a financial impact
upon the City as the attorney fees are frequently awarded against the City
where the decision was not to require an EIR and the City was sued over that
decision
Cmmissioner Sceranka asked if this area was designated a a park in the General
Plan shouldn't the Gmmission be acting upon a negative impact cn the General
Plan amendment before action c^ the Tentative Map.
M�. Vatrin replied that it would be done ton:urrently.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he could nut understand Chairman King's
statement that there are no negative impacts cr an EIR required on a piece
of property where a Ger ^ral Plan amendment would have to be made from a park
designation to a proposal for a subdivision development He felt that an EIR
world most definitely be required when you were completely changing the land
use of a piece of property.
Mr. Vatrin stated that the State Guidelines states that public controvarsy
alone was grounds ra require an EiR despite the issue of density.
Planning Cwn!ssion Minutes -3- August 26, 1981
/72-
w;.- missioner Sceranka stated that the proposal on this property is to take a
public park and make it a private park.
r •
-� Cosmissioner Reopel stated that it is not a Dark, it Is a proposed possible
park. He further stated that he was in agreement with Chairman King that
the applicants come in with a proposal of a much lower density. He also
stated that a study of the fire danger in that area should be looked into.
=Q
Chairman King asked for a motion.
Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Dahl, carried, to require an Environmental
impact Report for Tentative Tract 11933.
i AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Tolstoy, Dahl. Regel, Sceranka
IVES: COMMISSIONERS: King
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
Il
Planning Comdssicn Minutes -a- August 26, 1981
9
0
_ STAFF REPORT W ��P m� +i
August 26, 1981
tun
T0: Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Co=unity Development
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11933 (P.D. 81 -03)
WOODLAND PACIFIC - A total planned development of jo5 single fam y
detached units and a 14.6 acre park an 9S.5 acres of land in the
R- 1- 20,000 zone located on Hermosa Avenue, north of Hillside.
ABSTRACT: The project is a single family residential development submitted
ni accordonce with the Growth Management Ordinance. Since this project
appears to have environmental concerns, an Initial Study was perpared for
the Planning Commissions consideration and review.
BACKGROUND: The project is located on the eas, and west side of Hermosa
Avenue, north of Hillside. The project site totals 95.5 acres. 185 single
family detached homes are proposed to be built on 80.9 acres while a park
will be developed on the remaining 14 6 acres. The proposed Tentative Tract
Hap, Exhibit 'B% indicates that 149 lots are 12,000 sq. ft, and 36 lot are
20,000 sq. ft. Current zoning 1s R- 1- 20,000, and the General Plan designates
the majority of the property as a proposed park site. The applicant is re-
questing a General Plan Amendment to very low density (less than 2 dwellin
units per acre) and a zone change to the PO Combining District. The surrounding
zoning and land use is provided on the attached Zoning Map (Exhibit •C•).
ElIVIROUNERTAL SETTING: Approximately 8DS of the site is densely covered
with 65-year old red gum Eucalyptus trees which are in good condition. The
overall gradient of this site is approximately 10% with the, slope running
north to south The majority o' this site empties into a natural drainage
course which flows northeast to southwest. Runoff from the easterly portions
of this site travels into a channel which runs along the east project boundary
then turns west along the south of the property line. Surface runoff is very
stow and the erosion hazard is slight. Cutting across the northern part of
the property is the Cucamonga Fault. Existing development on site is limited
to Hermosa Avenue, a concrete reservoir near the south property line, a forest
service r ad along the north project boundary, several internal dirt roads,
and small borton pits in the northwest portion of this site.
The project site is bounded on the north by the foothills and isolated single
family homes To the southwest lies an existing single family residential
development A subdivision application, Tentative Tract 10088, has been filed
along the western project boundary. To the south and east there is a variety
:f land uses including agricultural uses, single family residences,vacant land,
and a flood control basin.
(-7`(
ITEM G
i
TT 11933 (P.D. 81 -03)
Staff Report _2_
August 26, 1981
ENViRON71EHTAl ANALYSIS: Part 1 of the Initial Study has been completed by
t e ape cant an —s attached for your review. Staff has conducted a field
investigation and has completed Part II of the Initial Study. Following is
a brief discussion of the major issues and potential adverse impacts which
may occur as a result of this proj!ct.
1 Drainage: Currently, the onsite soils are excessively drained and
the absorption rate is high. This project could significantly increase
runoff by increasing the amount of impervious surfaces which do not
allow water to seep into the Bound. Compounding this problem, is the
fact that approximately 750 acres of lend outside of the project area
drain into and across the site. The magnitude to which the increase:l
runoff will affect the ground water table and erosion potential is not
known
2. Biota: Removing a large number of Eucalyptus trees from the rite
cou significantly reduce a wildlife habitat which is unique to this
area The environmental impact of this action is not known.
3. Land Use: Since the project site is designated as a park in the •
Genera DIan, construction of this project may necessitate the need
for another park in the general vicinity It is uncertain whether the
short term benefit of the development of a 14.6 acre park will override
the the future. loAlso, rtheoeconomicfeasibilitycofltheeCi y creve'moping the
entire Eucalyptus grove as a park, or the feasibility of purchasing an
alternate site must be considered.
A determination of the most appropriate land use configuration and density
should be made. The possible alternatives could range from the clustering
of homes on smaller lots to maximize open space or to maintaining a minimum'
lot size of y acre or larger throughout the project site.
4. Public Safet Public Safety is a concern which must also be addressed.
highly susceptible too fires. PotentiallfPreshazard islincreased eformthis
site because the northanproject boundary abuts the foothills. Also of
concern is the Cucamonga Fault which rans thro ugh the northern portion of
the property Since the magnitude of an earthquake in this fault could
reach 6 5 to 1.0 on the Richter Scale, there is a significant public safety
enncern
r7s
�r
4
s
ZONING MAP
THE WOMS 4T RANCHO CUCaMONGa
A Planned Commanily by Nbodland Pacific Development, Inc.
17 (o
i
i TT 11933 (P.D. 81 -03)
9. Staff Report _3_
August 26, 1981
r BECLiWTS —tuU -. it isasecc�nded that ao Environmental Impact Report
be inding for this
scope project. EfI Re s�tdsiondetermined oncurs iby th this
onsi-
dering the information presented In the Initial Study, this report,
and the public hearing.
Respectfully su 1-ted,
�Vvv�
JACK LAM, AiCP
Director of Community Development
JL:CJ:cd
Attachments: Exhibit 'A' - Vicinity Nap
Exhibit •8' - Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit •C• - Zoning Map
Exhibit •D• - Site Plan
Exhibit •E• - Grading (two sheets)
Exhibit 'F' - Natural Featur,s Map
Exhibit •G' - Conceptual Landscaping Plan,
iY
i`
,t
�r
07
A
0
CITY OF
RANCHO CUGkNI0NGA
P"NNING DIVISION
C5 �[
rrat
\Wlalll
•nrl.�lyLCiMrr� MrrP
Mills , "A" sc%LE; NT s .
018 --
a
e•
A
•---- •- -- --
I
-- ----- -- - - -- -- -.. , - - - -- -----
, I 1
Iw
-.a
s
s . 1
1
r••
1
1
CT F I
I
�t
1
1
� �
VICINITY
RANCHO
i
I UUCAMONGA
CITY OF
RANCHO CUGkNI0NGA
P"NNING DIVISION
C5 �[
rrat
\Wlalll
•nrl.�lyLCiMrr� MrrP
Mills , "A" sc%LE; NT s .
018 --
Iw
-.a
s
s . 1
1
i
a
y';;
I
�t
1
I�1
1
� �
VICINITY
MAP
CITY OF
RANCHO CUGkNI0NGA
P"NNING DIVISION
C5 �[
rrat
\Wlalll
•nrl.�lyLCiMrr� MrrP
Mills , "A" sc%LE; NT s .
018 --
■
r-
Tnrr" a TRACE N0. 2UM
sm Ma.nn �•rrr•r.e.n.
r
•rv..
�l'v�ae
Imo•`- a(:it��lt.•as
CS7Li��'.ts. • �
Y +. � zz
,'3laxo fit!! L s
V R 9 q 49 m
e
Ll
Y i -TAIII t!.
� I r.` � r •TW.W ,.
r,
THE WOODS AT AAlMio CUca�9i��A
Ftanned t aMnunity tryl400dland Pxfffe Devebpment• Inc. ®-
u�a
0
MOMEMS "A
ME WOODS AT RANCHO (UUMC U
A Planned Conummiiy by Woodland Pacific Development, Inc.
/QO
w
•
CDNCZMAL CRAB= AND DRAINAUS PLAN
b-
THE UICOBS Ar rizilc t) (MA
A Planr d CamnRmtt� L7 Vk c;dbW pjdlfic LVM
x _ !-�ttnt, Inc. � � z\\
W
MWIM
b-
THE UICOBS Ar rizilc t) (MA
A Planr d CamnRmtt� L7 Vk c;dbW pjdlfic LVM
x _ !-�ttnt, Inc. � � z\\
NATU'RA E.ATU' EIS
/63
TIME WOODS AT flan «30 cucalrioncq
A Rmned Community by Wocdland Nclnc Development, Inc.
•
L]
•
esz
'--.-+ ' -
nnn -� n n -�
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA`{e MA •
INITIAL STUDY
PART I — PFOJECT INFORMATION SHEET — To be completed by applicant
Environmental Assessment Review Poo: $80.OG
For all projects requiring environmental review, this
farm mist be completed and submitted to the Development
Review Committee through the department whore the
project application is made. Upon receipt of this
application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare
Part 11 of the Initial Study, The Development Review
Co =ittee will meet and take action no later than ten
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to be heard. The Committee will make one oZ
three determinations: 1) The project will :lave no
environmental impaet and a Negative Declaration will be -
filed, 2) The project will have an environmantal impact
and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or
3) An additional information report should be supplied
by the applicant giving further information con_erning
the pi.iposed project.
PROJECT TITLF,: The Woods
APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPFANE: Woodland Pacific
Development e/o Dick Seett_ 1111 u 9th Street _Upland. CA 91786
(714) 946 -1802
NAME, ADDRESS. TELEPH n OF PERSON TO
CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: above and Peter
OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS
P1
PARCEL M.)
LIST OTHER PERMUTS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE ANTI
PEDCRAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PEL-IITS:
General Plan amand .* 7..-
IQs
- � b
A!) PROJECT DESCRIPTION ,
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT, The development of detached single - family
units an 149= 12.000 se. ft. lots and 36 - ?0 000 s .ft. lots for a
total of 105 units lus dedtcat on of a 1 acre par w Mrove-
' ment or save as a natural par w, eques r an ac es.
ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE 03F EXISTING AND
PROPOSED BUILDINGS, Ir ANY, 95.5 acre
DESCRIBE THE ENVIRON?2NTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE
INCLUDING INFORIATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES),
ANIMA:.S, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE
OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ArY -
EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS),
Cne Attachment
s `-
y..
4
Is the project, part of a larger project, or.e of a series
Of cur- ulativo actions, whi.h although individually small,
may as a whole have significant enviromental inpact?
np
WILL TNTS PROJECT,
ITS W •
x 1. Create a substantial Change in ground
contours?
X 2. Create a substantial change in existing
noise or vibration?
X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for
municipal services (police. fire, mater,
sew"e, etc.)?
X _ 4. Create changes in the existing zonJng or
general plan designations?
x _ 5: Remove any existing trees? How many?
, X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of
potentially hazardous materials such as
toxic substances, flammable* or explooives?
Explanation of any M answers above, (5) The project, by cotno
IMPORTANT, If the project involves the construction of
residential units, complete the form on the
next page.
CERTIFICATION: I hercby certify that the statements furrished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and
information required for this initial evaluation to the
beat of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to the best of
m> knowledge and belief. I further understand that
additional information may be required to be submitted
baforo an adequate evaulation can be made
Revi L"I Committee. the Davalaa c
Date / j%! i�3./9,pj__. 5Z Signatures Akk
Title ,�/% /,,,'ice /,l ` k
x3
'�-
a
•
"�SIDZNTIAL MISTMICTION
The following information should be pr.vided to tho City of Rancho Cucamonga
Plcaning Division in order
to aid in assessing the ability of th^
sc:eoul district to accomoodata the proposed residential dovelopcent.
Nara of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Woodland Pacific Develoomxnt Inc.
f
Specific Location of Projects Hermosa Avenue, North lof3Hillside
PHASE I PHASE a PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL
of single
"
family units:
2.
r:c -`er of multi ?le
fr— :ly units:
'.3.
Data pto to
eL•aa_n
^osod
cc..ctruction.
4.
Earliest _ate of
The development will have six phases as indicated
Ftcdnl a on the phasing exhibit. Construction activities
and a of Tentative will start approximately 120 days after recordation
' S.
Dad=-e -s Price Hance with each phase approximately 6 mnths apart.
-?
c
M9
nt
t^
{u
iz
119 16
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING - THE WOOOS
Topography
0
Located at the base of the San Bernardino National rarest,
The Woods has a high elevation in the northeast corner of
2170 feet above sea level droiping to a low point along
the southern boundary line of 1960 feet above sea level
(1920 within the drainage area) The overall gradient of
the site is 10%, with the slope running from north to
south.
Running through the site in a northeast to southwest
direction is a natural drainage course. That portion of
the site west of the drainage area has a gradual sloping
condition toward the drainage areas. That portion east of
tLe drainage area, although also havfng a gradual change,
slo Dos easterly forming the western limits of the drainage
area (see attached USGS map).
The development concept for this project results in mini-
mal grading with greding only for streets, access, and
housing structure.
Vegetations
Approximately 80% of the site is densely olanted with red
gum eucalyptus (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) approximately
65 years old. The densely planted conditions of the site
have not permitted the average tree diameter formation,
however, overall the trees are in good condition.
The limits of the densely planted conditions are shown on
the following exhibit. As can be seen from this exhibit,
the groves do not exist on the most easte-n and western
port'ons on the site.
The 'WOOos• plan, will preserve the maximum number of trees
Possibly restricting tree removal to that necessary for
streets, access, budding envelope and fire station.
Additionally, those areas not now Planted will have intro-
duced euralyptus
Riparian habitat exist in the natural drainage areas of
the site and will be preserved In the prrk area
Soils
The site lies in the northwestern portion of the San
Bernardino Valley In an area of granular alluvial soils.
These soi1S. derived fr000 the San Ga7riel Mountains, have
been aepos,ted to greet aeptnS
/7 y
r 1
����"�r , ��. fir•
i�
N
7
..,. J � `.. - -1_... - • � call t t � : 1
r� i-- ��,.- :z.t___ -- ter— . �i `-• dyT.,.�f-' �-
N G A --1✓ i... ..........� �-
i � as
:2t `' .J t�•y aif (:. :y� ,t.e __ _ -iy _ .J�aL�•uD` � �.�.. `~ \
i
- 7,
A Planned Community by Woodland Pacific Development, Ina J
Soils in this L-ea are part of the Tujunga - Soboba AsSaCia-
• tion A soil association Is a landscape that has a dis-
tinctive proportional pattern of soils. Specifically,
these soils are of the Soboba gravel y, loamy sand series
(SOC), are nearly levol to moderately sloping, and are
excessively drained. Runoff on these soils is very slow,
erosion hazard is slight, and the degree of limitation for
septic tank absorption fields is also slight.
Test holes encountered surface layers of light brown to
dark yellow -brown silty sands with gravel, cobbles, and
boulders underlain by dark grey -brown sands with gravel,
cobbles, and boulders, or red -brown very silty sands with
gravel, cobbles, and boulders, which are further underlain
by light drown sandy gravels with cobbles and boulders to
the maximum depth penetrated
N full soils engineering report prepared by Richard Mills
Associates, Inc 9223 -C Archibald Avenue; Rancho
Cucamonga. CA 91730, (714) 989 -1751, is available upon
request The study did not indicate that soils would be a
Problem during this developneot of the site provided
guidelines are followed.
Seismicity
The woods is located largely on the northwest extremity of
• the Deer Canyon alluvial fan th the upper San Bernardino
Valley.
The northmost portion of the property extends locally into
the foothills of the San Gabriel Hountains and, is tran-
sected by the Cucamonga fault. An Alquist- Priolo Special
Studies Zone has been established for this fault. Bedrock
exposures are limited to the
fault foothills area north of the
The potentially active Cucamonga fault cuts across the
northern part of the property It is typically a thrust
fault striking h60 -81E and dippino 'rom zero to 19 degrees
north Significant local variations in strike and dip
suggest an uneven thrust plane. The southerly dip has
been noted in adjacent areas along the Cucamonga fault.
It may represent a 'tectonic - slide' feature: the movement
of the eoge of the thrust Plate downstope across the land
surface during repeated fault mnvemznt
The maximum credible earthquake magnitude for the
Cucamonga fault, and for other active or potentially
ct iva faults that shaulC be considered In design are
listed below:
r
Y
S
J.
J
w
Distance to Magnitude Maximum
Site (M1.) Credl -lel
San Andreas 10 8.5
San Jacinto 7.5 7 5
Whittier 20 7.5
Cucamonga On -Site 6.5 -7 0
A full seismicity report is available from Richard Mills
Cuca-
monga. CA Inc.. 173 9
, (714) 9891. Avenue, upon request.
equest. Said
investigation indicates that the site is considered feas-
ible for development within the limitation end require-
ments contained within the seismicity investigation.
Groundwater
Small seeps representing local groundwater occurrences
concentrated by the clay faultgouge were noted In the
northwest portion, but were not in evidence on the exist-
ing 9 ound surface.
A small spring discharging less than an estimated 1 gal/
min. was noted about 130 feet north - northeast of the
northeast property corner. Hater from this spring was not
in evidence on the site.
Surface pater flowing at an estimated rate of 1 gal. /min.
disappeared into the alluvium (Qal) at the existing sub -
drain located approximately 325 feet northeasterly of the
Hermosa Avenue cul -de -sac.
The Seismic Refraction Survey suggests a possible Isolated
groundwater table at depths of 45 -75 feet along Seismic
Lines 3.
Drainage Analysis
The woods Is bounded on the north by the Los Angeles
'apartment of Mater 6.d iowsr Transmission line right -of-
way and the south by x county roadway
A drainage review of the site was made by the County Flood
Control District In the late 1960's and the Information is
contained In their file 106.0302. A drainage study made
for this report yields results consistent with District's.
0
L]
Comprehensive Storm Drain Project No. 2 (CSOPt), System
No 3, 's intended to serve the area Construction of the
• Corps of Engineers' Hillside Basin and Channel are re-
quireo before the CSOP2 system can function adequately as
proposed.
Approximately 750 acres, offsite, drain to and across the
site. Of these, about 484 acres will be intercepted by
the Hillside Basin and Channel System, construction of
which is currently scheduled to commence in the spring of
1982 Development of the site prior to 1982 must allow
for the possibility of flows from the approximately 390
acres ( drainage from Hillside Creek as well as the
approximately 94 acres east of the Hillside Creek drainage
boundary and north of the proposed Hillside Channel.
Existing drainage Improvements on the site, constructed in
connection with the Improvement of Hermosa Avenue, include
from north to south respectively, a 480 CGrruggated Metal
Pipe (CMP), 30" CMP, two 24' CMP and a double 6' x 3'
Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert (RCB). (Plate 4) Their
respective capacities, assuming one foot of head at the
entrance before overflow onto the street, are 100 cfs, 40
cfs, 25 cfs and 290 cfs. With the exception of the 48'
CMP, these capacities are adequate for the 10 -year dis-
charges. Required capacity for the 48' CMP is 133 cfs.
Capacity of the double 6' x 3' RC8 is sufficient to handle
' • the 1GO -y ,r discharge once the Corps' Hillside Basin and
Channel Improvements are completed.
In addition to the improvements listed above, a County
Flood Control channel bounds the property on the south, a
large natural channel traverses it near the west line and
I�>
a large channel, part of the earlier water spreading
system, runs north to south near the east property line.
+
This latter channel serves about 8.5 acres of the most
...
easterly part of the property. Its tributary area will be
practically eliminated by construction of the Corps' p -oj-
ect
The complete drainage report 1s available from Associated
Engineers, 316 East •E' Street; Ontario, CA 91764. This
report details the Improvement that will accompany devel-
opment
Existing Development
Existing development on -site Is limited to Hermosa Avenue,
e
a concrete reservoir In the southwest portion, a forest
service road along the north property line, several un-
paved Internal roads and paths and small oorzon pits on
`y
the northwest The site utilizltion mcp filed as part of
this application graphically describes surrounding land
h Ana
uses.
J9 N
4
Rego 2
{{
TES MAYBE No
a. Changes In currents, or the course of direction
r
of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral straom
a- !
channels?
b Changes In absorption rates, drainage patterns .
or the rate and amount of surface water
runoff?
—
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood
wtars?
—
t
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any
body of water?
o. Discharge into surface waters, or any
alteration of surface water quality?
_
f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics?
g Change in the qusntity of groundwators,
either through direct additions or wf• «-
dravals, or through Snterferenct with an
aquifer?
Quality?
Quantity
h. The reduction in the amount of water other-
wise available for public water supplies?
I. Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such " flooding or *niches?
—
t 7
Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant
,
results In:
!'
a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobilo
}
or indirect sources?
Stationary sources?
b Deterioration of ambient air quality .nd /or
Interference with the attainment of a,plieable
/
?
air quality standards?
c. Alturation of local or regional climatic
conditions, affecting air movement, sisturo
or temperature?
--
G.
Kota
Flora. will the proposal have significant results
in:
S.
a e
a Change in the charaeterietics of species,
Including diversity, distribution, or number
:*
of any species of plants?
{
-,
b. Reduction of the nmbors of any unique, rare
or endangered species
/ ---=
of plants?
V _ _
r'
C 1
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAVONaA
PART II - INITIAL SrUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
APPLICANT: �C-
PILING DATE:_ dh'?/k Loa NMOER
1 1
PECJECI LOCATION:_ f{p,Y)itCra- hl/�F?CIIS�.I ti
I L-MIR".1ENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are saquired
on attathud
sheets)
TES MAYBE NO
1 Soils and Ccoloay. Will the proposal have
significant results ins
•
a. Umtable ground conditions, or in changes in
geologic ralatiomhipsi
_ -V
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
burial of the soil?
_ , /
�c
c. Change in topography or ground surface
contour intervals?
-�
d The destruction, covering or modification
Of any unique geologic or physical features?
a. Any potential increase .a wind or water
erosion of sells, affecting nithar on or sff
site cond1tons7
f Change„ in croelon siltation, Or deposition?
_
k'
g Exposure of peopla or propit•v eo geo,oSlc
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud-
slides, ground failure, or similar hatanis7
x,
h An increase ir. tra rata of extraction and /or
..
use of any mineral resource?
_ --
t�
2. llydroloaq, Will the proposal have significant
S
'
results in:'t
'
�•
1
/
_�+e_ytM
��
a�
- 1
CONCIiWAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN
1FE =.
....q`.�...I�...,a. � =•�-r= =--ter
14 1
A.f..I..lp
µ �
• w.w•mom r. �rtn.
�1
rw.a.x.wI nw
M' ' Iuw
D7=.j
l
TY'ICAL FINISH GRADING PLANS
I 7 �».
THE 4 COM 47.aajDtj4O m ccBr
A,f1wrted carnxWtY byVkddlaxl P--cilic
- im i ^ r bY"p6 .
1
�.ss.uar..sw
t1?�k
ar�2F
TY'ICAL FINISH GRADING PLANS
I 7 �».
THE 4 COM 47.aajDtj4O m ccBr
A,f1wrted carnxWtY byVkddlaxl P--cilic
- im i ^ r bY"p6 .
•
•
i
■
Page 7
YES MAYBE NO
c. Introduction of new or;fisruptive species of
plants into an area?
d. Reduction in the potedtAl for agricultural %
production?
FaFa. a. Will the proposallhbe significant results
In:
a, change in the eharactailfitics of species,
including diversity, dfefributlon, or numbers
of any species of animalgt
_
n•
b. Reduction of the numbart-'of any unique, rare
or endangered species oFanlm:ts?
c. Introduction of nev it disrurtive species of
/
animals into an e:aa, or result in a barrier
to the migra a m or navefient of animals?
_
d. Deterioration or rmovalraf existing fish or
/
wildlife habitat?
_✓ -
5 Population. will the proposal have signlflunt
results ins es
a. Will the proposal altertUa location, distri-
bution, density, diversity, or grouch rate of
the humu population of-'in area?
_
b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or
/ w
create a demand for additional honing?
�/ 1
6. Socio- Economic Factors. Wil. cha proposal have
significant results in:
a. Change in local or regibilbl soclo- economic
characteristics, including aeonamic or
commercial diversity, tek rate, and property
values? stt^
b. Will project costs be ekalitably distributed
among project bnseficiaries, i.e., buyers,
tax payers or project uses?
u l;
,•
7. Land Use and Pl.:nnlnq Considerations. Will the
proposal have significant r alts in?
`
0
a. A substantial alteratioh of the present or
planned land use of as area?
b. A conflict with any deakInatfons, objectives,
-}F
;
Policies. or adopted plus of any governmental
entities?
✓/ '
C. An impact upon Cho qulafty or quantity of
existing coniumpfive oe'dbn- consumptivo
'
- r~crreationzI opportunities?
_ • ^� ` "pa
n a
C
s
,y
Vega G h'
-ES MAYBE NO
S. Transportation. 'dill the proposal have significant
results fns
- a. Generation of sucstantial additional vehicular /
movement?
b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for
new street construction? _
• c. Effects on existint; parking facilities, or —
demand for new parking?
,- d. Subs sntfal impact upon existing transport&- -
-- don, systems?
e
a. Alterations to present patterns of circula-
tion or movement of people and /or goods?
f. Alterations to or effcats an prestat and
potential voter -borne, rail, saes transit or
air traffic? r • __
S. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vuhiclas,
bicyclists or pedestrians? _
t 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have
significant results in: •
a. A disturbance to the Sntegrl_y of archaeological,
Paleontological, and /or historical resourcos? 1/
• 10. Health. Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Will the
proposal have significant results in:
■. beuriT of any health hazard or potential health /
.� _k
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? ,/r/
} ?• e. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous
r substances in the event of an accident?
d. An increase in the number of individuals
• or cpacies of vector or pathenogenic
organisms or the exposure of people to such
organisms? __% ✓
o. Increase in existing noise levels? ✓
t f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous
noise levels?
.,
g. The creation of objectionable odors? �
FF,
d. An inernasa in light or Clara? _ ,. •S�
a Yii?I�1'Sp•T�C.£.•�t'•- `'111•vh pe"•�`a•,•r.`i'yd �-: �Q _ r ,�' v v'h`+16. :ter+•
rage 5.
' 1 x?S MAYBE No
11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
5
H • a. 1'Ft obstruction or degradation of any scenic
+, vista or view? — —_ —
b. !1e creation of an aesthetically offensive
•, r •q ✓
C. n v.afliet with the objective of designated
or potential scenic corridors?
12. Utilities and Public Servic". Will the proposal
•• have a significant need far new syattms, or
alterations to the following:
i^ a. E: ectric power? _ ✓ _
b. W,tural or packaged gas? ✓ _
e. Comaunications system? _
{ - ��-
d Wacor supply? -
a. Wastewater facilities? -
!^ f. Flood control structures?
g Solid waste facilities? V ,/
h. Fire protection? _
!. Police protection?
J. Schools?
r
4 k. Parks or other recreational facilities? _
^ 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads and flood control facilities? — ✓ —
d I
m. Ocher governmental cervices? i —✓
13 Energy and Stares Resources. Will the proposal
'r have significant results int
`r
a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? _ Jr
b. Substantial increase in d nd upon existing
�ryryTT sources of energy?
C. An increase In the demand for development of =—
new sources of enargy7 _. • ..
�• d. An Increase or perpetuation of the consumption
''�;• of non - renewable fQ=1 of energy, when feasible . ++;r'r.
+; renewable sours of energy are available?
t {�li`t, c"...'a•lj iv p +- -ra'- _,t�•.f. -+r+Lr �•. �,Sf�,
0
0
r Fagu 6`
` YES NAYBE NO
c substantial depletion of any oonrenecebla or
m -- /
eraree otral resource?
14. Nandatory Findings of Significance.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self sustaining levels, threaten to
e1Ir1mte a plsut or snianl community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
importyat examples of the major periods of /
^.alifornla history or Frebistory? _ _✓
b. Doa. the project have the potential to achieve
short -cam, to the disadvantage of long -tem.
envisomental goals? (A short -term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a relat'vely
brief, definitive period of time while long.. --
tem impacts will endure well into the future).
c Does the project have impacts which are
Individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (Cumulatively considerable
means that the incremental affects of m
11 • l
0-
individual project am considerable what viewed •
In connection with the affects of past projects, /
and Probable future projects).
�. Does the project have anviromental effects
whi 41L cam* substantial adverse affects
on r•. -a beings, either directly or indirectly?
II. _OISCLSSION OF ENVIRO`MYTAL EVALUATION (S.a., of affirmative amvcn to
tan above questions plm a d�iscuuss-io%n of proposed mitigation measures).
s
^t
�i
24
y
r
Page 7
! III. OL CER:I[:LITION
On the basis of thia initial evaluations
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a aignificant effect
�+� C on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
in this case because he mitigation measures described on in
attached sheer have L..; added to the project. A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION WILL BE prup:110.
I find the proposed projetc MAY h..ve a significant effect on the
anvirno.ont, and an ENVIRONMENT WACT REPORT is required.
Date
Inac
i� -
r
a
4'
t
r
f
ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11933 1'
Explanation of 'yes" and "maybe" answers:
1 Soils and Geolunv
(c) The applicant intends to maintain the existing natural grade
wherever possible. This 1s to be accomplished by grading only for streets,
access, and the building footprint.
(e) E (f) The grading and drainage plan incirates that a number
of lots will drain into the existing natural drainage courses. Construction
on this site will increase the amount of surface water runoff, therefore, in-
crease the volume of water in these natural drainage courses which could re-
sult in water erosion of soils affecting off -site conditions. No improvements
to the drainage courses on-site or off -site are proposed, other than culverts
under the street
(n) The northern most portion of the property is transected by the
Cucamongi Fault An Alquist- Priolo special study zone has been established
for this fault The maximum magnitude of an earthquake on the Cucamonga
Fault 3t this location is projected at 6.5 to 7 on the Richter Scale, there-
fore cnuld exicise people or property to potentially significant geologic
hazards
llycrolog
(b) Conatriction will increase the area covered by buildings and
paved areas which will reduce rain and flood water absorption rates and
will increase the amount of surface water runoff.
(i) Development of the site could concentrate runoff water, particularly
In the existing natural drainage courses, which could result in potentially
significant flooding hazards both on -site and off -site.
4. Flora
(a) d (b) The project site is commonly known as the Hermosa Groves, and approx-
imately 80% of the site 1s densely planted with Red Gum Eucalyptus approximately
5 years old The proposed development has been designed to restrict tree re-
moval to the minimum necessary for streets, access, building envelope, and fire
protection The most western and eastern portions of the project site are out-
side the grove and are proposed to be planted with Eucalyptus. A•Tree Removal
Permit would be required from the City of Rancho Cucamonga for those trees meeting
the size criteria of the Tree Preservation Ordinance, which are protected by same.
Fauna
(a) The development of this site for human habitation will have an
effect on the diversity, distribution, and number. of species of animals
Inhabiting the site.
,,
0
s
c �
Addendum to Environmental Checklist for TT 11933 -2-
S. Population
(a) The protect site is desigrated a park site in the General Plan
for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and has a land use density of just under
2 dwelling units per acre. However, to preserve a 14.6 acre park along
the western portion of the site, 149 of the lots are proposed to be in the
12,000 square foot range, The surrounding properties are designated very
low (less than 2 dwelling units per acre)resldential on the General Plan
and are presently zonad R- 1- 20,000. Therafore, the project will elter
the density and growth rate of the human popu'.tion in this area.
7 Land Use and Planning Considerations
(a) d (b) The proJect site is designated as a park in the City's General
Plan, and the proposed development includes a 14.6 acre park. Computing
the dwelling unit density based upon excluding the 14.6 acre park from the pro-
ject site results in a density of 2.3 dwelling units per acre, whicli is
in conflict with the very low residential density established by Lire
General Plan for this area of Alta Lorna.
B. Transportation
is (a). n (d) This project will generate increased vehicular traffic
volo which will effect existing streets and require new street con-
struction and potentially iapact existing transportation systems
(g) The proposed development will result in an increase to the population
for the area and associated vehiculdr traffic. The 14.6 acre park shown
on the development plans does not indicate off -street parking facilities.
Both of these facto's could potentially result in traffic hazards to
motor vehicles, pedestrians, or olcyclists.
10. Health. Safetv. and Nuisance Factors
(e) Increase in noise levels resulting from this project will be pri-
marily due to increased vehicular traffic and normal human activities in a
residential area Noise levels will temporarily increase during construction.
11 Aesthetics
(b) This site. commonly known as the Hermosa Grove, is reroanized as a
significant natural resource for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the develop-
ment of the site could result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive
site
12. utilities and Public Services
The construction of this project may require extensions or modifi-
cations in some or all of tde utilities and public services noted in the Environ-
rental Checklist. The most significant impacts would be upon fire protection
services.
M
1, N 1
1 'st
Addendum to Environmental Checklist for TT 11993 • nY
to
14 Mandatory findings of Significance
(a) The development of this project may have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment. -
(d) This project may have environmental effects which may cause sub-
stantial adverse affects on human beings. either directly or indirectly.
^I+t'i�4,Yeµ2r� ��w;r�``.r•'.b i'�= `ni...:' .r: �.
•
•
r
Y
January 7, 1981
`_ Ch 10
DEVELOPMENT, INC. L` d L 19 E D
CIi i OF RANCK CUCAAIONGA
coullu"I " tkl'EI OPdENT DEPT,
,r.'1 i j Ij'd <'
AM
71819 %U112t112tU14,5a
Mr. Jack Lam
Director of Community Development A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P 0. Box 8 7
9340 Baseline Road, Unit A
Rancho Cucamonga, Cali!ornia 91730
RE: The Woods
Dear Hr Lam:
Please consider this letter to constitute a request for a 60 day
extension for our appeal of the Environmental Impact Report
requirement on the above referenced property
Due to the negotiations with the Parks 6 Recreation Department
for irchase of a portion of the property we are preparing amended
pldns for submission.
We thAnk you for your assiotance in thin mater.
Vey s'ncerely yo u2
a,
,!�� ?.
Richard N ptt, L.lairman of the Board
Woodland P fic Dcvelopment, Inc.
P.NS:vavu
_ 200
tilt WESTNINTHSTREET • UPLAND. CALIFORNIA 91766 • 714.949.1602
,
MY OF RANCHO CHO C6Il.f1IYMYlYj
r_
SFAFF REPORT
Y• DATE: February 3, 1982
TO Members of the City Council and City Manager
FROM: Jack Lam. AICP, Director of Ceammnity Levelopment
SUBOECT: PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT REIMBURSEMENTS
5
/7•
Oftentimes occasions arise where development projects may be enhanced
by providing public improvements that go beyond the applicant's property
and where la such cases the applicant agrees to put such public improve-
ments in provided there is reimbursement for such expenses if and when
the adjacent property /properties develop. Such public improvements of
course would be a normal requirement of such pi• nerties if and when these
develop, but in the meantime, the original applican6 will put in place
these improvements if there are assurances of some reimbursement, At-
tached is an ordinance that provides for such reimbursement at the time
of application for a building permit for those lots or parcels of land
with respect to which frontage improvements have been installed pur-
suant to a reimbursement agreement. This would allow the recapture
of costs of the improvements at the time the adjacent lots or parcels
are developed. The applicant benefits because safe Improvements may
enhance the project; the City benerits because more improvements are
put in place often providing improved safety; and adjacent property
owners benefit because improvements are put in place at a present del -
lar cost. No costs are incurred until such property develops at which
time the developer would normally have to pm, - these improvements
anyway. This type of reimbursement arrangement is common in all cities
and is utilized by special d' tracts such as water districts to pay for
the cost of water and sewer l.,ics. The Rancho Cucamonga City Code pre -
,, sently does not have this provi.'an and such an inclusion would help
In solving many public improvement situation[ in the City.
C RECOtMENDATION: Staff recommends that City Council adopt the Ordinance
mpsaiing a fee payable at the time of application for a building permit
for those lots or parcels of land with respect to which frontage im-
provements have been installed pursuant to a reimbursement agreement.
Re pectf 11 submit ed.
rk. JACK LAM. AICP
Community Development Director
JL:jk _•i
Attach.
yY�+��J/ -� :;aye_, •: � i w, ��e ` /16 P
DATE
CITY OF RANU10 CLrAh.1Q \GA
STAFF REPORT
March 17, 1982
TO. Members of the City Council and City Manager
FROM: Jack Lam. AICP. Director of Community Development
BY: Joan A. Kruse, Adojnistrative Secretary
SUBJECT: PUBLIC IHFROVERERT REIMBURSEMENTS
S
At Council's request this item was continued to this date in order
to allow for further review of the procedure and agreement for
public improvement reia+Oursements as well as to receive input from
the Buildinr Industry Association Discussion with the BIA is con-
tinuing and it is anticipated that all necessary work on tim agree-
ment will be completed within the next two weeks.
RECOMMENDATION•
It is recommended that this item be continued to the April 7. 1982
Council meeting.
Community Devel
JL JK:jk
VN 4 '
i
t
oRDIMANCE NO. 1'70
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, IMPOS143 A FEE PAYABLE
AT THE T114E OF APPLICATION FOR A BUILDING PERMIT FOR
THOSE LOTS OR PARCELS OF LAND WITH RESPECT TO WHICH
FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED PURSUANT
TO A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
The City Courrll of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California,
does ordain as follows
SECTION 1: Chapter 12.08 of Title 12 of the Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Zo'oe s amended by adding Section 12.08.075 thereto to read as t
follows
,
'Sec 12.08.015. Rimbusement agreement fee.
"If a frontage Improvement was constructed under
or pursuant to a reimbursement agreement between the -
City and another person along a street adjoining a
tot or parcel of land on which a building, or other
structure requiring a building permit, is to be con-
structed, altered or enlarged, then
a(a) The applicant for the building permit shall
pay to the City, at the time the application is sub-
mitted, all sums necessary to pay the reimbursement
sum apportioned to such lot or parcel by the terms of
the reimbursement agreement; and
the sums required itonbeppaidtbyhsub- section (a)noflthis
section are paid.a.
SECTION 2: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City
Clerk shall' attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same
to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage, at least
once to the Oa�11� Re crt, a newspaper of general iirculc ion. circulated
In the City of -Banc o ucamonga, California.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 3rd day of Febr- ry, 1982.
AYES:
HOES: f
7
i.
ABSENT: tr
M NN st- •II i ^ Q .N•
*.-,'. aS�.° ax' Ty: r��T��� „.vtiS.n?!r�'fv~`'.- "'�.^.'*� >u
ri
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: rarch 17, 19•,2
TO: City Council and City Manager
FROM: Lloyd B. Eubbs, City Engineer
BY: Shinto Bove, Associate Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Request for Waiver of Off -Site Improvements for
Director Review 81 -32 located on the mast side
of Etiwanda Avenue, south of grow Route
Ms. Jackie Smith, the owner of the property at 8585 Etiwanda
Avenue, is requesting a waiver of the requirement of Etiwanda
Avenue widening in connection with the apF�oval of Director
Review 61 -32 for the development of a new industrial building
on the au1`;ect property. The project was approved by the City
Planner and the environmental documents were issued by the
Planning Commission at its regular meeting held on October 28,
]981.
Previously a project on the subject property was approved order
Director Review 80 -25 for the addition to the exist':g metal
building, the approval of which has since expired. At that time,
the conditions of approval provided far the deferment of off -
site improvements with a lien agreement until such time as the
circulation element of the General Plan was approved.
Two recently completed projects just south of the subject site,
which were approved prior to adoption of the General Plat, pro-
vided liens for future construction of the street. Amercn Pipe
Co. is planning to widen, within a year's time, the west side of
Etiwanda Avenue adjacent to their property which is just across
from the subject site. It is our intent to call on those two lien
agreements along with this project, so that A substantial portion
of Etiwanda Avenue can be widened from Whittram Street to Arrow
Rou
it is recommended that Council dery the request for the waiver of
Etiwanda Avenue widening.
i
ty..
z�
r C Cih• of
RA N • June 26, 1980 �, (I
,}
Y R.S. Conructton Co. Inc'
+ 2491 Ru'idouetx @oulevard
Riverside, California 92509
Attn: Gene Seise
Subj: ,$.',a "'r Review�tlo BO_�Z• _ A 2,304 square toot addition to an
industrla buiil ding located at 8585 Square Etlwanda f Avenue
r Dear Applicant:
The development review process for the above described project has been
sucrelafully completod and approval has been granted based upon the following
duringgthisdProcess.onThis processuIsoProvidedatolensureoa timely andaadequate
Positive-
experience involved sincerely hope
Process has been a
fourteen (la) day appeal period beginning with the date of receipt of this
letter
••nd lnai:
S A. That the site Indicated by the development plan is adequate in site and
shape to accrogdate the proposed use and all yards, spaces, walls,
fences, park ng, loading, landscaping and other features „required
B. That the Improvements as indicated on the development plan are located
In such a manner as to be properly related to existing and proposed
streets and highrays
C That the improvements as shown on the development plan are consistent
with a41 adopted standards and policies
0. The project is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan.
E That the project will not cause significant adverse impacts upon the
environment
APPLItt.'IT SHALL CONTACT THE PLARNInG DIYISI011 FOR CO7IPLIANCE WITH THE FOlLO'A111G
CONDITIONS
1 Site shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plans on file
in the Planning Division and the ;onditions contained herein.
2 Approval of this request shall not wafve compliance with all sections of
s the Zoning Ordinance and ail other applicable City Ordinances In effect
at time of Building Permit issuance
.5� Ptlq'iRl(t A(tSIa7. Rl \i ltll(I't.tw0 \(. \. i. \U(OHCil vtan. 711 9a7•I931 ' ,
t
4
x
J. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being cormenced
thereon, all conditions of approval contained here" shall be completed
to the satisfaction of the Director of community Development.
a. All parking spaces shall be double striped.
S. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted to and approved
b; the planning Division prior to issuance of building permits.
6 Street trees, a minimum of 15 gallon size or larger, shall be installed
in accordance with the Halter Plan of street trees for the city of Rancho
Cucamonga and shall be planted at an average of every 20' on exterior
Streets.
7. All landscaped areas shall be maintained In a healthy and thriving condi-
tion. free from weeds, trash, and debris.
8 A dense, 'fast growing shrub,
ac average of every 20' a minimum of 15 gallon size, shall be planted
treees s on exterior streets, alternating with the street
g Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed In conformance
with the,Comprehensive Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval
by the Planning Division prior to installation of such signs
APPLICNN SHALL r-0NTACT THE BUILDING
DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
10 The applicant shall comply wft4 the latest adopted Uniform Building Code,
Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Elettrie Code, and
all other applicable codes and ordinances in effect at l E time of approval
of this project.
11 Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence
shall be submitted to the Foothill District FIre Chief that water supply
for fire protection is available.
12 Prior to the Issuance of a building permit for a new commercial or
industrial development or addition to an existfhg development the applicant
Shall Day development fees at the established rate Such fees may include,
but not be limited to. Systems Deselopment Fee, Drainage Fee, Permit and
Plan Checking fee:
13 This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not
Issued for this project w1, 1, In one year from the date of project approval.
APPLICANT SHALL CO'ITACT THE ENGRIEERl" DIVISION FOR CDNPLINICE WiTH THE
FOLLOWING SHALL CO!15:
14
i
i
c
IS- Adequate provisions shall be made for the ingress, engress, and internal
circulation of any trucks which will be used for delivery of goods to
the property or in the Operation of the proposed business.
16. Con truer i,tis
17. Prior to any work being performed in the public right -of -way, an encroach-
ment perndt and fees shall be obtained from the Cf'ty Engineer's Office, in
addition to any othar pOrmfts required.
IS. Street Improvement plans aporoved by the City Engineer and prepared by a
He9lstered Civil Engineer shall be required, for all street fmprovements,
prior to Issupnce of an encroachment permit.
19
r 20. The applicant will ae responsible for construction of all onsite drainage
facilities required by the City Engineer.
,
21. All proposed'utillties within the project shall be installed underground
Inctudfng utilities along major arterials less than 12 KV.
} • 22 Utility easements shall be provided to the specification of the serving
utility companies and the City Engineer.
23 Developer shall be responsible for the relocation of sxittin9 public
utilities, as required.
24 Hater and sewer system plans shall be designed and constructed to meet
requirements of the Cucamonga County Hater Olstri,t (CCHD), Foothill Fire
District 4nd the Environmental Health Department of the County of San
rertno q letter of campllance
re cecrrdadat'on from CCHG will be required prior to
Sincerely,
COl111111TY DEVELOPHEIIT DEPARTMEUT
C�P,LADtIVIG DIVISIOH
MICIIAEL VAIPIH
Associate Planner
Ira Dc Cd
213
t
.'i2IVEa
"Y CF Pj',NCHO CUCAMONGA
February 17, 1982 CU- kborry 0iN'DOYMINi DEPT.
r -3 17 im
AM PM
MAIDAIZ 1121319 M
ll
City of Rancho Cucmonga
P.O. Box 807
Rancho 0xz0Q yZa, CA 91730
Attention: Lloyds B�Jtbbs ���;ZFi
8�,-
Reference: Director review #00'--25 8 I81 - 32
Gentlemen:
1:e are in the process of building a new building or adding
stn
locaMa 85SSS Etiwanda Avenue. * End din gecauoicall
impossible to do the street lWovecents at the present
time and are requesting a waiver for construction, of street
1--pxovenents.
NO would
this � appreciate apprete any help you could give us to expedite
Very truly 'rotas,
C- w;,Z-
. Investments
i
J A. Smith
JAS:jp
r
•
1-77 -
�_'j a
t
l
0
1
92CEIVED
CITY OF RAWIO Ct AMtM A
ADMINiSrP.AnON
MAk 11992
Sh9hlatlt�ls?tsi4hSiG /
March 1, 1982
P.O. Box 346
Etiwamda, CA 91739
City Council Members
City of Rancho Cucamonga,
Rancho Cucamonga
Gentlaam: ,
Due to fact that we could not resolve the matter of a waives
for the stmt iq=vm=ts with the City rmgineering Office
for our building Project at 8585 Etiwanda Avenue; we an
requesting a hearing before the city council on 1Rdnesday
Wrch 17, 1982.
Thardc you for your consideration in this matter.
JAS:jP
i
Very truly yours,
J. & S IhNF —S-0 M
A.
���
J. with
sip - 17141
.1s
Y
ARROW R'TE i
AMERON PIPE CO. ty,•X' . ?' '•`
EXI SL
i •1 °,, :a i•.::�L'.r:.•t Sri
t �r PROJECT• ;�'•
� Q 71 .•. .i • K '1v r. y, i
' AREA a'a'i j...
provosed
tar rtda,
•
NEW BLDG. ,0)
(LIEN AGREEMENT) I I
1
Vacant m i -
NEW
BLD4
(U t4
t o eo
Vacant
i X17
' JJJI
t � m
3 EXISL ...
ill f o
.li iti 1
COFFM
C
tl
CITY OF FAIVCHO CUG11\t0 \CA ntreeter RL i yy
�L gL 5 ENGINEERING DIVISION
VICINITY MAP lv
ale
• COUNTY -CITY LAND SALE AGREEIENT
THIS AGREEMENT, dated March 17, 1982, is between the COUNTi
OF SAN 'oRHARDINO, a public entity and agency ("COUNTY•), and the CITY
OF RAI.CHO CUCAMONGA ('CI1f'), a general law city organized pursuant to
California law.
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, the COUNTY, a body corporate and politic, is the
owner of certain real property located within the City limits of CITY
consisting of approximately 25.5 acres, more or less, more particularly
described in Exhibit 'A' attached hereto and made a part hereofs and
wHEREAS, the COUNTY has determined to sell to the CITY 8.64
acres of the property iescribed in Exhibit 'A' to be used by the CITY
for the development of a city project for a comprehonsive Civic Center
described more specifically in Exhibit 'B' attached he•:eto and made a
part hereof ( "SITE')! and
WHEREAS. the COUNTY with the concurrence of the CITY is of-
the opinion that tha SITE should be developed as a part of the compre-
hensive Civic Center of the CITY by the construction of certain public
facilities such as a City Hall, Police Building, and Cultural Center,
together with parking facilities, walks, and other appurtenant facili-
ties as contemplatod by this Agreement.
NOW. THEREFORE, in consideration of the payment of
$1.061,182 08, plus cnsts in excess of direct land costs, and the
performance of the mutual promises and agreements heraln contained,
the parties hereto agree as follows:
SECTION 1: Premises.
The COUNTY hereby agrees to sell and the CITY hereby agrees
to buy the SITE, more specifically described in Exhibit 'A', subject
to any conditions, reservations, exceptions and rights- of-way which
may be of record, after review by CITY as set forth below.
SECTION 2: Ownerships Possession.
The COUNT\ covenants that it is the owner of the real
property described in Exhibit 'A' hereof and the COUNTY shall sell to
the CITY 8 64 aces, plus or minus of the total acreage described in
Exhibit 'A'
SECTION 3: Purchane Price and Method of Payment.
The COUNTY agrees to sell said property and CITY agrees to
purchase the SITE as follows:
o''?
The CITY shall pay a purchase price of $1,061,182.08 plus
costs in excess of direct land. costs for the SITE, payable to the
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO as follows: •
(a) The sum of 5750,000 to be paid by check to the order of
COUNTY, to be delivered through escrow on or before the close of
escrow, and the sum of $311,182.08 plus costs in excess of direct land
costs to be paid by check to the order of COUNTY, to be delivered on
or before January 15, 1983. If CITY fails to deliver either said
check, in said amount, as agreed, the portion remaining unpaid of the
total $1,061,182.08 plus costs in excess of direct land costs shall be
payable from CITY's apportionment of secured taxes until full satis-
faction and shall be made payable by a warrant to COUNTY, prepared by
the Auditor - Controller's Department from funds deposited with the
County Treasurer -Tax Collector on behalf of buyer, CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA.
(b) The CITY, following its acquisition of the SITE, shall
assume all taxes and assessments of any nature whatsoever levied upon
the property or CITY's interest therein or upon the CITY's operation
thereof or the CITY's obligation under applicable tax laws.
SECTION 4: Title Insurance.
(a) Preliminary Title Report.
Escrow holder is instructed to procure a CLTA standard •
form policy of title insurance as soon as possible after escrow has
been opened as a prerequisite to insuring title in CITY, issued by
title insurance acceptable to both COUNTY and CITY, in the full amount
of the purchase price and costs herein agreed to be reimbursed pro
rata share by CITY for the SITE, and shows title subject to the
following conditions:
(1) General and special taxes not yet delinquent;
(2) Such recorded covenants, conditions and restric-
tions which might exist thereon unless disapproved by City as provided
below:
(3) Any )Sena, encumbrances, easements, rights -of -way,
rights of record, items, exceptions or conditions which might exist
against title, unless disapproved by CITY as provided below.
(b) Review of Preliminary Title Report.
CITY shall have the right to review the title report
and the items and exceptions shown therein. Should CITY not disapprove
said title report by serving written notice of its objection to any
item thereon to COUNTY within fifteen (15) days after receipt of said
-2-
218
:n
�• title report, it shall be presumed that CITY has accepted the same and
escrow shall no longer be aubjeat to the requirement of CITY's approval
thereof. In the event that CITY shall disapprove said preliminary
title report or any item referred to therein, COUNTY shall use its
best efforts to correct those matters prior to the close of escrow.
SECTICN S: Escrow.
Within ten (10) business days after execution of this
Agreement an escrow covering the sale of the subject property shall be
opened at an escrow mutually acceptable to the COUNTY and CITY, and
each shall execute escrow instructions and such other documents as are
reasonably necessary and convenient to open the escrow and to satisfy
the terms and conditions of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be
referred to and made a part of said escrow instructions where applic-
able and appropriate, and to the extent this Agreement is inconsistent
with or conflicts with said escrow instructions, this Agreement shall
control in all respects. It is the intent of the parties hereto that,
where applicable, the provisions ox this Agreement shall survive the
close of escrow. It is specifically understood and agreed that time
is of the essence of each and every provision hereunder.
SECTION �.: Term of Escrow and Conditions for
Extena one Thereof.
• This escrow shall close no later than 30 days after opening.
The cost of escrow shall be borne equally by the parties hereto.
Texas and insurance premiums, if any, sha'I be shared by the parties
at the close of escrow. Assessments, if any, shall be paid by the
COUNTY and CITY. The cost of title insurance shall be shared by the
COUNTY and CITY. Escrow shall be closed, and possession and title
to the SITE shall be transferred to CITY at close of Escrow.
SECTION 7: Default by Purchaser - CITY.
In the event CITY fails to make any payment of the purchase
price promptly when the same shall become due as therein specified, or
promptly to perform any covenant or agreement herein contair.ed, COUNTY
may elect to specifically enforce this Agreement, or to exercise the
rights given to it under Section 3(a). Service of all demands, notices
or other papees may be mado by aegistered mail at the CITY CT RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, City Hall, 9320 Base Line Road, Unit C, P.O. Box. 807,
Rancho Cucamonga, Califorrin 91730, or at such other address as CITY
may indicate in writing to COUNTY.
SECTION 8: Default by Seller - COUNTY.
.f COUNTY is unablo to convey title in accordance with the
terms of this contract, CITY shall have the right of specific par -
formance.
-3-
Service of such demand may be made by registered mail at the
County Administrative Office, 157 W. Fifth Street, San Bernardino,
California 92415, or say such other address the COUNTY may indicate in •
d writing to CITY.
? SECTION 9: Assignment.
This agreement shall not be assignable by either COUNTY or
CITY without the consent of the other party. However, both parties
ii request that a notice of intention to assign be mailed to the address
ras listed in Section 12 and that only after written approval is given
i by the other party may the assignment in fact be allowed.
SECTION 30: Condition of Promises.
CITY and COUNTY stipulates that a full inspection of the
property has been made and that neither the COUNTY nor their assigns
shall be held to any covenant respecting the condition of any improve-
s ments on the premises, or to any agreement for alterations, improve-
I[
ments, or repairs, unless the covenant or agreement relied on is in
writing and attached to and made a part of this contract.
SECTION 11: Notices.
All notices, statements, demands, requesta, consents,
approval, authorizations, offers, agreements, appointments, or des -
ignations hereunder by either party to the other shall be in writing •
and shall be sufficiently given and served upon the other party, if
sent by United States registered mail, return receipt requested,
postage prepaid and addressed as follows:
COUNTY OF SAN BERWARDINO
COUNTY ADMINIST%ATIVE OFFICE
157 West Fifth Street
San Bernardino, California 92415
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY VJUTAGER'S OFFICE
City Hall, 9320 Base Line Road, Unit C
Post Office Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
SECTION 12: Partial invalidity.
If any one or more of terms, provisions, promises, covenants t
or conditions of this Agreement, or the application thereof to any
person or circumstance, shall to any extent be adjudged invalid,
:d unenforceable, void or voidable for any reason +hatsoever by a Court `
or competent jurisdiction each and all of the remaining terms, pro- t
visions, promises, covenants and conditions of this Agreement, and the ;;
-4-
aao
application thereof to other persons or circumctances, shall net be
� affected thereby, and shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest
el extent permitted by law.
SECTION 13s Attorneys Sees.
a if suit is brought hereon, whothei settled or pursued to
final judgement, or if any attorney is employed and expenses are
incurred to compel performance of this Agreement, or any portion of
this Agreement herein, the undersigned andll pay all attorney fees as
a result oa any action or proceeding, including appeals or further
litigation thereon. As used in this contract, Attorneys Sees refers
to full costs of any and all legal services performed and calculated
on the basis of usual fees charged by attorneys performing these
services and not limited be reasonable fees, as defined in any statute
or ruling of the court, including but not limited to Rule 402, Section
1 of the Los Angeles Superior Court. Chapter XI of the San Bernardino
County Superior Court Rules re Counsel Pees, Rule 1112.1.
0
s^
t,
?4
-5-
■
■
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Land
.,Sale Agreement to be executed and attested by their proper officers •
:-tharounto duly authorized, and their official seals to be hereto
,"affixed, as of the day and year first above written.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ATTEST:
UREN M. WASSERMAN
City Clark of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, CA
ROBERT HAMMOCK, OCR, Chairman
Board of Supervisors
County of Sun Bernardino
APPROVED AS TO PORMs
By:
CHARLES A. DUERBECK
Deputy County Counsel
County of San Bernardino
-6-
Hy:_
PHILLIP D. S NLos l
Mayor of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, CA
P
d
3 NN . N, Repressors ve °;
CountyAdmicistrative office 4
County of San Dernardino •
1
:INTER= OFFICE MEMO
e.
$ DATE July 28, 1981
FROM Senior Right AofE PHONE 3323
Way Agent
To JOHN MICHAELSON
Administrative Analyst
rr=
'SUBJECT WEST VALLEY LF AND JUSTICE CENTER - CUCAMONGA
:+
Listed as follows is a breakdown.of anticipated costs to be
incurred for the acqui &itdon of land for the subject property.
a. Labor charges
Administration, appraisal & negotiations $3,200.00
b. Escrow fees 450.00
c. Title Insurance 6,036.50
d. Title report 100.00
L APPROXIMATE COST $9,78G.50
THS:bch
cc: James L. Matthews
��'ia 1/!7 • �' � f
Xa 3
,e
1
Q
C
r.,t...,v- ,w•e.c.gq
1
�Ct' a _. 7w [aa 17
roues Stoll. na.
y `^^c10 Awe Ctn a cmi.
t6ctuoo"
OU U to rorCity that tbt lutist 1. coal
profits? too 1-4 by the ritbU I.C.s
to the City of Raaam C _ p • City Is-
..,rented aN•r CA, lo. of t%a sue. of
C.12fetsU. U hang ate opted by erd., of
the City Coimll..ad the Cans .aunts
to the "c"datlad tbnnt by As dely
autherl.at Wine.
Oatdi
tyl
■
EAUStc A
Cti, /COCaV LAM sate
Mroexet
ATa01el MA13116 SON- ]51- 10(P.e)
-4a.[ted y I taARi OtID reart..m.rlruwax
well t (b` CAS OOS) l;
I T6• COORIr Co' on tVlAt0[l0. • bed, "[vacate d a "lttle of
the .Pact of CW toad.. harry 47fA ts that Crn Or [AAaO COCAIPICA.
2 W raw bca"rt2 to Yea ilt, of Aescm cousea6a, is the Cent, at
su eaeraNtm. Mutt at 4lttsrala. de.n1bod u follonl
'1 All tie" portloa. of ?A W. 2 of PARCII. NAP b 6733. " M[
4 ,let ,ac.NM 1. boob 67 of Nan- NAB. "lot 4 re 1 1601..1.0. Moodie.
et -Ed ,resat•• aeea W"CoU.1, dua.lbed u toll..
s CPlemCO0 at eia t.t.tseetlad of W eacurllm of CIVIC %=u
s .arTS ffocael ?fpifa Aacm.) 21.00 feet old.. alts fM cacuelli at
"TO ASa..1. ewe ad "u panic Ita91 Cersct March 00' 10 24-
*at dads ..It toot.. ^' NATO AVC,O2.. dt.uaet of 44.01 feat;
tAroea lsaln said etetall," W. 'e' AM 36' test. • ditumm of
101.00 fn[ to • petit to tM Wt Jim at safe !4f0 AT73Tt. "1d valet
ales Was tW Tw Mtn 0P sta"IPCI chcece .e[.lo-, aerch 29' '9
y
36" ease, a elation, of 16.00 feet. IS .'Cie "fat tloctlq tic.
heath CO, 10. 34• feat "rolLl rt A "14 "atilt" or Mom A...
10 a dlsoace of 71.0 feet a elo bestmlas of . utsot Corn coact• to
W Martha.,. hates . 'df" of 50.00 feet, [beet. 2mNt "ti17 does
it "Id wsee, tbrw61, ce ..,I. of CO. 00' Jr. at. d'aume et 72.54 feet,
[Mace tanmt to "td "no. forth N• 49' 36' tuto a d "came of 240.4.
12 fie, to once "let tbeni.t Closer twch CO. to- 24. Wt. • 4I.ns<a
f 370.00 fee.. m " amt). "lee Clowlq [lose. Match so- 49, 36e t.at ..
13 9'41 feet to "Lt la 'co haw'E"c"Cly I" it "Id panel for 2. "lie
U atteet. Seech 41. 10• W Wst, a di.tu.ce of 330.14 fret. from It.
14 tier.e.ltm Htb CO R"ch"md, elbb[sf -c'p Iles of ALOtb ATOCt.
56.00 fee. .6 •faro ad "Id pamA meet t6rae. Sorts 42' JO' or Via,
1s tlaci "Id Nwt6aucsrl, II" of faccol t. a dlstamr of $47.79 feet, w
" chat ant leached? "r "r of ..I, PASCAL U. 3. Otch Caron is .Iw
16 ftPaced ae Clo NertNaaterl, Tfshc -city el" of .aid CIVIC CLTIO ORIn'
.Mae, forth 32' 32' W Wet ales( s d par a Moo ueit I se C-obady II",
17 dt.tawe of 317 73 feet. to the UIts 41" of . ".,at nrw [osei. to
Swtfiaae, beet., a eel.. of 41A.41 (rot; Ueaee OerlMOter1T ad
Is .udT .1.1 iii "no. thew" V. ..,I. of S7' 1s• lY. "..o Alatame
[ "4.01 feet, Braces c"[oae " old Cam Smote b9. 49. 364 Wst dead
19 March Hor of old CIVIC COMA MITI. • 41.raaee of 2CI.[O twee W
M41sln of • ".lace wow native le tm fotehe"t. Mae/ a tdlw
20 'r 24.00 feet, these. Nenlreouily 01oot "to ore, telwoh an onto at
• W or, n art dt.tazrt el 17.70 foot to . "let of tao0eec, oIth
21 "e, Mau Elio of sate N.4VU AVLiOt. t.d4 ea.t It., 1. Parallel Web
101.00 feet eai of saki notlell" of Rla0. M.e")t %Nees forte >
22 0 10• I4o Meet don "Id feet Ili.. duteu0 of Ibi.2) fee.. see of
ot. u tlo T&M POIxy or socintoc.
23 1 - .
24 '-
25 r•► a�N r`
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Land '
�.. Sale Agreement to be executed and attasted by their proper of •
tnereunto duly authorized, and theit official seals to be hereto '
affixed, as of the day and year first above written.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
:i
By: ?
PHILLIP D. SCHLOSSER
Mayor of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, CA
ATTESTt
LAUREN M. WASSERMAN
City Clerk of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, CA
BE T L. HA!' K, aIDdG JOHN P. SON, presents va
Hoard of Supervisors County Administrative Office •
County of San Bernardino County of San Dernardino
APPROVED AS TO FORMt
By:
CHARLES A D ERBE 9
Deputy County Counsol
County of San Beraarduo
-6-
/. T^
to
f'
4:.:y:s:
d:t
3r
i
• . r.,,r .c.
SUL=T 70. All rrorrnti.. mtrletta,s, eights and right -at+
of ieesd. tmSdind Kma ...trtaeloas abet she Wt Ale, of "id
Hams Ave.... an shwa as said tarnl mp w. 6723.
I1O7tt IL Kac".14"a dres.11d pncas3 central" So" .trot at
lad. Onto or Itue.
RZUIVLM Maas the f cy of Sas gataasdlm - Cl"Mr. she right
of steals IecldfV eshlwlor low. and ft... o.r shat semis "eel.
Of W horeluhw, destdbOd Parcel. add portion "sut6ad as follm,
CDN CB= at the tateaystim of the C"ta.11oe of CIVIC CADM
01311 (folen117 S"Wta Aeeento 0.03 fast .l0. crlth W en1.rltOn of
tATIS AYME. ".ban . On 14 tmnl oss, them. Notch 00' 10' 240 Wet
asset nod cnterU. of Y1G1 AVI=. • diseases of 4$4.00 lest& Aheaer
SuHo2 said aseudtr Notch 91' q• M^ Wt.. distant. of 101.00
feet As a "lee in the Oat It. of sa11 SAM AMMUT. nod pin aslo
hotel the I= Mtn Of grcANN[NDt ther" Seats 000 )0' 24• fast land
said fate It" 11.6 tests chosen Notch ev. A9' W tut, a duteace of
146.00 lest. ce W holiness, -,ens som cow. n the Soatleaat.
Walt' a relf'. at 21.00 tests Wow tiwtbaaotatl7 staff said cans
these - "310 of 90' 00' M. n'aw McLane. of 19.27 tests .
sands- u said ono teach 00 w- 24. tar✓. a dtatama of I3.b ..
se the b.glnt" al a eup-,c core, seam- to the btehuat. W0V
,4'►edln at 63.00 Atilt thmca 7wthosaudp land sold cores chnVh
an oegla of 90' CO. W. o.ve dlacaw at 102.10 (oast chance taVnt
w told tarn both tY A9' 1. 7 sac.. distance at 361.00 i.e. an W
Mglmlat of • consent "M atria to the gaaW.wae Wlsg a "At"
of 27.00 (fact theaco sbuthmnrl/ land old car" ehr"gb..Vl.
of t0' 00' Owns as are dutaaea of 3).27 Ann's .'a moo, tangent to said
corn teach 03' 10' 24• sent, . data- of 294.86
. lest ce W bottoming uegnc nom . locale, a edlso ,
of 62.00 tests
1MZr fosWt.urlt lest said case, tbmegh. We of 43' 35' 00'.
n ere distance of 49.31 Hats thorn, taVest to fast eMSn SwW 43'
no let Wat. • Matinee of 76.06 bosun atamesd" Mich Also Noreh-
wtadp ll" of atm.au Clvle Clout Min ".00 test video said
latalncesln Uses • plat t, . ,w'tus st eaten esaraee to she Swiss.
-.c hoKet • tdlas at 4aiA0 last$ Absent Saathoasted, lest told
turn Wrwch an "Slid of h' 21' 43's . ate die note at 63.03 fast,
W the food Wamt. (e cdf.l II" of said wm thrwgb 404 eed Mara
Match 490 36' L' fast)$ [Macs Notch 43' 24' 3P fast, . distance of
36.06 fast, m W Mgt"ut of a Winne rem saw. Natal -a1.r37
having . rdlas of 317.00 fast& chose. tolchoaaurl7 land said wm
throeth - .Vin of a3' 13. 000.. are distant. of 101.04 facts stent.
unmet to said wrn North W- !0' 240 Wac. a distant. of 5sd6 frets
.hoc. Swth S9' 49' 360 Web • distance. of 37.3 fee t& thaw Notch
03. 10' 2%" Waeo a dataase of 270.00 foot( chree. Swth 8)' All 340
Waco a chum, of 240.40 facto a the Mdasat of a feedlot eme
masses ta ad brtMUt having a cdiva of 30.00 tents theme Notch.
-11.117 .1", said mm thrwgb . 0.04 .( 90. 00' wr On see
ta
distance at 78.31 tests channe .se.t u said wren North or 30' 240
Waco a dtstam. of 72.41 tests thence Swth 090 49' ma Woco a distance
of 396.03 one, no'. ar lm, in ties I= MANI or MICInANC.
tat, 2
•;4-A• 2;3 t
X•17Lr
•
t.
1
F
i
i
1
�"�. `t,��y (ie•rd teary) ^��'
%, Fv?RIlR':,`w }a l- r',ii M-
1/ltasa• tN NN of tN C 1. of tN Wed of ttw.•r.l•ar•. aad
`
tN atet of too tart' of to Ntrrdlao, of tN nat• at Gltfo;t.,
tbta _ at of . IM
tt0lR w tall )ti'UJD➢O
By
W1er., ba ivp•[.lm[a
t
�
e
1
iiI.1T w t\tlf0ial\ 1
as
matt w ada bvadloao )
Go if wt.. r, tN t s&.rsLaad.
s bury goalie is W tttt•, Mrcwally apaaarad
N to r to be tbs m•ir.as of
i
too W�elwn at sald tr [Yt executed [M vital. Imat r at.
°
aad No\o to r to N W Nta•a wb. •.•cuted tM vltNa taatr.wt r
Maalf or tN body polt[ic and corpotaea tNnb asa.d. sad ecNoaladded
to r e:at •web lady Mtttle aad eoep•e.t. asaeatod tN -Stet- Iuttrot
prsvaa[ to lt. b, -laws at a nrlu[tw at its board of top.nloors.
Whitby n Nod •w .tftebl assl.
a
Y.
mt., rolic to •— (oho
Z,
old Coast sad ![sea
1
�"�. `t,��y (ie•rd teary) ^��'
%, Fv?RIlR':,`w }a l- r',ii M-
1
ouu�
1
1
1 PARCEL NO 1
I
I,
1
i 1 rcr all .•.c
1;
3I• •{. Kt
�wr
I
=n a{ 1
1
1—
I 1 I
I�I
PARCEL NO2 1
I; , 1 •
PARCEL MAP NO 6725 t•Z {+ i
u �
P M 67/4 -7
11 {M ..{4NMKt Cam, I
at 4p
AM
t•:S � o.
' V
• �. • oA
-i Y•.,1M 44..
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
"o
• DATE. March 17, 1982
tvn
TO: City Council and City Manager
FRO": Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Flood Control Benefit Assessment Program
On Thursday, "arch 11, the Zone 1 Advisory Board met to review
the latest BAP proposal developed by the Mayors and City Engineers.
Attendance at the meeting was primarily the mayors with only three
lay members of the boa--d present. Those in attendance voted to
return to each City Council the following elements of a proposed
ballot issue:
1. The issue should appear on the November: ballot.
2. The attached formula of assessment should be utilized.
• 3. The program should run for 10 years.
4. A minimum of 13% of the funds collected in each jurisdiction
should go the tegional facilities.
It is recognized •hat this proposal is not detailed Sufficiently
to answer all questions on the program. It is, however, the
fundamental elemen.s of the program and it is appropriate to
obtain a reaction to the proposal before we proceed to solve the
more detailed questions.
Also attached is an estimate of the funds generated by the formula
for each agency for the 5,7,10 and 15 year periods. The 10 year
program will generate 58,431,770 in Rancho Cucamonga and $50,077,570
` zone wide. This ib only a small fraction of the total needs but
many times the money available now. The funds will allow us to
deal with Hermosa Avenue problems and assist Hellman Avenue work.
In addition, I would expect a oortioo of the funds would go to the
Day- Etiwanda -San Sevaine probltn.
Questions still to be worked on are:
• Credits for fees and assessmaate
• Appeals process for special problem properties
• Mechanism and timing of funds transfer
r
f
.y
i
J
i
Y
F'
t
Revised
MIS "W" RZCDM U0ED ASSESSMENT RATES
LA." USE:
1. Undeveloped (va. 1 - $10.00 aualnun or $2.00 per acre. Whichever is greater.
2. Single 6 Multi easily Residential,
Condos, Apartncnts 6 Mobile Rosa parts — $39.00 per Duelling Unit plus $2.00 per
acre in excess of one acre per Dwelling Unit.
3. Come. b Ind, $312.00 per acre for developed plus $2.00 per acre for undeveloped.
6. Dairies, Churches, Schools L Libraries — 2 units at $39.00 per unit plus $2.00 per
and Special Cases acre In excess of 2 acres, Whera applicable
°Controlled Drainage Areas"a and other
properties prinarily utilised to store
atom runoff %O—U not ba. counted. _
a "Controlled Drainage At"" as defined
by the State Water Quality Control Board.
a3 0,
E
City Council Staff Report
Flood Control Benefit Assessment Program
March 17, 1982
Page 2
' • Specific ballot language
• Amount and prioritization of regional fund share.
On the issue of regional projects, it his been recognized that
backbone systems must precede the storm drain facilities and
that the entire zone should share in thuss facilities.
Montclair and Chino are the only cities in the zone with no
regional facilites wits their boundarios and therefore benefit
little from the regional projects. In order to demonstrate con-
, cern for the regional program, Montclair proposed the 131 minimum
contribution. It was implied that this would be the extent of
these two cities contribution but that the cities more directly
benefited should get together and agree on some higher level of
participation and the priority of drain construction. This
process would begin when the project fundamentals have been
completed.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council approve the four fundamental
elements of the Benefit Assessment Program as proposed and direct
Staff to continue the process of developing the details of the full
ballot issue.
a
M
6i
,
Respectfully subm tted,
T .F
LBN: a
X
Attachments c
f
� .v
Mo-q
m
J
P
tl
N
ryrp�O •+•a
O ^ TT
Nv r r v v v �r
^N o
o O O o 0 0 0
O �
� n '
N r N
Pn bN rb'rN NM MO Nlfl ppp�p Oro
bV QN YfV N� YNfV OV Yf rp Yqf O
n•0 Nn ON p
MO rON O prp ,�,t ��` 1b�Q q0
NM nm r(f0 q Mb NHf {Vn ^n
Nv NN MwN. Mr ^v b^ qr. wl
M O
Mb qu lDQ rMrM qN nQ NQ OQ
rOn nq lnN OM �V Or Qn Nn
b b N n N b M M V
M•^• Nq OrM bM Or Nrp
rOQ rN•1� Mq QM Yf0 Mq
Qb q0 bb r0 •G Nr(.
NY qGp O�pJ d^
� v �... bV •V=
0 o qc° �° � r0.•
N \
O N
n �l
9 N
V2
O
N M
u .
c B
�o
NN
LJ
J
f
+O
N
f
3.
3;
�7
Y
Y
♦3
FY
:y
Y
S a
i J
Y �
i
f �
Y t
M � r
O t
x �.y�
0
b
q
q
a
N
4
n
Q
b
e
N
\
m
q
u
q
n
O
n
m
M
N
IQ'1
M
m
N
ryrp�O •+•a
O ^ TT
Nv r r v v v �r
^N o
o O O o 0 0 0
O �
� n '
N r N
Pn bN rb'rN NM MO Nlfl ppp�p Oro
bV QN YfV N� YNfV OV Yf rp Yqf O
n•0 Nn ON p
MO rON O prp ,�,t ��` 1b�Q q0
NM nm r(f0 q Mb NHf {Vn ^n
Nv NN MwN. Mr ^v b^ qr. wl
M O
Mb qu lDQ rMrM qN nQ NQ OQ
rOn nq lnN OM �V Or Qn Nn
b b N n N b M M V
M•^• Nq OrM bM Or Nrp
rOQ rN•1� Mq QM Yf0 Mq
Qb q0 bb r0 •G Nr(.
NY qGp O�pJ d^
� v �... bV •V=
0 o qc° �° � r0.•
N \
O N
n �l
9 N
V2
O
N M
u .
c B
�o
NN
LJ
J
f
+O
N
f
3.
3;
�7
Y
Y
♦3
FY
:y
Y
S a
i J
Y �
i
f �
Y t
M � r
O t
x �.y�
dr J CITY OF RANCHO CUCAmoNGA
5� c�
MEMORANDUM �o
W7
DATE: March 9, 1982
r
TO: Bill Holley, Director of Coamnity Services and
Robert Hickcox, Chairman. Historic Preservation Co=tssion
FROM: 11 ck Hark:. Associate Planner
SUBJECT: PROJECT PROPOSAL SUBMITTED FOR CGMMUNITV DEVELOPMENT
NO NG: c N H C CH HDUSE
in order for City'staff to have a more complete understanding of the
proposed project and to be able to give complete information to the -
S., City Council regarding its scope, need and overall a,rit relative to
other projects, it would be helpful if you would provide answers to
• the following questions. As time is very short, it would he very
mach apnreciated if you could provide them in a day or so.
Thank you for your cooperation.
RH:jr
Attachment
.�
r
F'
,
i
1' a
a
r i
f.
4.
r:
f�
i
Bill Holley b Robert Hickcox
Subj• Reroofing Garcia Ranch House
-arch 9, 1982
Page 2
o How was the reroofing cost of $6,000 determined?
• Who is providing the matching S1,Coo (55,000 -01
($1,000- ?
• Who now owns the,Garcia Ranch House? _
• Current use (if any)?
• what is the current condition of the existing roof on the Garcia Ranch H- :e?
o SSr -082 12 -12 -75
San Bernardino County Point of Histo, al Interest
- please explain the above answer to 13 on Project Proposal form.
o Section E, 11 - olease provide an answer
o Section E, /3 - please provide an answer
-0 •
v
3 d
1'
March 16, 1982
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
To Rick Marks, Associate Planner
From Rill Holley, Director, Community Services
By Mary Whitney VV
Subject CDDG - Chaffey Garcia House
Please find the following in reply to your memo dated
March 9 concerning the Project Proposal for use of CDBG
funding to re -roof the Chaffey Garcia House.
1 Re- roofing cost was determined by Robert Hickcox,
Chairman, Historic Peeservation Como:ission. He -
arrived at that price after contacting the Centurion
Roofing Company (Rtiwanda). Price was determined
on a 2800 sq. ft. Complete re- roofing. Price
estimate from Centurion Roofing: Wood Shiugle,
$4,000, Asbestos: $2,000. These prices are only
estimates. Therefore, in order to give a high
estimate, $1.000 was added to price.
2 Matching funds could possibly be made availpble
from the Historic Preservation fund. These monies
have been collected over a period of 2 years and
have been set aside for historic preservation efforts.
3 The roube is currently owned by Lewis Homes, Inc.
As soon as the house Is relocated, it will become
the property of the William Lyon Company. The William
Lyon Ccspany intends to deed the house to a civic
group or other public entity for the purpose of restor-
ation.
4 The house is currently a private residence. Upon
relocation, it will not be used until such time as
restoration has occurred. Therefore, the non of the
structure is to be determined at a later date.
5. Current condition of roof almost non- exlstant
6. The structure is not currently listed with the National
or State list of Historical Places. It is eligible:
however, no such listing will be requested until the
Preservation offer's can be started It to registered
continued
h
pg. 2
memo - 3/18/82
to R. Narks
from: B. Holley
re Chuffey- Garcia House
now as a County of San Bernardino Point of Historic Interest.
Also, It is a Rancho Cucamonga City Historic Landmark, per
ordinance adopted by Council in March, 1981. The house is
not located within a designated historic district, as none
exist Its significance and historical merit are in the fact
that the house was Yee site of the first electric light west
of the Rocky NOaataias and was also the site of the first
long distance telephone call to occur in California.
7 In reference to Section E, B1 - as Previously explained in
this mend, some monies could b3 obtained from the Historic
Preservation Fund. - -
8 In reference to Section E, M3 - There have been no other
sources -if fuuding sought for the purpose of re- roofing
the hous•! The main goal to this date has been in obtaining
a site for the relocation of the house. Now that this has
been done and once the bou3e has actually been relocated,
efforts -or the complete restoration will be intensified.
NO
s
7
March 17, 1982
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON"A
CITY COUNCIL MTNUFES
Regular Meeting
1. CALL TO ORDER.
Thu regular moetmng of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga vas held
in the Lion's Park Community Center, 9161 Been Line Road on Wednesday. March 17,
1982. The meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Mayor Phillip D. Schlosser.
Girl Scouts from Troop No. 1130 led the pledge of allegiance to the flag.
Present were: City Council Members: Jon D. Mikelo, James C. Frost, Much"! A.
Palombo, and Arthur H. Bridge.
Also present were: City Manager, Lauren M. Wasserman; Assistant Citv Attorney,
Edward A. Hopson; Assistant City Hanger, Jim Robinson; Co—unity Development
Director, Jack Lan; City Engineer, Lloyd Hubbs; Finance Director, Hairy lmpey; and
Comunity Services Director, Dill Holley.
Approval of Minutes: Harlon: Moved by Palocbo, seconded by FZnat to approve, the
minutes of February 3, 1982 Motion carried unanimously 5 -0.
2. LNXOU:;CEHENrS.
a. Mayor Schlosser presented a Proclamotion to the Girl Scouts in recognition
Of Girl Scout Week, March 7 -13, 1982.
b. City Manager, Lauren Wasserama, requested that convent calendar item "f" be
removed from thn Consent Calendar.
c. Hr. Wasserman requested that Council set a date for a Redevelopment Meeting
for the purpose of extending the statute of limitations for the County. Council
net Monday. March 22, 1982 at 7:3o a.m. in the City Offices, 9320 lase Line Road,
Suite C.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR,
a. Approval of Warrants, Register No. 82 -3-17 in the amount of $309,249.66.
b. Forward Claim against the City by Deborah Ann Raines to the city attorney for
handling.
c Forward Claim against the City by Helga E. SCOvel; Steven Marc Scoval, Heidi
Kathleen Scovel to the city attorne• r handling.
d. Forward Claim against the City by Timothy Craig Thornbury to the city attorney
for handling.
e. Forward Claim against the City by Joseph Hainan to the city attorney for handling.
fv— Apprevs}- ef- Agreeernla -bed veep- Aanehe- Redeye }epmene - Agency - mod - ether- earring
agencies -wit hie- thr- eedera}epearses— Agteeaeees- have - been- eppreved- by- thrRe-
dere }apment- Agency. Item removed. ved. -
RESOLUT40- H9,82 -4i Item ramoved
A- RM66B6WP} BN- fiF {NB- 6 {{y- 60UN6 }TrOF- iR6- 6iiY -BP
RMGRG-GUEANBNGAr•GAMFORN{AT-APPRBY{N6-A6RER-
1�Mf6- B6iW6AM- i' HS- RAR6RB- RRBeY6b6PMQi}ff- A66N6Y
AND- 6N6A4GN6A- GSUNFY- WATER- R{S"M,- GNING-BA6iN
HWN}6IPA6- WATER -B {6;g {gam- ANB- WBg ;- gMMB- R{g6WR6B
G6N66R9AT46N- AGENGYy
g. Acceptance of Improvement Agreement and Security for CUP 81 -15 - Larry Bock: -_
located at the n;rthaas[ coiner of Haven and Jersey Avenues.
0
• "ti �,h,� \a,`!.'y4�'�; rN�f'g t, '+9.. _ _ "�'`1` .y'+M.0 ���ebtTr.�aar.
°I
+,
y. City Council Minute;
March 17, 1982
«.
Page 3
}k
✓v
i`
t2'e
Program Amount S
1. North Town Streets, Phase III $120,000 (33.3%)
.. Neighborhood Center Expansion $ 81,000 (22.52)
3. Housing Rehabilitation $ 84,000 (23.3 %)
4. Contingency $ 17,387 ( 4.8%)
5. Local Coats - Program Implementation
(a) Administration 4 6,255 ( 1.7%)
(b) Program Management $ 51.358 J14-02)-
$36U,000 1C0%
F'
Councilman Bridge asked fo a elarificatlrm of the amount design Pod for program
_
management. Hr. Narks mated that this amount was the equivalent costa for me
planning position and one half -time secretarial position. Hr. Bridge stated that
this seemed like a lerge savant of dollars for program management for the total
aaounc of dollars involved. Hr. Harks stated that HUD allowed the cities to charge
back 20% of the overall grant administrative costs.
Hr. lam pointed out that thorn cnuld be no one hired for the Grant, but we vou7d
be using existing staff.
Councilman Mikels asked where the $360,000 came from to begin vi:h. Mr..:rk;
M
stated this amount tame from HUD. Councilman Hikels a:.kad if this were a projection
for next year? Mr. Macke stated this arn87 would be available to tha city on
July 1. 1982. Mr. HLkels vanted to know how the federal governomnt could make such
_
a commitment since the budget had not bees adopted. Mr. Beadle stated that the
monies have been adopted and allocated. The appropriation bill was approved by
{
Congress in December 191,1, but we won't receive our amount until July, 1982, when
our program as an entitlement city begins.
'
Mayor Schlosser opened the meting for public hearing:
Williams,
-Bob addressed the neighborhood center expansion program. He stated
�}
that the V.I.P. Club was growing out of the Center.
^i
"
-Jim Hunt. stated that these funds will let them expand the V.I.P. program to
five days a week
�^
-Nacho Gratis, stated that he would like to see the North Tow streets, Phase
III completed.
-Bob Hickcox, Historical Commission Chairmant stated that the Cbaffay-Garcia
house roofing project could receive funds from the Housing Rehabilita -Lon pro-
!
'act. If this were not possible, then he suggested that tats be considered for
r ether year.
7,
f-
Mayor Schlosser stated that staff could explain how this project might be
°
completed without using tax payers monies.
Hr. Lam stated that staff has been discussing this with the William Lyon Company.
. }„
Although they have not made fiml commitments. it is baing discussed. The
->
Levis Coopnny has made a commitment to move the housa, and the William L7on
y1
Company is going to receive it. Restoration details have not been worked out
v
yet.
"r
Thera being no further response. the public hewn
R P P ng was declared cloned.
r
t~
•?r
Councilman Mikels stated that we should take the Chaffey- Garcia roofing request and
s
aM
make it number one on our 'tiish list" in the event that the budget categories are
`
-43
not completely exhausted.
its',+:
-
_
ti
_ s :•;.�w:;.�� a`•r:•'i..s..} w Ste - x cam}- ;+r -+
7
r
city C.uncil rsnutes
Hatch 17. 1982
Page 2
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -51
A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY up
RAW'TW cuck NCA CAI.Irmu, AprROv1NC THpROvC-
HFNf AGREEHEXr A$D IMPROVElffNT SECURITY FOR CON -
DITIO.NwL USE PERMIT NO. 81 -1!
h. Acceptance of Bonds and Agreements for Parcel rap 6005 and Raises* of Bonds
end Agreemen_ v- eviously submitted - located me the •Iuthside of 9th Street
between Hallman .net Viney,rd Avenue - Hark West Corp.
Relaaa* to Jayne T. Raaland for rarcel Hap 5196:
Faithful Performance Bond $17,000
Labor 6 Hater1-1 Bond $17.00
Accept free Hark West Cote for Parcel NIP 60051
Faithful P.cformance Bond $32,000
Labor a Hat.rial Bond $17.000
RESOLUTION N0. 82 -52
A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL % THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONCA, CALIFONDIA, APPROVING no?DVF
NEXT AGREEMENT AND IIBROVENFNT SECURITY MR PARCEL
MAP 6005.
1 Acceptance of Parcel Hap 7061 -1, Bends and Agreements submitted by Kator
for their development located on the south aide of bin Street between rlovelnnd
Avenue and Milliken Avenue.
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -53
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITT COUNCIL OF ThE CM OF
RANCHO COCAYONGA, CALIFORNIA. APPROVING PARCEL
HAP 7061 -1. INPROVIlMyr ACREQgNI, AND 1HPROVE-
H= SECURITY.
J. Approval of a Resolution llsigeating Robert Dougherty, of the firm of
Covington 6 Crowe, as the city attorney -or the City of Rancha Cucaaoega.
RESOLUTION NC 82 -55
A RESOLUT10r Of THE CITY %;CUNCIL OF THE CITY Of
RANCHO CUCAYOZA, CALIFORNIA, DESICHATLIG THE
CITY ATTORNEY.
k. Racomand that Council award the design services for widening of Base Line
Read at Red Hill to Linville- San0Arsoa -R0rn u the lowest bidder at $5,800 00.
Notion: M3ved by Palcmbo, seconded by Frost to approve the Conaent Calendar with
the deletion of Item f. Harlon carry+ enonimously 5 -0
A. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
-A. CQM .1!TY DEVELOPMM BLOCK CRA.RT PRDCRAH. A public hearing to obtain citizen
Input regarding pmj.c-a to Us fonocd with federal community development block grant
funds; obtain city council direction and approval of block grant objectives, pro-
facts Ind funding levels; and to : t federal Departzent of Housing and Urban
Developm^nt CDBG program requirements. Tim Beadle, senior planner, eave an over-
view of the prodr ±m. :.!chard Hirkb, Associate Planner, presented an overview of
-� the projects selectod thccl•gh a *zeds assessment procedure as follws:
1. North Tam sitters, Phase III $120,100
r
a t' ,
t
City Council Minutes
[arch 17, 1982
Page 4
Councilmn Frost stated that he wanted to go a stop further and designee up to
85,000 In reserve for this just in tae" other options don't work out.
Mr. Lm stated that if it van council's desirw to set asidm funds for this pro-
ject in case negotiations don't wore out, then this should be elated on the list.
If this is to be in:luded. than this Dust be included on the replication and
environmental application process. Mr. frost stated he wanted this included.
Mr. Marks stated that this would not be pct under "Housing Rehabilitation."
but under "111storical Proaenvation "
Mr. Front suggested that the money come out of 4os. 3 and 4.
Mr. Lam stated that the best approach would be to take $50000 out of the Housing
Hehabilitatio.t, make a new separate category do the envirormental, and to Include
this as a project for next year :radar Historical Preeervation.
Councilman Bridge stnted that he did not want to put this into this process. He
felt that this should be done by the Wlillam Lyon and Ralph Levis companies.
Mr. Lam stated that if council felt the negotiations should be done first and not
have any other commitments stand in the way, then council could proceed and adopt
the budge. as Is, and mid-wey through the yuar the budget could be amended with a
separate environmental Mr, tam stated further that the contingency fund did not
go into the city's general budget since it was actually a contingency for the projects.
Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Palombo to adopt Resolution No. 82 -56 with the
understanding that later in the year if negotiations failed with the Lyon /Levis
companies, and if there were funds available under the contingency fund. then
Council could direct staff to prepare an amendment to the application; and Lo waive
further reading of the Resolutiun Notion carried by the following vote: AYES:
MLkels. Palombo, Bridge, and Schlosser. NOES: Frost. ABSENT: None. City Clerk
Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 82 -56.
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -5f
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROy1NG PROGRAM
FUNDIFG MR THE CROWNlTY DEVELOPMENT BLACK GRANT
PROGRAM.
4B. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 82 -01 - LEUIS. A request to amend the Land Use Policies
of the General Plan that would allow the city to consider development plans within
a planned community area, prior to adoption of the planned coermmity. Staff report
by Rick Comes, city planner.
Mr. Comet read the following language change to the Land Use Element, page 30 of the
General Plan, paragraph 3:
"The City shall not generally consider for approval, any development
plans located within the Planned Commmities area, until such time
as the planned community has been reviewed and adopted by the city
council. Hm aver, the City my approve minor exceptions to this policy.
If in its judgement, the plans are consistent with the planned community
act' general plan goals " This exception shall be limited to one time
De per planned community area and shall not encompass more than 52
or 50 acres of the planned community arm, whichever is less.
Councilman Bridge stated that because of the sensitivity of such an issue, he wanted
to have the plane for such a request be approved by the city council after the
Planning Commission gave Its approval.
Mr. Lam asked if council was asking to have the final approval of this project. Mr.
Bridge stated that vas what he was asking.
air Comas stated that this could be incorporated into the general plan language.
Mayor Schlosser opened rho meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the -
public hearing was closed.
WIFVR
City Council minutes �' =
March 17, 1982 3
Page 5 �pp
- f
Mayor Schlosser requested the presentation Of Scam 4C before giving approval of
I
Resolution Me. 82 -57 since this item was includ.d In the resolution.
4C. rEmERAL PLAN ANERDMM 82 -OIC - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA. A request to amend
the Land of the Lateral Plan to change the land use dasignatiot in the
area fronting 4th Street extending 4pproYJ%AtG17 1400 feet north between Etivando
Avenue and the AT 4 BY railroad tracts. This land use designation is recommended
to be changed from heavy Industrial to Cenral Industrial. Staff report by Rick
Cornz, city planner.
Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public haari -•. There Laing no response,
the public hearing was closed.
Council had no discussion no thin portion of Resolution No, 82 -57,
Notion: Moved by Mtkels, seconded by Bridge to approve Resolution No. 62 -57 with
the foilming language a/.dition to section It
"Final approval or denial of any proposed development or development
plane submitted for approval under this exception shall be made by
the city council on recommendation of the Planning Comissfon."
and to approve the issuance of a negative declaration, and to ♦aive as entire
reading of Resolution No. 82 -57. Notion carried unanimously by the following
vote: AYES: P :vst, Hikels, Palombo, Bridge, and Schlosser. NOES: Moae. ABSENT.
None City Clerk Wasoarman read the title of Resolution No. 82 -57.
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -S7
A rESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY CP
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. AHEND7At: THE AD)PT111
LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CFNE2AL
PLAN.
40. PLANNEfI DEVEIUPt027T 82 -02 - S TRACT 11615 LEWIS PAGPERTIES. A
change of zone Erom Crl (� Sghbo a.� oareiall to R -? PD (multiple fancily
rasidentfal /planed dovelopment development of 152 condosinicm unite on
10.4 acres of land located port, a Line and vest of %rchil,,Id - APN 202-
161-37 and 202 - 151 -34. Staff rep.... presented by Michael Vafrin. Senior Planner.
City Clark Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 173.
ORDINANCE NO. 173 (first reading)
AN ORDINANCE OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAnONCA, CALIFORNIA, R.vZONINC ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NUMBER 202 - 161 -37 AIM 202- L•1 -34 FROM C -1
^i AND R- 3 /P.D., LOCATED NORTH OF BASE LINE AND WEST
OF ARCMIBALD AVENUE.
Notion: Maveu by Mikels, soconded by Palombu to valve ferther reading of Ordinance
No. 173 Notion tarried unanimously 5-0.
Itayor Schlnsser opened the meeting for public hearing. There beinn no response,
the public hearing vas closes.
There being no discussion by Council. Mayor Schlosser set second reading of
Ordinance No. 17) for April 7, 1982. d
Mayor Schlosser called a recess at 8:20 p.m. The mooting reconvened at 8:30 p.m.
with all members of staff and council present.
city council Minutes
March 17, 1982
Pago 6
A aevoaopment or a total punned residential development of 185 single family
detached units and 14.6 acre park on 95.5 acres of land in the R- 1- 20,000 zone
located on Hormosa Avenue, north of Hillside. Staff report presented by Jack
I=.
Hr. Ism pointed out that the developer, Hr. Richard Scott, was requesting an
additional 30-day extension in order to coeplate negotiations with the city for
the 14.6 acre park. The city council had several options: (1) to uphold the
Planning Commission's decision and require the environmental impact report,
(2) continua the mutter, or (3) deny the request. However, Hr. tam pointed out
that the whole issue vas becoming academic anyway since the davel ,kit vas
negotiating with the city in regards to the purchase of a park sit.. This would
change the design and character of the project which would change the implications
of the environmental impact. In this case, the applicant would need to refile a
revised project, and another initial study would be conducted to determine if aA
environmental impact report would be needed on the revised project.
Councilman Frost stated that hopefully the success of the negotiations on the vest
ptvperty will have an affect on the scope of the final =IR and a continuance may
be in order.
dayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing Council vas:
-Hr Richard Scott developer. He stated they were In the final
stages of negotiations with the city oa the park site. If they
proceeded as planned, then they will be presenting a different
project. He preferred the Item be continued because whet they
will be submitting will be an entirely different project.
Coiacilman Bridge stated that he felt this should be cleared up new and that the
Item should e'thnr be withdrawn or denied.
H. Ica stated that all the continuatl= have come at the request of the appll -_
cant so the city has not been put In jeopardy. Prior to a month ago, the staff
did not havP any concern for the continuances. However, we received a letter from
Mr. Scott's attorney construing the delays to now mean that the ona -year time limit
for approval constitute an approval of the project. Therefore, staff felt why
have this hang on if the company was going to construe this as an approval with
the centinuances. If he applicant understands with a continuance, there is no time
limit on the application, and we won't receive any further correspondence indi-
cating he has an approved project, than we wouldn't have any problems.
Hr Hopson pointed out that there are time limit regulations on what the city
tries to postpone Any request for postponement on the part of a developer does
not figure into the operation of those time lines. He stated that since Mr. Scott
was prosent, than if there is say codes" then while in a public foam, it could
be oado clear that the continuances bAve base at his request and that it has not
operated as an approval by the city council.
-Hr. Scott stated that the original application was filed in April
1981 and wasn't acted upon until August 1981. It has been since
August that they have base appealing on the RIR. According to the
Map Act if a project wasn't approved with "x" numbar of days, then
it could be considered approved.
He stated that they would stipulate at this polat in time to any-
thing with relationship to this being their request for a continuance.
Any of the •* luests for continuances, they would not expect to have
imputed into a city delay that would grant theu ooproval. They
recognized that any delays have come by their requests.
Hr. lam stated that an application is not deemed complete until an RIR is completed.
The Pla. Ang Commission stated on August 26, 1981 that an ilR was necessary. With-
in fourteen days an appeal was received.
Hr. Scott explained that at that time, they, had started negotiations
with the Parks and Recreation Department regarding the purchase of
land for a park site. --
City Council Minutes
March 17, 1982
Page 7
Councilmn Bridge stated that *into this was clear, them he would chanpo his former
request and approve the continuance.
> Motion[ loved by Bridge, ascended by Frost to approve the request for a 30 -day
y continuance to April 21, 1982. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0.
oF. PUBLIC TEO?ROVDBNT RETHBURSLIMiT. Item was continued tram the February 3.
1982 mating. Staff requested another continuance to April 7. 1982. Cuinell
concurred.
ORDINANCE NO. 170 (first reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. IMPOSING A FEE
PAYABLE AT THE TIME OF APPLICATIMI FOR A BUILD-
ING Pt.Z(IT FOR THOSE LOTS 01 PARCELS OF LAND WITH
RFSPECr TO 1 -41IGH FRONTAGE VP.- EMENTS HAVE BEEN
INSTALLED PORSTJ;= TO A REMBURSEHENT ACRM EHHf.
S. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS.
5A. REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF OFF -SITE IMPROVEMENTS FROM D.R. 81 -32 - located on the
east side of Etivanda Avenue, south of Arrow Route. Staff report by Lloyd Hubbs.
Councilman Mikels inquired when the liens would be called for the other two parcels
would they be called inraedistely, or when Aeeron would be developing which would
be approximately one year.
Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public comment.
- Jacqueline Smith, owner of J 6 S Investments. She requested a waiver for
the off -site improvemants for the next t+o years.
Councilman Bridge asked what It would take to put the whole @treat under the 1911
Assessment Act and if the whole street could be financed this way. Mr. Hubby
responded that It would be very difficult to bond a project that small.
-Frank Jacob,, partner in the property. He stated that they were requesting
the waiver in order to delay this expense so they could make improvements
to the properry. They were lacking apace and needed to build an an addition.
-Kevin Smitt, employee of J 6 S Investments. Expressed the need of having
an addition mda to the plant.
Councilman Btldea stated that he felt the off -sire improvements should be guarantacd
through the use of a lien agreement.
Councilmn Mikels stated that we should try to tie this in with the improvements
which will be made when Ameron mkes theft improvements since this will probably
not be for another year
Councilman Bridge stated that this side of the street could be done independently.
Mr Hubbs stated that he would recommend a two year improvement agreement with a
bond He felt this would bo a cleaner way to go.
Motion: Moved by Bridge, acconded by Palombo to approve the waiver vitb a two-
year tmprovewnt agreement secured with a bond
Councilman Frost inquired when the other property owners would be Informed. 2
Hub:,s stated h.+ would call the owners of the lion agreements that the process was
starting an the two year tiro period.
Councilman Frost asked about the r=unt of traffic flow. Mr. Lam stated that
presently there wasn't much traffic, but as development Increased so would the
traffic. `
city Council Itinutes
March 17, 1982
Page 8
Councilman Frost stated that w should have Ameron proceed with their improve-
ments and hold off on the meat side w til the traffic warranted such improvements.
Mr. Wassotman pointed out that the city triad to keep on, step ahead rather than
wait until there we a problem than try to resolve it.
Mr. Hopson pointed out that it would not be tw years and then start the improve.
seats. but rather that the improvement project will be completed in two years.
Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Palombo to approve a two year improvement
agreement secured vith a bond. Motion carried unanimously 5-0.
Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Palombo that the liens being held on the
properties to the mouth be callad within two years. Motion carried unanimusiv
S -0.
53. REVISED WEST END LAW AND JOSTIC? CEWM /CIVIC CENTER AGREEHLVr. Staff report
by Jim Robinson.
Revisions in the cowty -city land sale agr•ament are[
1. Includes a legal description and site plan delineating the city /cmmty
property.
2 Reflects the additional acreage of 1.1± acres for the city police facility.
3 Site plan reflects the relocation of the police facility to the southeast
tip of the property.
A Payments mould be: 8.64± acres 8 $122,822 per acre
Paymmt at escrat $750,000
January 15, 1983 $311.182
S Requires receipt of the deed for the city property upon the initial -
payment. Also, allows the County to withdrew from the city's apportion-
- mane of secuted tazas if city defaults on second payment.
iMotion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Mikels to authorize the Mayor to execute the
revised agreement with the County of San Bernardino. Motion carried unanimously
S -0.
Councilman Bridge suggested that since it will be a number of years before develop.
sent begina, that we procead with landscaping of the site. Council concurred vith
he suggestion and decided to consider this during the budget process.
SC. FLOOD CONTROL BENEFIT ASSESSf@ti PROGRAM. Staff report by Lloyd Hobbs.
Presented was a ten year flood control encasement program which will be presented
to the voters in November.
Motion: Moved by Mikele, seconded by Palombo to give a conceptual approval of the
following four points:
1. The issue should appear on the November ballot.
2 A formula of assessment should be utilized
3 The program should run for a 10 year period
4. A minimum of 132 of the funds collected in each jurisdiction should
go to regional facilities. A
Motion carried unanimously 5 -0.
+. +.,,. City Council Minutes
.,.e March 17, 1982
Page 9
,
6. CITY ATIOPCEY'S REPORTS, Thera were Dona.
v
S7. ADJOURNEMT.
-% Motion: Movud by Paloabo, seconded by Frost to adjourn to a Redevelopment Agency
mating on Monday, March 22, 1982 at 7:10 a.m. to be hold in the city offices.
lotion carried unanimously 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m.
s Respectfully submitted,
Beverly Authelet
Deputy City Clerk
l{
i
Y'
IIt'
C
4
1
a;
k
:
1
F _
t y_
+ X
i.
i,
ni
4
rA
- PROJ%T PROPOSAL -
CITY OF RANCHO COCAMONGA CO1p1nM DEVELOPNENT DEPARTMENT
COKMUt11TY OEYELOPHENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
Before completing this project proposal rorm, carefully read throur,:, the entire
form. Answer all questions which are apphlatle to vm :- pyjer• as specifically
as possible. If more space is needed, attach separate sheets. TYPE BR PRINT.
A. GENEnAL INFORMATiOM.
1 Area of City In which proposed Project is •a be located:
ETi''A"DA kVa-. ( nortb of Earaiine Road)
2 Date Submitted: Vareb 5, 1982
3. Applicant /Organization: Hiatoric Preservation Commission
Address: P.C. Box 807, CUCembEFa Calif I.730
Contact Person: We. Holley/ Robert Hickcox
Phone. 714- 989 -1851 Time Available: 9 -5P.N.
B. PROJECT SUM+ARY INFORMTION
Project Information. (Give a brief description of proposed project).
Re -roof GARCIA RANCH HO'.'SE -
2 Project Eligibility. (This Project WiLL: 01ECR ONE)
Drincipally benefit low and moderate income persons (State the
approximate number of benificiaries and describe how they will
benefit.)
_ Eliminate or prevent slums and blight. (Describe conditions to
be alleviated.)
Elimlrate an imminent threat to public health, safety or welfare.
(State the nature of the problem and the time at which It originated.)
x Other Objectives (Explain how the project would meet the purpose `
of the COOG Program.) -
Restoring and preserving properti-re of special value for
historic, and asrethetic reasons.
- r
"r
0
---4
K
,i
3. Historic Preservation
a' On the National YRegistertofnHistoric Placesgoritheo be forted
Register of Historic Places located within an historic district.
.Or otherwise recognized as a significant landmark? if so, please
explain.
Ban Bernardino Cot•ot S3r -OE2 12 -22 -75
Y POINT CF HISTORICAL INTEREST.
1 -13 -81 City of Rancho Cucamonga
R
C. ESTIMATED BUDGET ISTORICAL LANDRAEU,
Provide the financial data requested below.
best fnforva Costs should be based on the
tion available. When preparing this data, consider these
factors: (a) project should be completed in one phase if possible, or if
Phased, operatfonal capability of the phases should be independent of each
Parts, witthaestimetedrCosttand should
pr orityrforieachdpart;b(c) apply fedg�ajct
prevailing wage rates to construction projects over $2,000;
1. Total Estimated Cost of Project: S
2. Estimator's qualification: -------
3. Amount of Funds Requested:$
a• Funds to be received free other souroes:S 1.000.00
D. MAINTENANCE AND OPERAT.ON COSTS
All capital improvements /facilities will require a mwfntinance and oper-
ation (M 6 O) contract with an M d 0 entity. Will the pro-
posed project have ongoing maintenance and operation costs? _Yes N0.
What are the estimated M d 0 cost Per year for this Project?
What public /quasi - public entity will M d 0 ? �-
OTHER FUNDING SOURCES
It is important for you or your Organization to t AV
t0 help offset the demand for limited community try to Obtain Other funds our
Project involves a renewal of funds each year, the City cannot guarantee
that renewal.
1 List tt•e amount of other funds (municipal, state, local, church,
willservice UednInaaddltlorrWaCe ,b•,unj ,s etc.
) from each source that
for which they will be used. Development funds, and the Purpose
if Community Development funds are needed to secure matching funds
from another source, state the source and the amount of funds to be
matched.
3. List other srurces of funding which have been sought but denied.
Provide the name Of the source(s) from which the funds were sought,
the appro -,mate date they were sought, and the reason they were denied.
CONfLE -cD PROJECT PROPOSALS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO WMNITY DEVELOPHEHT T DEPARTMENT,
CITY JF RANCHO CUCA110NGA,
MA ($. P. 0. BOX $07, RANCHO CUCAPpNGA CA 91730, ATTENTiON:RICK
For assistance or information regarding this form, call (714) 989 -1851.
y
April 20, 1982
CM OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CM Concri. MINvIES
Adjourned Meeting
ilwy�GZdi]A :#
An adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga van hold
In the Lion's Park Community Centar, 9161 Base Line Road on Tuesday. April 20, 1982.
The meeting was called to order at 7:45 p.m. by Mayor Phillip D. Schlosser.
Present: Cowcilmembers: James C. Frost, Joe D. Mikels, Michael A. Palombo, and
Phillip 0 Schlosser, Mayor.
Also present[ City Manager, Lauren M. Wasserman; City Attorney, Robert Dougherty;
Community Davelopeent Director, Jack Lam; City Engineer, Lloyd Hubbs; Assist.nt
City Managar, Jim Robinson; Community Services Director, 0111 Holley; and Finance
Director, Harry Empey.
Absent: Councilman Arthur H. Bridge, who was 111.
2. ITEMS OF BUSINESS.
2A. APPROVAL OF RESOUM04 COKKENDINO ARTHUR H. BRIDGE.
Although Mr. Bridge was not present because of illness, council proceeded with
approval of the Resolution which sill be presented to him at ease future time.
Notion: Moved by liikels, seconded by Frost to approve Resolution No. 8I -64.
Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Frost. Ntkels, Palombo, Schlosser.
NOESt None. ABSENT: Bridge. Mayor Schlosser read the Resolution in full.
RESOLMON H0. 82-64
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAHK NGA. CALIFORNIA. 0MOM DING ARTHUR
H. BRIDCE FOR HIS SERVICES AS A MEMBER OF THE CITY
COUNCIL.
26. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION COBOmrHG MICHAEL A. PAmmo.
Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Mikela to approve Resolution No. 82 -77.
Motion carried by the following votat AYESt Presto NLkals, Schlosser, NOES:
None ABSENT: Bridge. ABSTAINED: Palombo. Mayor Schlosser read the Resolution
In full.
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -77
A RESOLUTION OF THE CM COUNCIL OF THE CM OF
RANCHO CUCANONCA, CALIFORNIA. CORM NDINC MICHAEL
A. PALUMBO FOR HIS SERVICES AS A MEMBER OF THE
CM COUNCIL.
2C. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION CERTIFYING ELECTION RESULTS.
Mr. Wasserman, City Manager /City Clerk, vent over the canvass. He stated the
veto changed by two votes. This was created by someone turning in an Absentee
Ballot at a precinct the day of election, which had not been counted until the
canvass. Since one precinct was late in coming in, that was the one which the
city clerk chose to hand count.
Notion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Frost to approve Resolution No. 82 -78
certifying the election results, and to valve the entire reading. Notion carried
by the following veto: AYES: Frost, Mikels, Palombo, Schlosser. NOES: Nona.
ABSENT: Bridge. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 82 -78. -
sr
+3
March 22, 1982 r
1
CnzT OF RANCHO COCAt10N4A
RMrMAP:0327r AGENCY MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER.
A meeting of the Redevelopment Agency van held on Monday. March 22, 1982, in the
City Offices, 9320 Hua Line Road, Suite C, Rancho Cucamonga. Beuuso neither
the Chairman. Phi:11p D. Schlosser, nor the Assistant Chairman, Arthur n Bridge,
man forethetmetheother agency members appointed James C. Frost ms Acting Chair —
Acting Chairman Jams C. Frost called the meeting to order at 7 33 a.m.
Present: Agency Membernt Jon D. Mikels, Michael A. Palombo, acd Acting Chsiram,
James C. Frost.
Also present: Eracutive Director, Lauren N. Wasserman. -
Absent: Agency Members: Phillip D. Schlosser and Arthur H. Bridge. i
2_BUSINESS.
Item of business was to extend rho statute of limitations for an additional 30
days for the County of San Bernardino.
Motion: Moved by Mikals, seconded by Palumbo to grant the tim extension
Of the statute of limitations for thw County of Sea Grnardin�Motion "tried
by the and following
Schlosser. votes ATESt Nlkals. Palumbo. and Front. NOES: None. ABSENrg
Hridgo and Schlaeser.
3. ADJOURNM N-.
Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palonbo to adjourn the meting. Motion tarried
unanimons17. The meting adjourned at 7:37 a.m.
, ,o,
Respectfully submitted,
Lauren N. Wasserman
Secretary
x
e
Z -. 1Clty Council ME1nuEes rh
April 20, 1982 „
Page 2 w
S RESOLUr10N NO. 82 -78
A RFSOLUTION OF TED; CITY CCU'dCIL OF THE CITY OF v
UNC80 CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, RECITINC Td8 FACT
OF THE CENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION @:M .D IN SAID
CITY CH APRIL 11. 1982, OECLARINC THE RESULT
THEREOF AND SUCH OTHER HATTERS ARE PROVIDED BY
LAW.
2D. ADDED ITEM: PRPSEETYATION BY CHAMBER or CttOMcE.
Bob Salazar, of the Ranlho Curanonge Chamber of Commerce, presented Mr. Palombo
with a Resolution of Commendation. They had a resolution for MM.-. Bridge also which
would be presented to his at a later time.
2D. ADMINISTRATION OF OA1NS OF OFFICE To NEW COUNCIL CANDIDATES.
City Clerk, Lauren M. Wasseraaa, administered the oaths of office to the following
councilmembers elects
Chs -les J. Buquet II
Richard N. Dahl
Jon D. Hikels
After the oaths were administered, the new council members took their seats at
the council table.
2E. ADDED ITEM: Mrs. Frost presented the two new councilmembers with coffee
cups icmrinted with their name to match the other councilmember's cups.
2F. STATEMENTS M04 NEWLY INSTALLED COUNCIL MEMBERS. Each Counclimembsr was
given the opportunity to make a few comments.
2C. SELECTION OF MAYOR AND MAYOR -PRO TEERORE. The City Clerk received ballots
from the councilmembers for the position of Mayor and Mayor Pro-Tempore. Following
the counting of the ballots, Mr. Wasserman announced that Jon D. Mikels was named
Mayor and Charles J. Buquat II was named the Mayor Pro- Tampore.
1. ADJOURNMENT.
Motions Moved by Frost, seconded by Schlosser to adjourn. Motion carried unanlanusly
5-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m. to a social time.
Respectfully submitted,
Beverly A. Acthelet
Deputy City Clark