Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1982/04/21 - Agenda Packet
V ACTION AGENDA an, bF RA\C3•10 CUCAMOC\GA MY COUNCIL lGEV nk Lion's Park Community Center 9161 Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga, California Wedneseay, April 21, 1982 - 7:0D p.m. All Itemv submitted for the City Council Agenda mast be In Writing. The deadline for submitting those Items is Stop p.m. on the Wednesday prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's office receives all such Items. 1. CALL TO ORDER. 7:30 p.m. a- i A. Pledge of Allegiance to Flag b Roll Call Frost x , Mikels x Buquet a , Gahl_ j, and Schl: 'x C Approval of Minutes: none submitted. 2 AtiI.OURCEIIENTS. a. Thursaay, April 22, 7:00 p.m. - Advisory Commission - Lion's Park Community Certer, 9161 Base Line Road. (CANCELLED) b. Tuesday, April 27, 7:00 p.m. - Etiwanda Specific Plan Meeting - Etiwanda Intermediate School, 6925 Etiwanda Avenue. c. S {• ing Clean Sweep Week - May 8 -15. d. Vacrncies on the Planning Commission and Advisory Commission. Applications can be obtained from the city clerk. Applications with reeumr attached will be accepted until May 7, 1982. Public Interviews of applicants will be conducted ' at adjourned mating of City Council prior to May 19th. (See reverse side for additional announcements) , 3. CONSEIIT CALENDAR. , The following Consent Calendar Items are expected to be routine and non- controversial. They Will be acted upon by the Council at one time 'wIVWut,.,, discussion. ..` A,. Moved by Schloemer, Seconded by Frost to approve the consent calestlir''•+'; k ,Sd '.:,,+r• +ritn 1 and m acted upon separately. Motion carried 5 -0. +.A; �� �,+s _. -� f, ., e.YY(•t.p4:'",i. ! ; • . . �'r, ..';e..�j e'•rJ'y�j }' ,fi �sn 4Y)::3��Y�s''�i��t�bTe `C- �tu.E$:•�i.ci�!'i ..ti l.j±:' ,+-n _. •.-.i n' -.; :x:+.:.� w..4�I��� -ii e. Moved by Front, seconded by Buquat that Mayor send letter M-.ffey BSgh School Board encouraging them to .tame new Eigh School In Etiwanda, the Etivands High School. f. City Clerk Wasserman requested that "Agreement Betvean Agency and Foothill Fire District" and "Agreement Between Agency and the County of San Bernardino" be added to the consent �xlender as Items "1" and "m ". g. City Clerk Wasserman read correction to title of Consent Calendar Item "k ". h. Councilman Frost ...coated some of tha activities that will take place at the Etivands Centen®Sal celebration. I. Councilman Frost requested that Item "I" and "m" be pulled from the consent calendar and acted upon separately. ' ,`? ;_;•aim � +`� i � e 6�...Ik ♦try. ..�.. �✓ ",Z- I :YIw]54 t V. is r' 5 e City Council Agenda -2- a. Approval of Warrants, Register No. 82 -4 -21 in the amount of $422,058.20 b. Award of Design Services for street widening, recon- struction, and resurfacing at: Hillside Road from Amethyst Street to Sapphire Street; and Beryl Avenue from Manzanita Drive to Hillside Road. Recommend that contract be awarded to Associated Engineers as the lowest bidder. 777 , April 21, 1982 Droved Apbroved c Forward Claim by Keely L. Oliva to the city attorney Approved for handling. d. Forward Claim by Stanley Arthur Antlocer to the city Approved attorney for handling. e Ala flit Beverage License Application for on -sale Approved general eating place by f4ney b Robert, Inc , the _ Boars Head, 6620 Carnelian Street. f. Approval of a Resolution to oppose using PERS Pension Approved funds to balance the State budget. RESOLUTION 82 -68 Approved A RESOLUTION OF T4E CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING THE USE OF PERS PENSION FUNDS TO BALANCE THE STATE BUDGET. g Acceptance of Improvement Agreement. Bonds, and Real Approved Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for Director Review 81 -34 - Charles Hofgaarden: located at 8780 Archibald Avenue RESOLUTION NO. 82 -69 _ Approwd A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMVIT AGREEMENT AND iHPROVEMENT SECURIT7 FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW NO 81 -34. RESOLUTION NO. 02 -70 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. ACCEPTIRG A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CO11- TRACL AND LIEI AGREEMENT FROM CHARLES HOFGAARDEN AND AUTHORIZING THE HAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO44SIGN THE.SMIE. Approved . .s City Council Agenda -3- April 21, 1982 h. Acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract Approved and Lien Agreement from O'Gorman and Smith: located at 8861 Strang Lane. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -71 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOPNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMEYT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM JAMES O'GORMAN, MARCELLA O'GORMAH,AND BRIAN SMITH AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME. (8861 STRANG LANE) i. Intent to Annex Tract. No. 11696. Tract No. 10762, and Tract No. 10277 -1 as Annexation No. 9 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -72 A RESOLUTION nF THE CI71 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNI4. OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENG.'NEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION NO. 9 TO LANDSCAPE MNHTEUANCE DISTRICT NO. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -73 A RESOLUTION O' TILE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHP CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, DECLARING IT5 II1TER7I31i TO ORDER THE ANNEYA- TIOH TO LA'.OSCAPE MA14TENANCE DISTRICT :'0. 1. AN AS�,ESaMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATItW NO. 9 TO LANDSCAPE WIIITENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND .IGHTING %7 OF 1972 AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEATING OB- JECTIOtIS THERETO (TRACT HUMMERS 11691, 10762, • AND 10277-1). Approved Approved - Approved Approved j Acceptance of Bonds and Agreements fora Single Approved Family Residence at 5727 Carnelian Street - submitted by Richard E. Harney RESOLUTION NO 82 -74 Approved A RESOLUTIOt OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE _ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVE - 14EIT SECURITY FOR A SI4GLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 5727 CARNELIAN STREET. '��ri.S'N ): /hA''..- ��''_'`.i- '-•..rte ...._.,.,.._...a- ...........15 vSe%irV 'E��' i. a J f r t r City Council Agenda 4- April 21, 1982 k. Set Public Hearing Date for May 5, 1982: Environ- mental Assessment and Parcel Hap 7280 - The Robert sea Reverse side for Mayer Corporation: A residential subdivision of corrected Title, descriptio ' 23 1 acres into 2 lots located on the southeast corner of Arrow Route and Turner Avenue - APN 290- 091-5 and 6. 1 Approvel of Agre�mot between Agency and Foothill Fire Diet. Approved 5-0. m Approval of Agreement Netween Agency and count) Approved 5 -0. . 4 IC HEARINGS. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT REIMBURSEMENTS. ORDIHAIiCE NO. 170 (second reading) _ .,pp, c,,,.a _5_-D_ Al ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE Council requested staff CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, met with developers and IMPOSING A FEE PAYABLE AT THE TIME OF prepare report regarding APPLICATION FOR A L'ILDING PERMIT FOR THOSE options for notification LOTS OR PARCELS OF LAND WITH RESPEC- TO and interest reimbursementf WHICH FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN review at May 19th meeting INSTALLED PURSUANT TO A REINBURSEMEN' AGREEMENT. B. APPEAL OF PLANNING CO >PIISSIOY DECISION FOR PREPARATION r atimma t w.1y is.h, b�All Eli IRONME T I C PO E DE tL P 1E , OFILMT TI T C 3- dews opment o a tote planned residential aeve opsrent of 185 singe: family detached units and 14.6 acre park on 95.5 acres of land in the R -1- 20,000 Zone located on Hermosa Avenue, north of Hillside. C ENVIPONMENTAL ASSFSSMENT AND ZONING ORDINANCF AMEND - IT -1 'Ten ng c -I an C- zones o a ow , arcade uses subject to review and approval of a Con- ditional Use Permit. ORDINANCE NO 174 (first reading) c A R,aAlnc a.t for June 2, 1982 ' All ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHD CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS 61.022. 61.027A, AND 61.027D OF THE R.VICHD CUCAMONGA INTERIM ZONING OR014INCE BY DEFINING AN ARCADE AND ADDING SECTIONS 61.027A(b)(5)0 AND 61.0270 , (d)(6), AND AMENDING SECTION 61.027B(b)(1) A TO PROVIDE FOR ARCADE USES ill THE C -1 AND C -2 ZONES AND REQUIRING A CONDITIONAL "• '� • - ""r7? USE PERMIT. - R�y} LY_" �$: tis�P` w' ldri.:{ �i.^��F.tcFtr...i9�'o:.«%_•.yY: X... ....- .s.-`� .-. .n. .... . uir... T 1p. ��]�]++���`` .yyqq��� .. +n.- 9lCn.c�MYY.'sl•.. k. Set Public Hearl�g for Envimnm�.ntal Agoasament and Planned Davcicpe��t OZA*fT_11&9, - Ra7or - A change Appr�ved. I CSI%; W of zone from It- il, I dential)to R-31PD (Multiple randly ResIdantial/Planned Development) and the daialopment oZ 44 patio homes and 322 townhouse units on 33 acres of land in the R-1 zone located on the south side of Arrov. betwea Tumor and Center Avenues - APH 209-091-05, 06, 07, Set Public Hearing Date for May 5* 1982. City Council Agenua -S- 7 r+ S. STAFF REPORTS. A. RECqUEST FRAM SAN BERNARDINO COiYcTY FOR SUPPORT OF h `• {T1CS�A 6JECT. -5tL� report port byT a — Wasserman. >� R. RESOLUTICN N0. 82 -75 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE a1 CITY OF R4NCH0 CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, URGING T'OF SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT TO PRO- VOTE THE RECOVERY OF MATERIALS AND ENERGY r. FROM SOLID HASTF B. A RESOLUTION AMENDING TIFF FOR COUNCIL KEETINGS. Naff report by auren asserman RESOLUTION NO. 82 -7i A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TI14E OF REGULAR 11EETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. Y 6 CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS. i 7 AWOURNMENT. 9:15 P.M. Y �Tr April 21, 1982 - r. . Approved 5-0 Approved 5 -0 . � JJ✓ X. OF RANO-10 QX.AMOMA CITY COUNCIL AGEDMIk man Lion's Park Community Center r 9161 Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga, California Wednesday, April 21, 1982 - 7:00 p.m. r• 4, All Items submitted for the City Council Agenda east be in writing. The deadline for submitting these Items is S,00 p.m. on the Wednesday prior to the meeting, The City Clerk's Office receives all such Sterna. 1. CALL TO ORDER. A Pledge of Allegiance to Flag B Roll Call Frost , Mikels_, Buquet , Dahl , and Schlosser 1,10 C. .proval of Minutes: none submitted. V ) _ .40 2 ne s 1 b. Tuesday, April 27, 7:00 p.m. - Etiwanda Specific Plan Meeting - Etiwanda intermediate School, 6925 Etiwanda Avenue. c. Spring Clean Sweep Weeh» May 8 -154 d. Vacancies on the Planning Commission and Advisory Commission. Applications can be obtained from tie city clerk. 3 CONSENT CALENOAR. The following Consent Calendar Items are erpocted to he mutlne and non - mnemvoraial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without a disevaslon. ;"o, t4,�+ ryp2 rid yA *. pQ1 HIV i -ti.,. Il \ ^ • Sr' Z 'v^. L Ii�Y�.i{.':. "�di.:i.l..x1. `F .. �•4� I n City Council Agenda �fl -2- April 21, 1982 a. Approval of Warrants, Register Ho. 82 -4 -21 in the 1 amount of .=412,058.20. b. Award of Design Servires for street widening, recce- S strvction, and resurfacing at: Hillside Road from Amethyst Street to Sapphire Street; and Beryl Avenue from Manzanita Drive to Hillside Road Recommend that contract be awarded to Associated Engineers as the lowest bidder. c Forward Claim by Neely L. Oliva to the c'ty attorney 13 for handling. d Forward Claim by Stanley Arthur Antiocer to the city 15 attorney for handling. e Alcoholic Beverage License Application for on -sale to general eating place by Downey d Robert, Inc., the - Boars Head, 6620 Carnelian `,treet. f. Approval of a Resolution x. oppose using PERS Pension funds to balance the State budget. RESOLUTION 82 -68 zo A RESOLUiI011 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMORrA, CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING THE USE OF PERS PENSION FUNDS TO BALANCE THE STATE BUDGET. g Acceptance of Improvement Agreement, Bonds, and Real 11 Prol.erty Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for Director Review 81 -34 - Charles Hofgaarden: located at 8780 Archibald Avenue. RESOLUTION 110. 82 -69 23 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 81 -34. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -70 24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. fALIFONIIA, •' `s ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY - IMPROVEMENT CON- TRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM CHARLES HOFGAAROEN AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND r�A CITY LURK TO SIGN THE SAME. W�[ R��`/:' t1Y�4" ji$���L'i1�.;4'i5�?�A'f..b..6a �.a •i' ...ir.'ia��•.P C'[•u'�a�L'_`F "��i , RESOLUTION NO 82 -72 43 t A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. "A"FORNIA, • OF PRE:IMIHARY APPROVAL OF CITY :NGINEER'S , REPORT FOR t� I N MAINTENANCE DIS RICT80. 19 TO WIDSLAI'F. 8 i R •ULUT)ON NO. 82 -73 46 A RESOLUTION OF .MF f.TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIIONGA, CALIF074IA, DECLARING ITS INTENTIOY TO ORDER THE AhNEXA- TION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION NO. 9 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND , OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEATING OB- JECTIONS THERETO (TRACT NUMBERS 11691, 10762, AND 10277 -1). ls� B Acceptance of Bonds and Agreements for a Single as Family Residence at 5727 Carnelian Street - submitted by Richard E. Harney. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -74 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE . ; CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOILNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVE- =' NEW SECURITY FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT _5727 CARNELIAN STPEET. 5o " City Council Agenca -3- April 21, 1982 h. Acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract 33 and Lien Agreewent from U'Gornan and Smith: located at 8861 Strang Lane. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -71 35 a A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ' CITY OF RANCHO Cl'CAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ' ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM JAMES - O'GORMAN, MARCELLA O'GORMAN, AND BRIAN SMITH AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME. (8861 STRANG LANE) i. Intent to Annex Tract No. 11696, Tract No. 10762, and 39 Tract No. 10277 -1 as Annexation No. 9 to Landscape Maintenancc District No. 1. RESOLUTION NO 82 -72 43 t A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. "A"FORNIA, • OF PRE:IMIHARY APPROVAL OF CITY :NGINEER'S , REPORT FOR t� I N MAINTENANCE DIS RICT80. 19 TO WIDSLAI'F. 8 i R •ULUT)ON NO. 82 -73 46 A RESOLUTION OF .MF f.TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIIONGA, CALIF074IA, DECLARING ITS INTENTIOY TO ORDER THE AhNEXA- TION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION NO. 9 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND , OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEATING OB- JECTIONS THERETO (TRACT NUMBERS 11691, 10762, AND 10277 -1). ls� B Acceptance of Bonds and Agreements for a Single as Family Residence at 5727 Carnelian Street - submitted by Richard E. Harney. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -74 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE . ; CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOILNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVE- =' NEW SECURITY FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT _5727 CARNELIAN STPEET. 5o " c, t ' r City Council Agenda -4- April 21, 1982 k. Set Public Hearing Date for May S. 1982: Environ- ored�K�iyer Assessment and Parcel Nap 7280 - isi k -rt ration: A residential subdtviSion ur into 2 lots located on the southeas 111���000www Route and Turner Ave AP � 4S I \ A. PUBLIC INPROIENEW REIMBURSEMENTS. ORDINANCE NO. 170 (second reading) se AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNLIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCX4CNrA. CALIFORNIA, IMPOSING A FEE PAYABLE 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 PURSUANT TO A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT. 8 APPEAL OF PLANNING C"ISSI011 DECISION FOR PREPARAfIC41 _ 57 N I Et1T I C PO E UhvhLuFn.N1 Or TENTAT CT ""' - development o a total — p anne res ent a eva epaent 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 He-mosa Avenue, north of Hil'! de. L. H+IRONNENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMEND- _ 60 82-03. Amending C- I an d C-2 zones to a ow arcade uses subject to review and approval of a Con- ditional Use Permit. ORDINANCE NO. 174 (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUt1CIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDiNG SECTIONS 61.022, 61.027A, AND 61 0278 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE BY DEFINING AN ARCADE ADDING SECTIONS 61.027A(b)(5)B AND 61.0 (d)(6), 41D AMENDING SECTION 61.0278(b) A TO PROVIDE FOR ARCADE USES IN THE C AND C -2 ZONES AND REQUIRING A CONDITION USE PERMIT. 84 r W City Council Agenda -5- S. STAFF REPORTS. A. REQUEST FROM SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FOR SUPPORT OF WASTE TO ENERGY PROJECT. Staff report by Lauren aWsserran. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -75 A RESOLUTICN OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TdE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, URGING THE SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT TO PF'O- MOTE THE RECOVERY OF MATERIALS AND ENERGY FROM SOLID WASTE B. A RESGLUTION AMENDING TIME FnR COUNCIL MEETINGS. Staff report by Lauren Wassemian. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -76 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL CF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TIME OF REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. 6 CITY ATTO -;EY'S REPORTS. 7. ADJOURNMENT. April 21, 1982 101 101 c P� ACTION AGMA RANCHO CUCA14ONGA REDEVEIOP.KENT AGENCY AGENDA Lion's Park Community Center 9161 Hasa Line Road Rancho Cucamotga, California Wednesday, April 21, 1982 - 6130 p.m 1. CALL TO ORDER. 6:40 p.m. "1 a Roll Call: Frost z Mlkeis X , B�quet x, Dahl__&. Schlosser,. :• b. Approval of Minutes: none were submitted. • Mayor Mikels called an exac4tivu session at 6:41. Meeting resume. with ,. all members of Council and staff present at 7:02 a.m. ,i 2. CONSENT CALENDAR. „+ No items submitted s LC 3. STAFF REPORTS. A. APP ^_OVAL OF AGREggNT BETWEEN AGENCY AND THE FOOT- Anorcved 5 -0. Ato FIRE GCSE B. APPROVAL OF ACREEM"CHT BETWEEN AG-NCV AND THE COUNTY /nprovcd 5-0. OF S O hJ. Motion: cMo�vv�ee�dboy Frost to schedule future Redevelopment Meetings at 7100 p.m. and ��o 4. A0.10�IWAAEcouncil at 7:30 p.m., seconded by Dahl. Motion Carried 5-0. 7:14 p.m ON 4 x n�, •�'i+li2+�.lifiw��TY�:3Gc,�•%•�A •• .y- p,.,•y.:.i>it...� a CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 21, 1982 TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency FROM: Lauren Wasserman, City Manager BY: Tim J. Beedle. Senior Planner SUBJECT: AGRErMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO REUARDING TAX INCREMENT The negotiations with the County of San Bernardino regarding the County's share of tax increments to the Redevelopment Agency have reached a successful conclusion. Attached to this staff report you will find a draft copy of the agreement that has been worked out by both the City staff and County staff. Essentially, the County accepted the position which the City offered in response to the County's initial proposal. Following are the major points of the agreement: 1. The agreement grants the Redevelopment AgPnry all the share of the tax increment for the first fifteen years or $50,000,000, whichever cares first 2. After fifteen years the County will retain a portion of tax increment based upon a per capita cost of ser- vices by the County to the population within the Re- development area. This arrangement provides for the County to determine the costs of certain County ser- vices to those within the Redevelopment area. Exhibit "A" of the Agreement indicates the services which the County provides. 3. The accrued tax increment from the County's share will be used to provide for the construction of regional fa- cilities such as flood control facilities of the Day Creek and Etiwanda Creek system. Compared to the original agreement which the County offered the City, this agreement 1s remarkably different. It assumes that the City will be able to receive a much greater portion of the County's tax increment over the life of the Redevelopment Plan. REC%KNOATION: It is recommended that the Redevelopment Agency approve c e agreement and authorize the chairman of the Redevelopment Agency to execute the agreement. Respectfully submitted, Attach. s k -S V i• Y: kT, IS RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA Lion's Park Co:maanity Center 9161 Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga, California Nednesd?,V 21, 1902 — 6:30 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER. a. Roll Call: Frost , Mikels_, Buquat__ Dahl._, Schlosser b. Approval of Minutes: none were submitted. 2. CONSENT C4LENDAR. No items submitted. 3 STAFF REPORTS. A. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN AGENCY AND THE FOOT- HILL FIRE DISTRICT. B APPP�M&MREEMEKT BETWEEN AGENCY AND THE COUNTY 4 ADJOURIOTNT. . s r= I 23 .' tiiry„ r 1 BEST, BEST a KRIEGER • vwoM�I eli)eM wtMYw MOO 0 ONA MNO[ LT9CL1 !. oson lose RIV9"SIOC,GLVORmm Olaca )LIOMOMLOM)e!L•NLO April 12, 1982 i 2ECEIVEa CITY OF MC O CUCAMiONGA APR 131982 � 8191101U11 2 11 1 213y� S 6 PM �• 1 i✓ r.t, , J - w), [,w,ese onaL ee0 w) rweVln•IIK+tWw we 4 eYY ePllllLa.44reI1M11 ylIe ` ONJY4)aM eVM LRI TIICL NMO CMNaf MIiLL eOVtaV.MO roeT O +IK[ LOa L LVM C)r'I.4YI0[MN eN1, (M) IN.YN ,.oe n,wzN orrleL m seas rao+N n�aur[ ueo wa aweuN.v.uroexu eoeo µylaN.uu gf Lauren Wasserman n ue.w. Vip. cew, 7 Redevelopment Agency �E City of Rancho Cucamonga I� uL.w.O +.� %.ti.• 0.W�wl e)nLw .e..ww� iVUarM I.Wu .i' a.ilMr a.es). isu ia:ewa • wru. w xeN, L..... the Foothill Fire Protection District, wwn ew.. rvaw[ iuriee.M the Redevelopment Agency of the City of 1 BEST, BEST a KRIEGER • vwoM�I eli)eM wtMYw MOO 0 ONA MNO[ LT9CL1 !. oson lose RIV9"SIOC,GLVORmm Olaca )LIOMOMLOM)e!L•NLO April 12, 1982 i 2ECEIVEa CITY OF MC O CUCAMiONGA APR 131982 � 8191101U11 2 11 1 213y� S 6 PM �• 1 i✓ r.t, , J - w), [,w,ese onaL ee0 w) rweVln•IIK+tWw we 4 eYY ePllllLa.44reI1M11 ylIe ` ONJY4)aM eVM LRI TIICL NMO CMNaf MIiLL eOVtaV.MO roeT O +IK[ LOa L LVM C)r'I.4YI0[MN eN1, (M) IN.YN ,.oe n,wzN orrleL m seas rao+N n�aur[ ueo wa aweuN.v.uroexu eoeo µylaN.uu gf Lauren Wasserman Executive Director 7 Redevelopment Agency �E City of Rancho Cucamonga ` P 0 Box 807 .i' Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 • Re: Agreement for Cooperation Between the Foothill Fire Protection District, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dear Lauren: Enclosed please find two counterpart on inals of the referenced agreement which have been revised to include the two changes which wL discussed by telephone ¢t today. Section 2.6 has been revised to include °ire fighting personnel costs as part of the overall definition of fire protection facilities ". In addition, we have revised Section 3 2 to require allocation of excess funds to the Rancho Redevelopment Fire Protection Fund in the event the tax increment received by the Agency exceeds & && the annual debt service for construction of and operation and maintenance costs for Fire Station Re. 4 as well as the additional items act forth in Section 3.2. You should know that the revision to 3.2 results i in somewhat of a "full circle" allocation of the tax increment 'Ail - uw ornccs or BEST BEST 6 KRIE? °R Lauren Wasserman April 12, 1482 Page Two which otherwise would have been paid to the Foothill Fire Protection District, but for the Rancho Redevelopment Project. However, we have diecrased that it is unlikely that sufficient funds will ever be accumilated to trigger t' the requirements of Section 3.2 let a]nae exceed the 7' expenditures authorized by 3.2. A c In passing, I did want to point out that the V7 agreement authorizes the Agency ra pay all monies received under the terms of the agreement to its special fund, so long as they are othera-ise allocated or attributed to the Rancho Redevelopment Project Fire Protection Fund or Fire Station No. 4 Operation and Maintenance Fund. This means that considerable opportunities should exist for leveraging funds otherwise allocated to the purposes set forth in the referenced agreement. If tha enclosed agreement meets with your approval, we would suggest two counterpart originals be referred to the Foothill Fire Protection District y for review and signature. ;yr Yovr eilcerely, s" John E. Brown of Beat, Beat 6 Krieger JEB:bjs Enclosures v' /J .r J a • C i.•C+ •.T "� � tv y: Y 1 h r r r' r.• :.i Change made on pago 5 on 1- 15 -87. 'A Clean coples will be given to Council ` at the Council mating. AGREEMENT FOR COOPERATION BETWEEN THE FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION 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 April, 1982, between the FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, a public agency ( "Dis- trict"), and the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a public body ( "Agency ") and the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation ( "City'). RECITALS. 2 1 Agency is proposing to undertake a pro3ram under the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Coda Secti.., 33000 et seg.)* for the redevelopment, replanning and redesign of blighted areas within City with stagnant, improperly utilized and unproduc- tive land known as the Rancho Redevelopment Pro,ieet ("Pro- ject") and requiring redevelopment in the interest of the health, safety, and general welfare 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, authorizing *All subsequent references, unless otherwise noted, are to the California Health & Safety Code. -1- Revised: 4/12/82 ' 3 r E.".1 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 purl >ose 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 1980 -81. 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 - community which has adopted 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. 2.5 District has submitted objections to Project's financial impact and has determined that Project will cause financial burden or detriment. 2.b 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, operation and maintenance of fire fighting structures, equipment and apparatus including fire fighting personnel costs (hereinafter collectively referred to as "fire protection facilities ") and District and Agency have a common interest in and wish to facilitate •�t i_ -2- Revised: 4/12/82 ��. �a , P' •�i ik redevelopment within City and to provide for the cooperation of District and Agency in carrying out redevelopment activi- ties and otherwise alleviate any financial burden or detri- ment caused to District by the Rancho Revelopment Project. ` 2.7 District and Agency recognize the need to provide adequate fire protection facilities to serve the Project and have determined that such facilities are of { benefit to the Project and the immediate area in which the Project is located end that there are no other reasonable means of financing tho construct_on, operation and mainte- +i nance of such fire protocrion facilities. 2 8 Agency has found and determined that it would be appropriate to alleviate any financial burL:en or . detriment caused to District by the Rancho Redevelo•,ment Project by paying to District money to be used fr.r the operation and maintenance of fire protection facilities which benefit the Project and by otherwise expanding and improving construction, operation and maintenance of the community's fire protection capabilities 2 9 District and Agency, in consideration of '• these mutual undertakings, desire to settle their differ- ences and cooperatively provide for the redevelopment of ' certain areas of City. ' NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual promises and covenants contained herof 1, the 4 parties hereto agree as follows: -3- Revised: 4/12182 ENRON! 11 +i 4. Th f' bf v, 3. TERMS. :i - 3.1 General Purpose Tax Allocation for Con - struction of Fire Station No. 4. Taxes attributable to that ar +%a c hin the territorial limits of District which would hs• - ,erwiss 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 and which are allocated to Agency pursuant to Section 33670(b) shall be allocated by Agency to its Special Fund and designated "Rancho Redevelop- ment Project Fire Protection Fund" an. rall be used when accumulated in sufficient amount to pay the principal of and interest on loans, money advanced to, or indebtedness (whether funded, refunded, assumed or otherwise) incurred by gency to finance or refinance, in whole or in part, the construction of District's Fire Station No. 4 which fire protection facility benefits the Project. when the annual debt service for such loans, advances and indebtedness, and interest thereof, have been paid in any one year, all moneys th6reafter received from taxes in that year, or any lesser portion thereof agreed to by the parties, attributable to District, upon the taxable property within that portion of such redevelopment project included within the territorial limits of District and which are allocated to Agency pur- suant to Section 33670(b), shall be allocated by Agency to its Special Fund and designated Fire Station No. 4 Operation and Maintenancn Fund. • 0 -�„ -4- Revised: 4112/32 ' a • 3.2 Payment to District. When the taxes '� allocated pursuant to Section 3.1 exceed the annual debt r service for construction of and operation and maintenance costs for Fire Station No. 4, the excess taxes allocated to �' Agency sha.l be paid to District upon request to alleviate jt.. any Financial burden or detriment caused to District by yet, Project Funds so allocated to District shall be used to pay the principal of and interest on loans, money advanced to, or indebtedness (whether funded, refunded, assumed or otherwise) incurred by the Agency or District to finance or 4 refinance, in whole or in part, the following: (a) con- struction of additional facilities for Fire Station No. 4. w � (b) lease and /or purchase of fire protection equipment; and (c) operation and maintenance of fire protection facilities ywhich mutually benefit the Project and the District. When �G such loans, advances and indebtedness, if any and interest thereof, have been paid, all moneys thereafter received from hx taxes, or any portion thereof, attributable to District upon the taxable property within that portion of such redevel- opment project included within the territorial limits of .'ter• District shall be paid into the Rancho Redevelopment Fire "leased to the District uyon re est by the Protection Fund of Agency and /used to alleviate any ad District, and e- tional financial burden or detriment caused to District by r y; the Rancho Redevelopment Project by paying to District money � to be used for the operation and mnintenanee of fire protec- ok � F tior. facilities which benefit the Project and by otherwise (, expanding and improving construction, operation and mafnte- -5- Revised: 4/12/82 - i W i 5 l v , A. nonce of the community's fire protection capabilities. 3.3 Rancho Redevelopment Project Fire Pr-•tac t {on Fees. Not leas than fifty percent (50X) of the fire protection fees including but not limited to fees in kind such as land donations, excluding special benefit assessment or standby availability charges levied for fire suppress'.on services or fees for services, which are collected from taxable property in the Project Area by or for the benefit of the District after the effective date of Ordinance Ne. 166 and which are remitted to District shall be paid to Agency and deposited into a fund designated the Rancho Redevelopment Project Fire Protection Fund within ten days after such fees are paid to District. Agency agrees that all such fees which aro allocated to Agency shr.11 be held in a se2arate Rancho Redevelopment Project Fire Protection Fund and shall be used by Agency for the purpose of reducing any annual indebtedness, financial burden or detriment of Agency incurred by constructing, expanding and improving construction of the community's Fire Station No 4 If necessary, Agency and District shall make and execute su:h contracts and other instruments necessary or conveni5int to enable Agency and District to exercise their powers in order to carry out the purposes of this section. If sufficient funds have been accumulated in the Rancho Development Project Fire Protection Fund in any one year to retire any annual indebtedness, all moneys thereafter rece ved from such fess, or any portion thereof, attributable to Ustrict, upon the taxable property- -6- Revised: 4/12/82 - 0 s i i. ;t n `i ,r 1 within that portion of such redevelopment project included within the territorial limits of District, shall be allocated pursuant to Secti �n 3.2. 3 4 Time of District Tax Allocation. That portion of taxes which are to be allocated to Agency pur- suant to Section 33670(b) and which are to be paid to District pursuant to Section 3.2 shall be allocated to the Rancho Redevelopment Project Fire Protection Fund 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 30 allocated shall be held in Agency's Special Fund and designated Rancho Redevelopment Project Fire Protection Fund until used by District for the purposes set forth in Section 3.2 of this Agreement The Agency shall remit such taxes to and District shall use such taxes in accordance with the following proce- dure: (a) On or before May 1 of each year, the District shall adopt a resolution declaring its inten- tion to adopt a p,oposed budget and specifying a time, not later than August 31, and a place at which the District ::ill hold a hearing on the question of the adoption of such budget. The budget shall be in two parts, one part consist- ing of capital costs and :he other part consisting of opera- tion and maintenance costa District's budget shall indi- cate the total taxes which must be allocated to District by Agency from the Rancho Radevelc.pment Project Fire Protection -7- Revised: 4/12/82 a S X ..x Fund in the budget year in order to alleviate any financial '•`} burden or detriment. W (b) Immediately after adoption of the r resolution of intention, the District shall mail a c oy of the resolution and proposed budget to the Agency. The '-- Agency shall review the proposed budget and, not later than 1' ten 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 mcke such changes in the proposed budget as it deems advisable. r' (c) Not later r'.,an August 31 of each ;t year, the District shall by resolution adopt the budget and determine the Agency allocation The severAl amounts of t proposed expenditures specified in the adopted budget shall be deemed appropriated for the fiscal year and for the pur- poses specified in the budget The District shall adapt an amended budget to reflect the report and recommendations of the Agency with respect to the amount allocated, unless the D- strict, based on specific findings, determines that such 4 ^ recommendations will inpnir the District's ability to pro- vide fire protection facilities, 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 -8- Revised: 4112/82 %O SY` i, 1i ± � i a 0 I (d) If the Agency failr to submit a written report and recommendations as hereinabove provided, then the Agency shall be deemed to have approved the pro- posed budget. (a) If the District fails to adol.t c 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 chall con- stitute the budget and allocation for such fiscal year. (f) From and after adoption of the budget, the Agency shall remit such taxes with interest thereon to District from the "Rancho Redevelopment Project Fire Protection Fund," within. 30 days after receipt of written request therefor, in such amounts as indicated in the adopted budget less reasonable expenses, as agr -ted upon by Agency and District, incurred by Agency in the adminis- tration of this Agreement. In no event shall such expenses exceed ten percent (10%) of the taxes remitted to District by Agency 3.5 Allocation of Special Taxes. District shall be allocated, in addition to the portion of taxes allocated pursuant to Subdivision (a) of Section 33670 cad Section 3.1 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 District which levy occurs after -9- Revised: 4112)82 .p .k the tae year in which the ordinance adopting the redevelop- ment plan becomes effective. ;i 3 6 Mutual Assistance. District will assist ° the Agency in the planning, financing, acquisition, construc- tion and maintenance or operation of redevelopment activi- ties undertaken by Agency within District in accordance with applicable state and .federal law. District and Agency shall supply to one another such information and reports as from time to time either may require to undertake their _"pee - tive obligations. ATTEST: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATED: - Mayor ATTEST: • City Cler REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATED: DATED: Chairman ATTEST: ;C Secretary }y FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION "•, DISTRICT DATED: President `41 ' ATTEST: J Secretary �,�- Revised: 4112J82 _ _ : II-10- I Crry OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEXOR"DUM April 16, 1982 TO, Redevolopmme Agency rRay, Beverly AUtholat Au15tont SC=nt4ZV At the time thO APIA" vas typed, " had not --sce'ved wp'Gs of the ATreoment with the County. Coplas Will be distributed owe tbay are xeealvod. ba iC -Am O- i Y f new. r.�•n.wr +• t� i a wn Y e.te.,w Y. csrtw:.a. x•.a v,weW x• .0.N 'v )0.nY9• wua xuvY • �•w�x•^ �l"n` a,aae e.mt. x_.u. <l�avi y.�u,p•• �_ x�YM.x �p .n.or.o n..z.w• wI a�..,.n rT,n� Nuu.t.x ...... YM wM,N a. IY ieM,w Aae IyYO Pouf Y YNt�+1VM.•x9 waA }ti/[ ,0,4 i.,,i. 9MYt eY,Mi/•a Y I.YOatl.0 ao•r9x•fox Y • our Ornocs or BEST, BEST 4 KRIEGER nw.tw- 9r, 1 Na rere+wr ei00 mM c 8 Tx [LT r. O.fO[ Oii RMROIO[ICAUIOMMI 828 02 TR[rMOMC(iN)ii0•N00 April 14, 1982 Edward Duddy, Esq. Deputy County Counsel County of San Bernardino County Civic Building 157 West 5th Street San Bernardino, California 92415 /Yx ix IMi M/Ki f00 WtTIxON}i.VKJWIV Vtt . ruM nmx9geu+roexu n[f[ pN)ttl -n« fYx OW OIrKi, ! «t0 PUtT MINI fOOINMO xJiT 9Ir.Ct fOl fux (n�)ntoi� fuo iN 1MTx I Wc. 24 W.Ti NOO bf Y10llU,GYNnxN i000 MY)e.T•tUf Re: ProjecnAxees (Rancho RCucamonga eRedev Redevelop- ment op- ment Agency) Dear Ed: During our meeting last week regarding the referenced agreement, we discussed the fact that it is unlikely that the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga will be able to immediately incur indebtedness to finance the regional flood control facilities to be constructed as part of the agreement. However, the Agency has every intention of incurring such indebted - ness as soon as practicably possible in order to complete p construction of these facilities at the earliest possible date In fact, the Agency would be willing to agree to incur such indebtedness within an appropriately reasonable period of time �! In exchange for so agreeing, we would like to (s• request your consideration of a provision which would enable uo to appropriately escalate this $50,000,000.00 ceiling eontempMed uy the agreement in order to more u ti ? _ accurately reflect the delay in actually incurring „� Within five (5) years from the date of this agreement, Agency shall establish any loans, advances and indebtedness necessary to finance or refinance, in whole or part, Regional Facilities. No loans, advances or indebtedness to be repaid from that allocation of taxes attributable to and payable to Agency imder this section shall be established or incurred by Agency beyond such time limitation. The tctal amount of tax increment paid to Agency under this section shall be determined by multiplying the sum of $50,000,000.00 by the Engineering News Record Cost Index as the same stands on the date of this agreement divided by the Engineering M • 1%'. uw arrlacc or t: BEST. BEST 6 KRIEGER Edward Daddy Esq. April 14, 1982 • Page Iwo indebtaoaesa which will result from the significant: cost of the flood control facilities which need to be financed. We would propose that Section 5.1 of the referenced agreement be revised to provide that Section 5 shall become operative in fiscal year 1998 -99 or in the fiscal year after the receipt by the Agency of a aum to be determined by an escalating formula We ' would propose %at the escalating formula be established by relating the sun of $50,000,000.00 by multiplying that figure by the proportional increase in the Engineering News Record Cost Index. For example, Section 5 1 could read as follows: 5.1 This Section 5 shall become operative in Fiscal Year 1998 -99 or in the fiscal year after the receipt by the Agency of a -total - ef- Plfty- mill fen- 2ek?eze- E$30;600;BB ® -ae> that aim computed pursuant to Section of this Agreement, whichever occurs first. S We would then propose that Sect'_on 4.1 could be revised to include the additional language as follows: Within five (5) years from the date of this agreement, Agency shall establish any loans, advances and indebtedness necessary to finance or refinance, in whole or part, Regional Facilities. No loans, advances or indebtedness to be repaid from that allocation of taxes attributable to and payable to Agency imder this section shall be established or incurred by Agency beyond such time limitation. The tctal amount of tax increment paid to Agency under this section shall be determined by multiplying the sum of $50,000,000.00 by the Engineering News Record Cost Index as the same stands on the date of this agreement divided by the Engineering M r• UM OIIICL• or BEST BEST & KRIEGER ' Eeward Duddy Esq. April 14, 1982 Page Three 0 News Record Cost Index on the date said loans, advances and indebtedness are incurred. We believe that the inclusion of the above language would reasonably carry out the expectations of both the County of San Bernardino and tha Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga b!• insuring that the sum of $50,000,000.00 or its equivalent is available at such time as the Agency is reasonably able to finance the regional facilities contemplated under the agreement. We would be happy to answer any additional questions you may have regarding this proposed change. It is hoped that the Agency will be able to formally coneider this matter at its meeting of Wednesday, April 21. 1982. Yours sincerely, John E. Brown of Best, Beet & Krieger Counsel for the Redevelopment JEB:bja Agency of the City of Rancho Cuccmonga cc: JLauren Wasserman Tim Beadle Albert R. Reid Delores Carter ■ t .i 'i . . i rl�" � � t i Y • Y Y Y Y Y 1 Y Y Y Y 'Y Y Y 1 7 h _W U N N m •� .» O M ��y qK LI h UG l� Y R t r� Y� iN �< ie F N Z t G a ,� 2 m i� a ='� o +i a " z moaN+Ne«enNeroron « oaNNeo eN.opeoeoo'eN.00NVN+po . rN..aNanmpe +ave+ooeaeao .-- aocM— nwaoaNn<ew�^r�+.��vonpoo�nv oo.. -�mr w�M.NwwnNNwrv•.nrvYOC.v..rwp +.%off �0000enar •.NII+Nnmw..n.wvww. Dear- ..oeaaan.epowNMna «+.r+a++a+ aaoa�r�nw+a ,.� »>0000e oeoo.�+•u. -ry �wwwNwNNw�r «�Nnaa+aavaa +eanaeaear<aa as oa ea�oa<aeaooa wrrr o.. naNer .me•o�nw+Ne.mpo.NnaNar.mpe.Nn+ Nan. eo.. Nrn+ mawmpo .wnanar• <po—Nnawar- mpo.+�na Nwn«nNNw•oeo <aaa der+ nrnwnr- w ..eoes.cmmcapppspppppp00000m000 �..nN'.NN eea ae aaeaeaaoua o$ aaooaaa: M <a 000aseaopeoaaoaaannr .ter- w�.nnnn......nnn r.r. .__ _ u 'oa$oee °°oS$°o$�ao$$$°oo' Coo° o $a$ °o$$o�poo °OOeo$oea$o$ °m$eaS$ own$$° oe o $oS °opo$$po °opo$$ °opoa °$$SS °oeo J N t M• L' i \ 0 \ • • •, •` \ \ \ • • \� 3 7 9 7 •� YOFOpa000pOOpOY OY YIMCOOOIOONNIOFa00N0 1MCnO.�ryY� Or00000r••OO OOODO 0000 COYOTTPPCOO OrOTOp IIMFfgNICOY1IPOaa00rG ONNraa0�00NOTrOOWOOp�TOF0 00000000 ••••• •••••••••• ••••••••••••••yy• •••• ....................... ••••••••••• NYMT'IPNPCV'0rT0 O Oa�NNTPICMr+YArpr1fF000100 F�IPMYITOTOpryaINa�NM I.Pr�rM�r�r+rT Y Y ♦ IN N N n'MrTN NY N NIar00 rrry N TarITNn MP O F+T y M M C n Nn Aq PN !1!• pNN O M O nwt+ owvwTaroor P.. eowaTU ynoTnwnmF��ww..rooeeM+r•ooa aYwno Poen+naeaTnFN�oper.aa :r�IF�artiPrNn OrrO��,PFNMJNTaaOC PrOC11rOPNOnrlq OprCwr��wFl�na�IIY.IMMn FMaFFMVCCeI00YCCOPeoe0000 °vPPPPPPPPPPPpPO)Nan amFCa iNM1MOCwIaCiCMFIFaaaSaa�aa I) („ Il 1• ,1 1 / 1' 1 Id 1 1 1 1 1 11 1' 1 \� qJ 4 0 i 7 000ne eljO�pN A r T O 7� N N y • ww1M� •1y CCLY co ao `oe + ffM W L Y o i L s i J a � ww o a.L xwr o 'WL ^ WJSW .y ' M ���_��,'g =���r ;-,r .;r,•.-r :.r: r �r r' e r r e ", i,.,�- s:i "�'f'' iM ;r RESURFACING OF HILLSIDE.D UER TR E Proposals were received April 2, 1982 for the subject street improvements from following firms. Firm Bid* 1 Associated Engineers $26,550 2. C. G. Engineering $27,000 3. L. D. King, Inc. $28,000 4 Linville- Sanderson -Horn & Assoc. $31,100 - 5. J. N. Wilson, Civil Ergineer $36,900 *Note: Proposals do not include fee required for detailed design of Rancho Wash or Angall's Creek culverts. • The firm of Associated Engineers submitted the most favorable proposal. Two sets of bid documents shall be submitted in conjunction with the two proposed phases of construction. The first phase shall cover Hillside Road, Amethyst Street to Beryl Street, and Sapohire Street to just west of Rancho Wash The second phase shall cover Beryl Street between existing improvements just south of Hanzanita Drive to Hillside Road, and Hillside Road between Beryl Street to just west of Rancho Wash. An additional fee of $9,320 has been included in the contract for the detdiled design of Rancho Wash and Angell's Creek culverts and to cover the cost of project phasing This amount may be reduced if existing drainage structures are found adequate. RECO.1I4ENDATION: It is recoamended that Council award the design to Associated Engineers and authorize the mayor to execute the contract documents. Respectfully sub ftted, L84. C,bc x r g Attachments �'t� . �. :u3•.i'fr�+ ' °a _ .<'ak:s -' - , : r.'t'Y -,. t'-t�r c I , CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT • DATE: April 21, 1982 TO: City Council and City manager 0 0 z FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer 1577 a` s BY: Richard Coto, Associate Civil Engineer > SUBJECT: AWARD OF DESIGN SERVICES FOR STREET WIDENING, RECONSTRUCTION AND ;r RESURFACING OF HILLSIDE.D UER TR E Proposals were received April 2, 1982 for the subject street improvements from following firms. Firm Bid* 1 Associated Engineers $26,550 2. C. G. Engineering $27,000 3. L. D. King, Inc. $28,000 4 Linville- Sanderson -Horn & Assoc. $31,100 - 5. J. N. Wilson, Civil Ergineer $36,900 *Note: Proposals do not include fee required for detailed design of Rancho Wash or Angall's Creek culverts. • The firm of Associated Engineers submitted the most favorable proposal. Two sets of bid documents shall be submitted in conjunction with the two proposed phases of construction. The first phase shall cover Hillside Road, Amethyst Street to Beryl Street, and Sapohire Street to just west of Rancho Wash The second phase shall cover Beryl Street between existing improvements just south of Hanzanita Drive to Hillside Road, and Hillside Road between Beryl Street to just west of Rancho Wash. An additional fee of $9,320 has been included in the contract for the detdiled design of Rancho Wash and Angell's Creek culverts and to cover the cost of project phasing This amount may be reduced if existing drainage structures are found adequate. RECO.1I4ENDATION: It is recoamended that Council award the design to Associated Engineers and authorize the mayor to execute the contract documents. Respectfully sub ftted, L84. C,bc x r g Attachments �'t� . �. :u3•.i'fr�+ ' °a _ .<'ak:s -' - , : r.'t'Y -,. t'-t�r c I , J 4 _a . —. — Be 0,..:• Fez, 1 1" �Y . Ytl a s I ' ;? � I IIC,, Z _N G W Z L• Z �� � U � Z W U 51 rl LI ` �4Y �d b ,Y e elf 8 Z g� M s I ' ;? � I IIC,, Z _N G W Z L• Z �� � U � Z W U 51 rl LI ` �4Y �d r.t i 4 , 1 AGRMIF1T FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES •`-• • - - $ THIS AG•tEEWENT is coda and entered Into this day of _ 1' 3 1911Z. het... the CITY OF RANCHO CUCA110NCA, a Municipal Corporation, hcre- �; l mafter referred to as •CITY•, and YIW9 AND LILT. ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS INC. 6 duly licensed engineers of Tt& East •E• Street, Ontario. C.IUamla, 91764, herein- _ .;1 6 after nferred to a -ENGINEER', sft 7 YITNESSETH, 'fir B WI:EREAS. the CITY has need for engineering services, consisting of the 9 prrparstion of IclP o vmrnt planso speclfkatlons..stinstre and other professional 10 services far the STREET WIDENING, RECONSTRUCTION. RESURFACING AND z" Il DRAINAGE FACILIT:ES FOR TWO PROJECTS, PROJECT 11- H:LISIDE ROAD - 12 BETWEEN SAPPHIRE STREET AND THE WEST BOUNDARY OF HERITAGE PARK, 1- .-- -r. •�. 13 AND HILLSIDE ROAD B17CWEEN BERYL STREET AND AMMYST STREETt „r•�,, -�,,. ,,�„ 14 and PROJECT 11- HILLSIDE ROAD BETWEEN THE WEST BOUNDARY OF HERITAGE 16 PARK AND BERYL STREfl, and BERYL STREET BETWEEN HILLSIDE ROAD AND 16 HANZANITA ORIYE. harem referred to eolit tiveir as •PROJECT•, rj 17 TB WHEREAS. the CITY has 1ev11ad the ENGINEER to pravld. required enginrermg •.- 18 senkre fv the CITY, 1" 91 WPEREns, the ENGINEER has speciaUaed kneeled{., training rod aperient. I 22 In deelgn and construction d streets and drama{. fwNt•re, E3 •�,�,- _c.� -,- E{ AND. WHEREAS. the ENGINEER mdkatw nllRngnus to twfarm mgmecrieg -ear ., �........ ' ES wmcee for the CT1 under contract E6 27 NOW THEREFORE. the CITY and the ENGINEER, for ch. cen.ld ... Clues h.r EB lecher named solve .. rellacs, 29 ARTICLE 1 Th. ENGINEER -9— to furnkh and Perform the arbus prefewlonsl 30 s.rvkes, pertinent to prenaratkn as uhf Plan. and Spollf"tion. and Cost E.Ibautt jytr 31 ac foRv.w r 32 vier' �` ~•�'� `� ' j.. 11 2 3 6 6 7 B 9 10 22 13 14 16 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Preliminary Deal,. I. Perjure, all neceaaary field aunty- to thoroughly consider and establish current and witheate -greet eras sectlons. grades, drainage proNss and traffic cc nxtrxint-. L Perfe at necessary soUa I- esaUffaUms t- establish structural section design 3- Prepare • prelh -Umry design In the form of red -tined rough design with "ac—o Wade for the oWaninf, recon-tructlen:resurucing at the subject strnte to bo -b-itted to the CITY for revive prior to final design prrressug. Design shallprovide for curb and gutter through areas of CITY W San 6vrnardiro County Flood Cannot Dlatrlcl setterahlpl acdlUenal cans -teeUona W areas of pr -posed drainage facilities sill be takto. PreNNnary design Bill Include remmiended drainage control hcWUes to be constructed at the Rancho Mash and at Angelis Creek Drainage control lacUlUea at Rancho Wash -ban be steed according to the hydrology study and hydraulic calculations prepared by the ENGINEER. Drainage control facilities at Angell, Greek edl be Ward by the CITY and no additional hydroloEy or hydraulic studios far thle facility shall be requirad of the ENGINEER. Final Deal" L Upon approval of preilmbury design concept, the ENGINEER shall prepare final design plane shoring the street design for fuU vldmNg lectu,:.,X necessary drive approacn mdlflca6ms, curb Evades, required typical saatlons, drainage structure- and haphaltle Concrete resurfacing. Dralnaga structure design Includes Puna stW speclncallons for the r®aval of thu aaieling A` CUP at the easterly branch of Rancho Wash W its vrPlac mot with a rstnforoed ben culvert. The CITY aDvr recsiving and valuating the Prelkelnary Design Weludlee the hydrology study. my elect b retain the esutNg facwty and require Irmtcad tho -1 tho - -bung culvert and tho design of suitable aodUkulena of the Inlet and owlet to this facility. If the CIIY so alesb I to retain th- u-utmg facillty.and the design of a Me euuert or -the, reylacc.nsnr is tot requlnd,tho ENGINEERi fre to, noel design for l•' -•2 .rr2 '• 7t� t awes.. .. s 1 Project 12Will be reduced to the amount stated by Alternate •Ae m 2 ArtL- -M U. Section R 3 2. Prepare cut -sheets for reeurfacln2 sectians of tie projects; where typ ul l ascUms aro Impractical for slructurolj armactical ar, other ressona. 6 1- Prapere contract doc aces IU, specifications and quantity estimates in 6 rmferInmee edU CITY and San Bernardino Flood Cmtrol District 7 RuldeUnse for project construction. 6 7. Submit design piano no CITY and San 6ernardlno ptood Cmtrol District 9 for plan check and review. 10 S. Hake necessary plan rtvtalnna U meet CITY and County requlrments and 11 approval. 12 6. Prepare 20 set. .1 finished OesiSn Pun.. SpecUlutrms and U&..r4 13 WimaUS. 16 7. Upon r.e.lpt of construction bids. ENGINEER shall ualae the CITY In the 16 saalysta of bid. and make rtca mdstms on the ow" of cmtmct. 10 C. Construction 17 1. At the option of the CITY the ENGINEER shall provide all required 16 ®stavctlOn suiting when authorteed by the CITY Endncer. 10 2. ENGINEER shall be evugable for corsulu NOn during construction many 20 needed plan revulans. 21 1. Wake '"coutmldatun m contract change orders. Y2 4. Prepare project sa-6.111 plan.. 23 D. Rrpradoctbrt 26 Original t"Ir Rs ahaU becme the property of the CITY upon compietust of 23 this contract' Cesta for reproduction of plane and specifications .111 be born. 26 by the CITY at the direct costa of reproduction. 27 1 ARTICLE 11 The CtTY agrees to pay the ENGINEER• as eompstustlon (or the 23 oamed professimM arrvk<sAS (.lbws, 29 A. Project No. 1 30 1. lerahteinary Design 711,062 31 2. met o.jig. S 5.992 a' 32 Total Project 7 I 711.674 n�4�1 e,1 �..: "v1 *:arty � - ei;�.k'r ✓. S i J 4' V .t j i r 3 2 3 6 f 7 e 9 10 21 12 33 1{ 17 16 17 16 19 20 21 22 23 2{ 23 26 27 26 29 30 31 32 I 8, ProNet No. 2 1. PteLmbzary Design 612,S94 2. FbW Design f 6.223 Total Project 6 2 $16,116 2A. Fine, Design Altertuto'Ae 3 1d02 Tow Project l 2 Alternate -A' 616,616 Tow of Projem 1 I and 1 2 375,170 Teed of Fralcm 1 1 and 1 R. Alternate 'A' 325,950 C. For Item 1 of Sectlon C. Article 1, the CITY rrM coupon to the EI/DWeru at the bcalrly rates attached as Exhibit vAe, proWed the CITY sleets to authulr, such ewit. D, If the ENGINEER receives authorization to proceed on parts of the Prejrat after July 91, 1982 the fes for those pare of the project than be adjusted in proportion to the ratio of the Consume Price Indus: for the Les Angeles am to effect m the date the ENGINEER met. such cathonra/lon. to the C.P.I. for the Les Angeles arum April 1, 1112. Expressed : a formula, Far a Contract I. Auormt x C'P'I* on on Autheriutlon Date PTTG1i — E. The ENGINEER .01 bill the CITY sPxtthly, for that portion of the fu for each ittso that her been completed at the date of billing. ua151 tech itm bin been cmpl tad and totally bitted. ARTICLE III The ENGINEER agree to perform the above asrrkes within the following taut Mite, A. Pre t I- Prollmloary Design sha0 be submllted Its the CITY within 30 - T calendar days Iron the Notieo to Proceed. D. Prom 1- Met Design stall be eubulmd te the CITY for plan check Nlhin 30 calendar days (rose the date of CITY approval of the Pnliminary Design. ,[ C. Project 1- final plan preparation aWU be p.,fineed odRout d by through- Ihs Pian cheek process to Adesrtlaraont for Olds. D. Project 2- Prelbsinary Design stall be cubedltad le the CITY olthin 60 calendar days from the Notice to Pereeed. Z. ♦ - u, A..RYA yypja 1 'r w. v i T'. IL a a: 4 lip, f.v, 1 E. P %t :- Final Dn16n shall be auMlttd to the CITY fee plan check Ithln E 60 C.Und., day. from the date of CITY .pp.,.l of the P:. Iaelnnry Design. S P. Pro Kt y- Mal Plan preparation .hall be performed .Ithout delay through d the Plan check process to Advertisenenl !or Otde. 0 ARTICfd IV If the ewk is suspended indefinitely w abandomet prior to the 6 oampletlnn of the Eoglne thtm .elviees set fa,tl. In this .gr,emeat, the CITY 7 agrees to Pay the ENCINE.1. at the rotes set forth in Eabibli -A-. to the 0 lbw of Ad suspension or abandacaent, ehkh payment Is W be he full and 9 MJ settlement fw W the Bark Perforev.d by the ENGINEER to said time, and 30 such ewk shelf become the property of the CITY upon said payment. 11 ARTICLE V AB tern., conditions and provislao. hsrm: "I brae to and Dull 12 bled the parties htrctn, their swce -wo and .,sign.. 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, W Pestks hereto have executed this Agreement the 14 day and year Dnt above .,film. 15 10 CITY OF RANCHO 7UCAJONOA 17 10 BY. se Mayor all 22 23 24 E5 E6 Y'! APPROVED AS TO FORM E6 29 City ttornay, c u:amenpa 30 31 32 '. �' 7 '1t°Xv'h'fidjfiA:+1"F.^&.N'i's1? Y Attest. City tom—' MILLS AND LILL ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS t, �s :- =dye =, Associated Engineers CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS .E a• 916 EAST V STREET • ONTARIO. CALIFORNIA 91764 • 17143 036.6019 Y HOURLY RASES (Effective 8- Principal Registered Civil Engineer $66.00 per hour ' Senior Airport Engineer $60 00 per hour Senior Registered Civil Engineer $53.00 per hour Principal Licenses Land Surveyor $53.00 per hour Associate Civil Engineer $46.00 per hour Associate Land Planner 546.00 per hour Registered Civil Engineer $42.00 per hour > Senior Designer /Draftsman $38.00 per hour Designer /Draftsman $35 00 per hour Draftsman $32.00 per hour Engineering Aide $22.00 per hour Varityping $28.00 per hour ?} Key Punch Operator $21 00 per hour i Secretarial $21.00 per hour 3-Man Survey Party $120.00 per hour 2 -Man urvey Party $95 00 per hour 3 -Man Survey Party with Electronic Distance Measuring Equip 5130.00 per hour 1 -clan r+urvey Party � ith Electronic Distance Measuring Equip. 5310.00 per hour Above sch dine is for straight time only and in the case of overtime. the rate charged for will be 1 1/2 times the hourly rates shown and Sundays and holidays at 3 times 1 m hourly rates shaven. These hourly rates du not Include pnnting costs which are billed at cost or fees paid to Governmental agencies or others. Exhibit 'A' . 1 .' }�FLANNING 4*'Jkj ,, DESIGNING SURVEYING xV�® c, R� z' f- C t 1 '• ISPACC BELOW MR"Ll:40 ETdLM=) 1 • t n DERSOR.'TAVro a REEVEIt R E G E I V E D •naN6n AT Lnw CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONQA . 2 n. urn v. Ceiuia .ice 4 ADMINI ' 4714, ua.uo STRATTON 3 , APR 081982 a I m I, 71819(n1Ul�Ilf�19)41�j8 5 AttoraM far M nlmant !? 7 8 CLAIM AGAINST A GOVER.\NENTAL ENTITY J� 9 10 CLAIM OF: ) I 11 KEELY L OLIVA, ) CASE NO. ) 12 Claimant, ) CLAIN FOR PROPERTY MAAGES ' ) (SECTION 910 OF TP.E GOVERN- 13 VS. ) RENT CODE) I� ) 14 :SAN OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF ) SAN BERNARDINO, CITY CLERK OF ) 1r, IRANCUO CUCAMONGA, CALIrORNIA, ) I 16 Defendants. ) I 17 18 TO T11C BOARD OF SUPERVISURS, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, I 19 CIrt CLERK OF RANCHO CUCA11ONGA, CALIFORNIA: it 20 YOU ARE BLREBY NOTIFIED that KEELY L. OLIVA. whose 21 address is 375 -C Vernon, Upland, California, 91796, claims damages 22 rc-t Lh, City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, and the County of 23 San 'i. n-a.rdlnu, in 0% amount of MOO:) =ompuccd ..s of tho date of Z4 the pr ntatlun of this claim This claim is based on property S' damaVe a133-ain -d by clalaant on or abo t FeLivary 22, 1982, at the deadend of Rancho Street, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California under the following circumstances: 1 �rt 1' I At approximItely 10 ;Gn P y on a Z'gg'i, mist- night, applicant was traveling rorthtound •., Z in the Rancho Cucamonga area intending to turn g •r :, onta Rillstdd Street, but missed tli llsade Stc• et 3 and made a right turn on Ranc. ",o Street, believing it was Hills-de, arh continued ca3tbound on Pancho q Street where the rotLd suddenly ended without warning or notice, Causing applicant's vehicle• 5 to crash into the rough area extending beyond Rancho Street causi•Sg damage to applicant's P 6 vehicle. 7 The names of the public employees causing claimant's 8 injuries under the described circumstances are unknown te, applicant I 7 The injuries sustained by claimant, as far as known as i. ,. 10 of the date of the presentation of this claim, coneiet of the E 11 physical damage to applicant's automobile ! 13 The amount chimed as of the date of the presentation i o. 13 of this chin is computed as follows: p 11 Property Damage S 9,000 lr Lo&3 of Use of Vehicle Unknown Tot..l damage incurred to dJtc $9,000 plus loss of u3. �a 17 All notices or other corrunicatiors with regard to this ld Clain should be sent to claimant in care of ANDERSON, TAVES ! ` 19 6 REEVER, Post Office Box 1357. 1365 west Foothill Boulevard, s 20 Suite 1, Upland, California, 91186. if 1 t ! 1 i 22 D..ted: April 6, 195: ANDERSON, T\VES a RE1:VC4 ' CJ i LY 21 /Ta••Cs 6 •• Jr' n 25 i.•ox. y`4rti r•rsa -2- ! i eaaraw b.iw•an a a +. , - ± .. y� n.ce w•.u• ..iw.rr � 'r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 VINNEDGE, LANCE G GLENN, INC. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 204 NORTH SAN ANTONIO AVENUE ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA 91762 (714) 983 -9574 Claim of Stanley Arthur Antlocer, vs. County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department, and City of Rancho Cucamonga, public entities CITY OFERANCHO CU CEO NGA ADMINISTRA T ION APR 081982 AM 7 191ti101>?t11Q�31415 B CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURIES1 VIOLATION OF CIVIL A.:D CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ce i a9, TO: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCI4+ You are hereby notified that Stanley Arthur Antlocer, whose addresr is 8986 Appaloosa Court, Alta Loma, California, 91701, claims damages from the City of Rancho Cucamonga in the amount, computed as of the date of the presentation of this claim, of $500,000.00, plus punitive damages. This claim is based upon personal injuries and violation of civil and constitutional rights sustained by claimant on or about December 31, 1981, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga under the following circumstances: on the morning of December 31, 1901 claimant was lawfully operating a motor vehicle upon public._ streets and highways located within the City of Rancho ; :# I 1 Cucamonga. At such time and place, without probable cause or.- 2 reasonable belief that claimant had committed any act or conduct' ;a 3 to justify a stop, detention or arrest of claimant, claimant was 4 stopped, detained and arrested for an alleged violation of Penal v 5 Code 5245(a), a felony. { 6 Upon such arrest, claimant was, among other things, 7 handcuffed and thereafter transported to the West End Sheriff's 8 9 sub- station where claimant was, among other things, fingerprinted, photographed, and booked into jail. 10 11 Claimant was ultimately charged with a violation of Penal 12 Code 5245(b), a misdemeanor. A criminal prosecution was filed 13 as Case Number MWV 78104 in the San Bernardino County Municipal 14 Court, West Valley Division. After trial by jury, claimant was, y 15 on March 18, 1982 found not guilty of the criminal offense sr " 16 alleged. 17 As a result of the foregoing events, claimant sustained, f 18 among other things, attorney's fees and costs in connection with 19 preparing and presenting a defense against the criminal charges 20 filed, damage and injury to his reputation, lose of earnings and " 21 •�-r`J 9 capacity, . personal injury. carnin ca acct emotional di cess and 22 23 The names of the public employeon causing claimant's 24 inj•,ries are Sheriff's Deputy James McPheron ItM18611, Deputy R. 25 Sumendich (iS1341) and J. Schlabaeh (tS.O. 479) of the San 7! 25 Bernardino County Sheriff's Department. Other public employees,, ;. i' 27 whose identities are not yet known to claimant, may also have', r I 4; 28 been involved _ the events above synopisized. a L , •R teal VU[ iww.wy.a,n //__ w. a,a oa.ur. y° �,•gr• t 0 • 1� 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 z 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 is U.CL Damages incurred to date include attorney's fees and costs In the sum of Five Thousand Sixteen and no /100 ($5,016.U0) dollars in connection with preparing and presenting a defense against the criminal charges filed, loss of earnings and earning capacity, loss of reputation, emotional distress, and personal injury in a sum not yet finally and fully ascertained; total general and special damages to date are alleged to be $500,000.00. The acts and conduct of the public employees as hereinabove described were carried on in conscious disregard of claimant's rights and interests. Total amount claimed as of the date of the presentation of this claim is general and special danages of $500,000.00 and punitive damages of $750,090.00. All notices or other comm•.nications w.th regard to this claim should be sent to clalmart at Vinnedge, Lance and Glenn, Inc.. Attorneys at Law, 204 $1. San Antonio Avenue, Ontario, California, 91762, Dated: April 4 , 1982 VINNE /D/G/E, LANCL L /p /GLLENN�,/�/, INC. By Il — L..�i'fL_ WILLIAM A. VAN DYK Attorneys for Claimant, Stanlay Arthur Antlocer (3) 1? R i :0 AFPtICAWjja=; ROR 3ACVlZ ......... ... �-,Copy Fi 07�n!" son �Umm LCgpnwl L Tip . jo) W -Ua,,, Kim r m" -Nw.11 Cn 121S 0 3e 114 ce &a-- c;nE6L ZAZM 22 wr I k.wRM p APftKAWM a RCMMT, im. AppW 2" . 'E3 T-- Jr. t ""M w monkno"m m m MO.OD 47 =M= TO 2V3 47 300.00 fcmarlr ri" 48 C? 20 .4-siow 917M Go 2Wff; UM PCs* Y 11 WAN W CIaaW1A C� a AFPtICAWjja=; ROR 3ACVlZ ......... ... 1 .lTy � �B S Q� JoElq n +� —1 r— 't� f e� all V R. x• f. r a. `N � • .x • RESOLUTION NO. Flt - (a� A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA, OPPOSING THE USE OF PERS PENSION FUNDS TO BALANCE THE STATE BUDGET ' WHEREAS, the Public Employees Retirement System was established to guarantee the payment of retirement benefits to public employees in the State of California; and WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga is a contracting agency with the System, and 1+ _6 WHEREAS, the employees of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, as memmers of the System, have contributed funds; and WHEREAS, said funds have been guaranteed for the purpose of drawing benefits; and WHEREAS, said contributions earn interest; and _ " WHEREAS, U - Governor of the State of California has used PERS pension fund money to balance the State budget by withholding $180 million • in state payments for two months; and WHEREAS, the withholding of said payments could result in a $I 4 billion loss to the system; and .'t WHEREAS, legislation is needed to prevent such use of public employee's pension funds. r V'? NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the . City of Rancho Cucamonga supports the revision of the Public Employees 'r • letirement Law to preclude the adverse impact of the system's earnings by making it illegal to tamper with PERS funds. " PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 21st day of April, 1982 RYES: NCES ! ABSENT I((..� ; ATTEST- auren asserman, LY erh Fhi'M D C OssSiT —er, Mayor s: 1� ar I. - ,r: �a v. 1 CITy 0y� RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT c DATE: April 21, 1982 O A �r Z TO: City Council and City Manager > W" FROM: Lloyd B. Rubbe. City Engineer BY: Barbara [rail, Engineering Technician StWECr: Acceptance of Binds. Agreement and Real Property Improvement Contract and Lion Agreement for D.B. 81 -34. Charles Hof fgaarden has submitted an agreement and bonds to guarantee the construction of off -site Improvements on Ferou Boulevard mud Archibald Avenue for his project located at 8780 Archibald Avenue. This project conalsts of ■ 10,000 square foot industrial building addition on 1.37 acres of land in the General Industrial tone. Also, submitted for Council approval Is a Beal Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for the future construction of a lanaecsped median island on Archibald Avenue. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City COUhCII adopt the attached Reaolutioaa accepting the agreement, bonds and Real Property Improvement Crmtract and Lien Agreement authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign same. Respectfully aubmic d, LDHa :bc Attachment- 1 s T -,t CITY OF RANCI -10 CuCtumO \'GA title; DR: b1 -34^ ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY AIAP N y' - s page= . -,�.;: RESOLUTION NO. ja� -/o? A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCKO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW 110. OR 81 -34 sk. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement executed on April 21, 1982 by ChLAes Hofgaarden as developer, for the improvement �,• of public right -of -way adjacent to the real property spdcifically described therein, and generally located at 8730 Archibald Avenue; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improviment Agreement and subject to the terns thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said real property as referred to Planning Commission, Director Review No. 81 -34; and 3-' WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient improvement Security, which is identified in said t Icprovement Agreement. - <; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Agreement and said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the .,. • Mayor is hereby author :Ted to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. �- PASSED, APPROVED, ADOPTED this 21st day of April, 1982. AYES* NOES: s"ssr'' '4 ABSENT: S pFFiilli o. Schlosser. -F par ATTEST Lauren 11. Wasserman, City Clerk ~ RESOLUTION N0. Ga' 70 ON A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEHEHT FROM CHARLES HOFGAAROEN fND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO S!GH THE SAME WHEREAS, Director Review No. 81 -34, located at 8780 Archibald Avenue, submitted by Charles Hofgaarden was approved on April 21, 1982; and WHEREAS, Installation of a landscaped median island establishv4 as prerequisite to is•uance of Building Permit has been met by entry into a Peal Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement by Charles Hofgaarden. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Ccuncil of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California does accept said Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement, authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign same, and directs the City Clerk to record same in the Office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, C*ilifornia PASSED, APPROVED and *,DOPTED this 21st day of April, 1982. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: turen M. Wasserman, City Clerk pPhiTT{ o�cRlosscr, FEY-For a c l i .i .t 0 nY••i.- { «TT of RARC00 CVCAM" LIPROVEkMrr AGARORHT y •t ` °' and entered Into. In rrwni•{a�noe with the provlsSOas Of the Runieipalala }' Code and Regulations •! Uv City of Rancho tmcemnga, State of Cali - locola, • amnlcipal mrporaCOn. atrainshof rofer:W a as the City, b. ..l by and hJU san said City and Charles Refcaardan OtJ]M { re errs '—s m. a ovel per T. - MiTNe.`arTRe d MAT RRLRGS, purasamt to said Gde, Devoloppea. Na requited approval tY the City of Director Reviw 61.14 venue y ^ " , to ,has with the 'M ..... M of t eS report a e t lu Nareon, and a Y pent Dlrse for cry amendPonts therebf located r- 1 at 8760 Mehl.. Sd a and WHUCV. the City has eatiblishad certain requirements to be C sat by said developer prior to grsaing the final approval of the devalopnentr and ' •�r_4 - -. RROtfAS. the execution of this agresaeat and posting of laprevewent security as hereinafter .,ited" sad approved by the City Att,tnay, are deemed to be equivalent to prior completion o• laid requirements for the purpose of eteurine said approval. .• Ron. TRRALyORR, it is hereby -groed by and between the City and the Develapar as follows) 1. The developer hereby agre{s to mnstruet at developer's upro sa se all Impror*aV described on p,ge 3 hereof within 6 moths trot the date hereof ' 1. The tam of this agresmn: $hall be 6 sooths, oveeenalag on the date of m*Cgtion hereof by the City. lr This rereamnt *hall be In default on the day following the last day of "a tam stipulated, "IsSa said tam has been "tended as hereinafter Provided. 3. The Developer my request additional time In which to M 9lete the provisiom, o! UL agnwnt. In writing u+[ has* than le.c weeks prior co the default date, and imlWeng a aratamerc• of circuv,.nces of necess.ty for additional ties. In consideration o[ -' {' 31- each request. the City r.•sacvsa the cfyht b revlw the pcovisSOas beam!. Auludlnq eons %rw.tlon standards, cast *stlaate, • d suf- ficiency � ... f of eha fmpmvesent sacurlty, and to rognlre adiuPments theratO when warranted by eubstanllal changes therein. ?� 6 If the Developer falls or noglects to eonpply with the prwlstOno of Uis agreesen , the City shall have the right at any i� flea [o cause said provision. to be cOmPlets, by any lawful mesa, and there.P -. to recover tme said Dev*a.7wc Or ,/Or has surety the full One• and "pease iatarred In so doing. � { �f S. Zanteachment obtained by the Developer troe the otfiee Of the City pCn SSeeer Priors a 9 D $h start Of any perk w1U10 Publle rlgatwit -way, sew the developer shall conduct with the regulations work In such full esult e r;r b *the City LNra1n Ron- eroepliaase In hon- my result Sn idepplrp of the work by the City, led *ueswat of the I+enal ciu provided 6 public rl htwfwa cork rJquirsd Stall bd constructed in •nnfocmnco with a .., v pr"*doment tpecifleatio,., - DDCOVan laproveecia plans, standard and ttandall D.av nqs and say special amaevteenb Increta• _ ConatmeeloR shall ".lade any tmasltions *War Other lseldaneal work dgerwd necessary for any oubllc safety. nY••i.- { . 4 tits I A �... 7, tAaa Mae rl t,!}f; is It UM1g etxeet} ' all M AlYlf+in. jy V 174 to ,o%;.lstloa %\ l,y eltall .1 In right tD fDgRlite yey end ttl work in Ni ey¢ : of ae�t%ltr:H $iltp In con.Dletion, 'm to %A vat all cot% an4 '&-yams l4M%pF4 fi`aw tDe Cv.slap.r %aa/or his asetractor by any jarful mabf, ^ro,�gr� e t D.valopar shat% Im ttl nethle f l replacement %1IrK \tlon 'or ssev of en a aby lttiytim Wt't 'ya,se of llirad w31t tit }atattaetlen of the city evulf 9. %yh�t�t\�t� Swat a}pa \j be to elble for roes vei of all f% swaaz\ p% T'\41 4b ;Ilk No �M t1ght- of-r}y resulting % !l a- t propet%y or vl In SAJA right- of-ray. \g it * Oa S %• plant }oA ulnUin parkway tress as ± e t Dlr/Ator. 11 The i�wv*k %t- %a,urity to be furrtpeheA by the O'rfloper a v.t+vaatas tap I of a firm at W {} 'grstaaTll shall M eaDleot - 0..n approv }j a tt, (' ;;t$ jlttetnny. (tM prlmipal taount of u14 ty nirovarent '%aus % %`I M rot lose tan the knoll, 'noun b'lor% WA, I w -uvr *b=lTy 17a4t4t'mt rs %htul sap Mtba._.I wed —L74200.00 h,aH lat %*d tabor mood $3.500.00 I J- �• Tit lmnral 6t31r0y the portion h'rOb hive eaus}A Nete Vt11•• -+ to a Amlp aarvteb old a,knorl dged NN all farmlitlm - -�rr- oy %tr U ih' 40%, onk torN opposite their elgmtveet • D ZLOpfh ' BT,. IT. y OAtft^'2 t �i UJTT.v�.O�STI% - rj;Veta %I �Jt %i..� yt.R•Ce G�'r /4Fi w w; �taern CIS'y W M7sChp NCAlIONOA. GLITOMIA arm an ti tst a setalalpal corporation .wimp ATTZST. . C_TT CLCpt t DATZt — . 4 tits • J �i A= c a7 I CGY9 :l " COaT 7C['[I0: A� : rt CT.L'117C l cfsatees:z 7¢rt- ra to py. IeD / I .1 (,ItLXA w'ta•aaatarS 'i• OATLI 3/17182 It%QT W. I me= DT J. Stara, Jr. x rlt• 4rarex4 P.R. 85 -H Clry Oravle6 b.a_ AreMWld and hren /,5•j)�) Wnt Ow• m[ welW ce[nee tea rot Y Stl•R p•nit or pa.a.••[ r•p(u•- a•e[ darealu. — tb= Tir.RTf01 m1T L]iIIt176 cc$rn CT108 I= Is I" ft CMIXI 1Cf CILSD $ 670.75 TOTAL lYti6fi0CT5a1 MM 57.000.07 rA(T070L rl6rCMAXU 800 (1002) 57.000.00 Ural Aim MTUUL rob (S01) 53,500.00 MUM= 7farICTtw TIM f 750.00 Mc 3mu"91 ImA9CMTIOn $080 (Ga) •O- P(AR CK" I e $575.00 1`..'1`i ;; r;; °�[��';`�;�v'l�rt. {s•�.2,Hsy� x �,9 -7 q e -rrr s[ Imrn[In C.T. r San ne l.I. 1 A f Iwr�l r TOY I •n ! It C.O. yl aL a TA, A e r. w 1 t 1 r cc$rn CT108 I= Is I" ft CMIXI 1Cf CILSD $ 670.75 TOTAL lYti6fi0CT5a1 MM 57.000.07 rA(T070L rl6rCMAXU 800 (1002) 57.000.00 Ural Aim MTUUL rob (S01) 53,500.00 MUM= 7farICTtw TIM f 750.00 Mc 3mu"91 ImA9CMTIOn $080 (Ga) •O- P(AR CK" I e $575.00 1`..'1`i ;; r;; °�[��';`�;�v'l�rt. {s•�.2,Hsy� x �,9 -7 z k 1.....,..o-..^. 2` T r' d: D t t !s�'•r•y Bond 163024W Pr=am !X0.00 rAiTWM Pray0mvie a DORD Wr.RCi{R, the City,Cxta11 of tA• City of Rancho Cucamonga, sate of CAlltomia, and Cedes IbfF'avda, thereinafter dealgni�- PC niTl w a anTgeaemani Meeeby prlmlpal agnea to Osul� and eoeplau•eeruin deaf vied Public Lprgvuanta, vh1eA sold agrefaant. dated ,hheh 14. 19t , and ideO;3fied as pru3ect n ^t A,_%mm to barony ...Crr w Y ►ix • yart Nt10 l and, YatkW, Said principal is required ander the urea of sold agreement to furnish a bond for the faithful perforavnce of said agro•sant. P Noll, TRtRETCRE. we the prinolpal and f1 ®tTLJT CyByAgr 4 CALTPOWIA . as suacy, are. • a iraly bound "In .• ty o Acne o oamngA thereiNftar OA13ed •CltyJ, I. tn• Penal Sus of Shen thmand and 001100.--- ..». -. —..— - ---... WlLace {ji i sY Y sonny O e nice aloe. or a payment o v sum va and truly to b• md•, w bind cOnolws, our halts, succ•ssets, asscotozs and adslal- atfaurs, jointly and severally. firmly by these pru•Ata. The condition of this Obligation is such that If the oboe nounlSd Principal. his Or its ,mitt, esAeuton, ads. nistrators. succnaen Or easagns, shall to all things stand to sad &aide by, and ,.mil and truly kelp sad perfam the eevanagts. conditions Lld Provisions in the said Agreement and any alteration thereof "de as therein provided. on his or chair pert, to b• leapt and perforred at the time no In the manor therein sPaeltled. and In all respects ,,tCotaing to their true intent and seating, and shall lnd•anlfy and save harmless City. Its officers, agents and osyloyeas, &a therein stipulated, than this Obligation ssalL beeoss mull and void, uth,miss, it shall W and e®lir In full ferc,,aed •!feet. face AS Pact of the,obllCstlon saauted hereby and in addition tO the pcUtled therefor, there shall be lmluded Costs and ressomble oSpenaas and feu, Looluding reasonable attorney's fees, T Incurred by City In succaasfully enforcing own obllgatt=, all lo be uaad as .00u and included in any Judgment randerod. The summy hereby stijulaces and agrees that no !nano ,, eaueaioz Of Um, Alteration of add!tloe to the urea of the ayr• -mo,t or ns the wok lo be erforsed thoreundet or the apof theodons ,it or the Saar shall 4n anyvlsa affect its obligations on this bond, and it does h0[aby valvo node& Of anv Sora change. extension Of tlAo, allocation or aaditlon to the tens of thn agroesant or lo the wrR or u thO Specifications In wiviGS gnLRNr, this lnatruaont has bean duly exacutud by the principal and Surety Ano a moved, oa hC /ern `1 if &:. B003tt M QyB,�'(t(wOT Cy ilOff�A vy Air, 5aimlag,. DTtey -:Mxt �- 'lie i nw•-r • .1 S +'r t% tily�1 r �bt .J� 7. �n .. n LABOR A" MTCR7AtNf9' BCrD APR ECW) m. 6"9? If tlat?"Z, t \e City Cnme," •r the :Sty of Rancho Cucamnga, state of California, an: _,istlgII )yR (hereinafter d=Ima — es pr nC Pa 1 have eater -ate an agrsesent whereby principal apnea to !Mtall *ad rsPlete certain designated Public feP"%ROG1G, which said agre.anant dated torts 19 , 1942, any identified an prujuot 8J80 Anxbsld [s0 t pau. • • u: y re err to and e a part HdtRIAS. radar the [crab of said agreaeaut• ➢rinelpal is re7olred before entering upon the Dei[ornaite of the vorx, to file a good and eufflClent Papent bond with Na ':Sty of Rancho Cucaam a te secure the Claim m which reference Is mdv In tlela 1S (e®eencla09q with at oral) of Part a of Divleemn 1 0[ the Civil Code of the •fate of California. Gll ROW. TUPPErOIS, said princ.pal and the undenign*d as a Corporate suraty, are held fitely bound unto the City of Rancho Cucamnga and ell Contractors, subyoAt[aCmrl. laborers, Mtarialeed and other persons eepleyed in Ne terfonbace of the atonsale sgreeeent and referred m in the aforetald Cede of Civil Procedure in the am of uaeepleynmt insurance act with bee et te LocA -- - said surety will pay the sswr In an�imunt not sxoeeedlC lobo �� Aarainshe" sat forth and also in Case suit Is brought guppoon this bond Will pay in addition CO the teen amunt thnreeL coats tad reasonablw Lacvrree by and fees. City Inssuersasfull� untorn.ng much obligation. to beeau.,d d C" fixed eploc< by Jre COUrte and te Ix rated as Co." and Co be inetuded In the 1udgRent NereSn rard0red. It is hereby sxpreeell sti Pulated AM agreed that this bond null inure te the bralf.t of U3 end all psrtoCS, Cmpmfes end Corporations entitled m 9110 Claim antler Title 15 ([absenting with auction !OBI) of Pact a of DLvif ion 1 of the Civil Code, so as to give • right of Action te than Or their asnlgns In any suit *[ought upon this bend Should the r<tdltton Of this bond b tul'y pertorsed then this Wigatim shell bacm. null and void otherwise it bball be aM r-ealn in full tome Ana *!fact The surety hereby ail //slates and agrees the, oe CNnge, *xtenblon of tie*, Alteration or addition to the term of bid agreeeent o. top sperltleatlons actaspanying Us saes shall in env mnrer .ffert its obi 19atlons on "is bonds and It does hereby walla aQt1Ce of Any such change extens.an alteration or addition. iw JM'CSS waIREOPr this lnrlruaent has been duly eerr bad by thr prl elpal and awnty abom ntav:v on Rvcr •- 1_91 sr ;tLwel��� Ila1 `�tj:I�Y OXP,17�1 /.rap CiLXMIA Am v:c r U� -- C� L' i 010 , RECORDIM MOCESM By and HHCE RECORDED W.IL TO, CITT CLEM CITY Or saacme CLCAPOWA 9110 -C Eau Line Road "at office box 907 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91710 PLV. RADPLRIT IMPR0vpiLlrr COMRACT App LIEF AOREMESi e THIS ACRU)CM, made and entered Into this _ day of �, 19_, by and betvsen Chatlu H. Eofgaarden, a single man, (hersiufter rofarred to a 'Darelopsr•1, and the CITY Or RAMMO CDCApot•G, CALIMMIA, • municipal Corporation (heraloafter referred to as •Caty), provides as follows, wvZRLAS, as a general condition precedent W the issuance of a building permit for xasldentlal develcpmont, the City raqulres the construction or ons -half landscaped median island on Archibald Aveoue, adiatat W the prepertY to be developed! and YHERTAS, the Developer desire, to postpone construction of rued improvements until a later date, as dahrminnd by the City, and 17EMAS, the City is agreeable to surh poetpone*ent provided that the Developer enters into this Agreement requiring the Developer W consuw:t said Ivprovenegw, at mo expense to the City, after demand to do so .ry the CL-y, Which old Agreement shall also provide that the City may construct said Improvements if the Dsveloper fails or neglects to do w and tbat the City shall have a lien upon the real Property hereinafter described as security for the pealopsr's psrfor- ance, and any repayment due City. ROM, THEWOM, THE PARTIES AGUE, 1. The Developer hereby agues that they will install one - halt landscaped nadtan Island with irrigatlon on mater, in accordance and compliance with all applicable ord)eancea, toolutions, rule* and regulations of the City in affect at the time of the Installation. Laid 1 row sP sarnu Hall be installed Upon and along Archibald Avenue, sdlacent to developer's property hereinafter described, f r , ;r« •j RECORDIM MOCESM By and HHCE RECORDED W.IL TO, CITT CLEM CITY Or saacme CLCAPOWA 9110 -C Eau Line Road "at office box 907 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91710 PLV. RADPLRIT IMPR0vpiLlrr COMRACT App LIEF AOREMESi e THIS ACRU)CM, made and entered Into this _ day of �, 19_, by and betvsen Chatlu H. Eofgaarden, a single man, (hersiufter rofarred to a 'Darelopsr•1, and the CITY Or RAMMO CDCApot•G, CALIMMIA, • municipal Corporation (heraloafter referred to as •Caty), provides as follows, wvZRLAS, as a general condition precedent W the issuance of a building permit for xasldentlal develcpmont, the City raqulres the construction or ons -half landscaped median island on Archibald Aveoue, adiatat W the prepertY to be developed! and YHERTAS, the Developer desire, to postpone construction of rued improvements until a later date, as dahrminnd by the City, and 17EMAS, the City is agreeable to surh poetpone*ent provided that the Developer enters into this Agreement requiring the Developer W consuw:t said Ivprovenegw, at mo expense to the City, after demand to do so .ry the CL-y, Which old Agreement shall also provide that the City may construct said Improvements if the Dsveloper fails or neglects to do w and tbat the City shall have a lien upon the real Property hereinafter described as security for the pealopsr's psrfor- ance, and any repayment due City. ROM, THEWOM, THE PARTIES AGUE, 1. The Developer hereby agues that they will install one - halt landscaped nadtan Island with irrigatlon on mater, in accordance and compliance with all applicable ord)eancea, toolutions, rule* and regulations of the City in affect at the time of the Installation. Laid 1 row sP sarnu Hall be installed Upon and along Archibald Avenue, sdlacent to developer's property hereinafter described, f r , ;r« 2. The installation of said iaprovernts shall be corpleted rot 1&Mr than one (1) year follwing vrittoo eotice to the developer Loos the City to Cooaaca Ins•alcation of the e: . iastallation of said improvements, abatl ba at he expense to we City 1 in the avant the det,.lcper fall, or refuses to complete the tn,tallation of said Lpravaaents In a timely mmer, City my at any Ilse tnereaftur, upon giving the Developer written mtico of its intention ta Gu so, enter upon the property neraleafter described mod complete cold Lmprovesenta and recover all frosts of Completion imutred r -4c City from the Developer. e. Ter secure the performirce by the developer of the term and conditions of We Agreement and to secure the repayment to City of any fonds shim my be expanded by City .n completing ,aid loprwe- mnts upon default by the developer hereunder, the Developer does by these presents grant, bargain, cell and convey to the City the follotl,q w'^• dewrlbed real property strutted in the City of Aamho Cucamonga, County of Ban Daraardiao, State of Ce,lforola. to-vltt The South 101 12 feet of P,ecel 2 of Parcel flap tin. 1326 as recorded to took 14. Page Sf of Parcel Mope. records of said County (APD 1011- 011 -493 I ( P S. This Comeyame Is In [r=ats hoveve:. for the purposes dsacrtind above 6 Dew therefore. If the Developer shall faithfully ^ psrtorn til of th, acts and thing& by tsar w be done ends this ....r Agreement coon this Conveyance &bell be vold, cthsc. Lze, it shall �- resin in full force and offset and in all respect, atoll be coc,idered and trcatvd as a rortgafe on the real property and rte right, and obligations of the parties with respect thereto shall be governed by a•a provisions of the Civil Coda of the State of ralitornia, and any r Nor app- lcable statute pertalnLq to mortgagee an real property. 7 This Agruemanr shall be binding upon and shall Sesdre to the benefit of the hairs, executors, adsiniatratots, succermre aM •'i;® atslrns K ea <h of the parties hereto x � I ( P W: .MSEW9— City Clerk ti �C� t' n r -' "' •. ��� Vii.. °i�?�.1. t .�e y� 0. To the extent required W glue affect of this Agreement r[ AS a mrtgaga. tb�; hra `Developer• 8.,3411 seam 'Mrtgagor• and the . tlty shall Lo the •metgagea' as Phase terse are used !n the Civil -` w. Code of the State of CAllfIr is and any, other statute pertaird g to ' j: " ^`•"" nrtgageo on real property. ' 9. If loge• action is romanced to'emfaras any of the •; •j�ti ' Provisions of this Agrseoent, to rcc�cer any s,, vhich the v'lty Se entitled to rerrver frca the Developer here"" or ro forrr:ora the right of the Developer ro redem W above- doarrlhed property frost tea sortgaga created Nraby. then the prevailing party shall be mtitlod to recover its roate sad such reasonable attornayso fees as sN1& be erarded by the Co•%rt. ID MITMI9f• hRLAmr, the parties herrta Nv* eramted this Agreement an the day and year first above erltLn. DMI.Op", ' '+y rITT Or WCHO C.00AMDmf:A. ,....H.... • ' CALIMANIA, mrporatlon • mnlclpal Ccrparatlon •` ^r 4 0Y. p Y Mayor 3: E' AT T. W: .MSEW9— City Clerk ti �C� t' n r — CITY OF. aNCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 21, 19821 k TO: City Council and City Hanger FROM: Lloyd B. Hobbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Rrall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Acceptnee of Real Property Imprmvment Contract and Lien Agreement - O'Cormaa, Smith - located at 8861 Strang Lane The developers of a single family residence located at 8851 Strang Lana have submitted a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for City Council approval. Thin agraement in to gnranree future off -site improvements at the subject site. RECOMMMATIOH: It in recommecded that City Council adopt the attached Resolution accepting the Real Property Improvement Contract and Limn Agreement and authorizing the Hayor and City Clark to sign same. Respectfully submitted, LBR R:b, i 4� } i K LT 0 i. C O OO O 1�1 � ti, I PROJECT SITE H/LLSIDC RIAD st • JJ Mr ti, IY4• C �7r7•r `s c` +")b CITY OF RAN'C110 CUCr\NICh \GA Min f`�I 8661 STRKN `�i �� '. ENGINEERING DIVISION LANE c 6�i z .VICINITY nll�r ;y, v Pact L+ Eta t _ •ate -- _ IYr •+L lam, Y , x IOM • '� ? fj 13, J I 1 5Ti-N& L-A O O LT 0 i. C O OO O 1�1 � ti, I PROJECT SITE H/LLSIDC RIAD st • JJ Mr ti, IY4• C �7r7•r `s c` +")b CITY OF RAN'C110 CUCr\NICh \GA Min f`�I 8661 STRKN `�i �� '. ENGINEERING DIVISION LANE c 6�i z .VICINITY nll�r ;y, v Pact RESOLUTION NO. s Ll A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM JAMES O'GORMAN, MARCELLA O'GORMAN AND BRIAN SMITH AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME (8861 STRANG LANE) MHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted Resolution No. 80 -38 of May 7, 1980, to establish requirements for landlocked parcels where no subdivision is occurring; and WHEREAS, installation of curb, gutter, pavement and sidewalk as prerequisite to issuance of Building Permit has been met by entry into a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement by James and Marcella O'Gorman and Brian Smith for 8861 Strang Lane; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California does accept said Real Pro, qty Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement, authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign same, and directs the City Clerk to record same in the Office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 21st day of April, 1982. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Phillip 0. Schlosser—.1uy—or ATTEST Lauren rl Wasserman, City Clerk 1 real �^ prope[ty haretp[ur described as pearl cy for the D&velopae9 per- � formanae and any repayeant due City y THEREFORE. THE PARTIC7g AOAEE[ J t X 1 The Developer hereby agrees that Nay will install off- &Its street Improvement., including curb. , 9u ec &r. pavement and alJovalA. +ur in accordance and COePll &nee with all apple -able ordinances. resolutions, rules and regulation. Of the City in effect at the timed Of the Installs - .^eyyfpI�t lion. :aid Improvements shall be Installed n soon and along Seraog Lend, adjacent to C&velaPerb Property nereinafter described. . ,� rte n RECOROIRO REOOLgTrD BY and .fdEN RECORDED NAIL TO[ CITY CLEAR - ••a~•+�w.• CITY or M - Pont Office BOX 907 f s senchO COOIROngR, California 91730 A x, R REAL PROPERTY IMPOVER M CONTRA.'T AM LIEN ADREO l THIS AClr O=. made and entered Into this � day Of , 19 —, by and betvsen Jars P. O'COrnan, Naroslle E. O'Gorman and Brian Samuel Sa1N ( hereinafter referred to as 'Developer -), and the CITY N BANCSO COMIONCA, CALIrORNIA, a municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'City'l, provide, as follove[ REEREASs as a gnnetal condition precedent to the issuance of r `,� a a building permit for residential d&velmprnt, the City requires the rM ti - eenettretlon of mining orf-elte street lmProvemeOts, Ioolndinq Curb, goiter, pavme.t and sldevalA, edjaeent to the Property m be dpelopedr ,i a and NREIWS the Developer dealrev to postpone coo•truction Of turn Snprovemento until a later data, as determined by the Cityt and a, W WHEREAS, the City is agreeable to such postponement provided the the Developer enters into this Agresernt requiring the Developer W ern'troet Said improvements. at no expense to the City, after fy das nd to do to by the City. Mich said Agreement &hall also provide _ N Nac the City may construct Said Improvements If the Developer fail. [ [ Or "11"ts to do e0 and that the City &hall have A lien Upon the r �7 ;i 2. She installation at said Istpmvenen4 .hall be mopleted act later than oast (1) your fallowing written notice to the Developet froa the City to mastenes installation of the seen Installation of said iaprevemen" shall be at an expense to the City. 1 1. it the event the Drveloper fails or refuse* to couplet* the installation of Said improvemmn4 fn a timely =mart City say at any ties the - . r, upon giving the Developer written entice of 14 lntlntiaA to do wt enter upon the property hereiuttar described and Cat611e41aid LCprft ynta and rerarer all meta of eorpletien lcmcced by the City frost the Developer. t. To secure the perfGMAWe by the Dewlopar of the terms and condition, of We Agresount aW to secure the repsymant to City Of any tunes vhlch Say be arpendad by City in cosg.leting said Inprwenente upon default M' the Developer hereunder. the Developer does by them Presents geant, bargala, sell and convey to the City the follwiuq • described soul property situated In the City of Rancho Cucamaga, County of Ban Rarurdiw- State of California, to -wltj ` The aoutn 1/2 of all that portion of lot 6, Blork 11 Of the Cucamnga Homestead ASeaoiatlon Lands, ae per plat recorded In book 6 of Hops, page 16, rorord, of said County, lying Southerly of a line drawn parallel to the wftherly lied of laid Sot, the northwesterly corner of said parcel being at a point equidistant from the mithvaet corer and the Southwest corner of maid lot. Excepting therefrom the Westerly 382 last tareof. (APR 201 - 032 -361 , a,; • 3 This conveye*ca Is In trust, however, for the purpose, dsmrlbad above _ 6, Now, therefore, if the eevdopac shall faithfully perfora all of the ao4 and things by than ro be done under this Agreement, than this cnaveyanea shall be voids otherwise. It atoll slain In full force and affect and in all raspeets Nall be consideeW 1 "" and treated as a mrtgxgs on tha real property and the right, and obligations of the parties with rasp"t thereto shall be governed by'• ` a� the provisions of Na Civil Code of the State of California, and any a ,i, 37 4- p.* s 3 ses, ,. M? J. i other applicable statute pertaining to mortgages an real property 7 This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall insure W the benefit of the heirs, aaaeutors, adsiniatrasore, successors and assigns of each of the parties hereto. I- Tea the extent required m give effect of this Agreement es A wrtgsge, the tees `D• SIOPer` •tall wan •mrtgegor• and toe City ehali be the • mortgagse• as thou corms are used in the Civil Code of the State of California •td any ether statute pertaining to mrtgages on real property. e If legal action Se commenced to enforeo any of the provisions of this Agraeaot, to raccver any sm Mich the City is entitled to recover from the Developer hereunder ar to foreclose the right Of the Devsloper W redeem the above- dsseribed property from the mortgage treated hereby, then the prevailing party shall be entitled W recover! its costs and such rassonable attorneys' fees as shall be warded by the Court. M WITDCSS VILUX f, the parties hereto have eAae,ited this I Agreement an the day and year first above Witten. CITY, orvfinerat CITY DP aA, a icalA. J ---I � Corporation • municipal �� / / / corporation By. /Afro Mayor ATTEST, M. e - ,y City Clark v i 4v Mw X CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COCAAfQ� STAFF REPORT'' , a: C , 0 s DATE: April 21, 1982 _ i T'0: City Council and City Managa'_ tsr7 FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbv. City Engineer BY: B bar& Krell. Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Infant to Amex Tracts 11696, 10762 and 10277 -1 as Annexation No. 9 to LeAdocape Haintanarce District No. I Attached for City Council approval is a Resolution declaring thu City Counei intent to amen Tracts 11696, 10762 and 10277 -t to Landscape NainL--- .: ' District no. 1 and getting the public hearing for May 190 1982. Also attached for your review is the Engineer's Report and a Resolution ■pprcving same. _ RECCIOMMATION: It is recommended that Counci. approve the attached Resolution declaring the . City's intent to annex Tracts U696, 10762 and 10277 -1 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 and netting a &to for public Hearing. r� Respectfully submitted, L :bk:bc Attachments r ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM W c LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 ANNEXATION NO.9 .1 t± 0 w b z >V• V I u t i r Y S I r sF FI .1 •1 ,M=U 3 AM em. m G i I ^^ a• a - % 1 i 1 r ( � 1 r � VQ 1 t � � I w i s 1w £!si CITY OF RANCHO CUCAj\'IONGA .N tt[Ic; ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY NIAP NOM 22e !�� V'�h."`t��� %vtr�YG ?.;^v et��'•f2i'Iw•�,,�� %�..' � - +, ;.�;s •l��lj ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NMI ANNEXATION NO.9 �1 �`• _ ``• ' O 0 u .IM1 1 /K /t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAAK •.,� �.2i! ,ENGINEERING DIVISION `VICINITY NIAP I n n _ tlt:c ,.�i CITY OF RANCHO C<L UNIO \GA ?RAC7 �•f ' � N0. 1076?. EVGINEERIXC DIVISlO'N y7� _ • ' ' VICINITY nlAr �\ ■ RESOLUTION NO. `0 j • %',j t A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGIUEER'S REPORT FOR ANNE "sTION NO. 9 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT W 1 5. $ St WHEREAS, on April 21, 1982, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamongr directed the City Engineer to make and file with the -'S City Clerk of said City a report in writing as required by the Land- scaping and Lighting Act of 1972; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has made and filed with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as called for pursuant to said Act, which report has been presented to this Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, said City Council has duly considered said report and :i each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said _ report is sufficient, and that said report, nor any part thereof, requires or should be modified in any respect. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City `!. of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: SECTION 1: That the Engineer's Estimate of the itemized costs and expensesofsaTd work and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said report be, and each of them are hereby, preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 2: That the diagram showing the Assessment District referred to adescribed in said report, the boundaries of the subdivisions of land within said Assessment District are hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 3: That the proposed assessment upon the subdivisions of land in sa sessment District in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by said subdivisim., respectively. from said work and of the incidental expenses thereof, as contained in said report is . hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 4: That said report shall sta. nd as the City z'igineer's Report for-We purposes of all subsequent proceedings, and pursuant to the proposed district. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 21st cay of April, 1992. AYES: " NOES: i ABSENT:.,t y `'xi• vitri�.'r.�ia `� , i �,;- .*'.'+C 040t. I f. i C. S i; ,m k& w4 ■ SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to ann ^.x all new tracts into Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. The City Council has determined that the areas to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within Tracts 11696, 10277 -1 and 10762 as well as on the lots directly abutting the _ landscaped areas. All landscaped areas to be maintained in the annexed t•icts are shown on the Tract Map as roadway right -of -way or easements to be granted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. SECTIO11 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for the landscaping have been prepared by the developer and have been approved as part of the improvement plans. The plans and specifications for the landscaping are in cunformance with the Planning Commission. Reference is 'iereby made to the subject Tract Maps and the assessment diagrams for the exact location of the landscaped areas. The plans and specifications by reference are hereby made a part of this report to the same extent as if said Mans and specifications were attached hereto. SECTION 4 Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for parkway improvement construction. All tmq- ovements will be constructed by developers. Based on historical data csntract onclysis and developed work standards, it is estimated that ma•ntenance costs for assessment purposes will equal thirty (S.30) per square foot per year. These costs are estimated only, actual assess- ment will be Cased on actual cost data. 0 0 CITY OF RANCHO COCAMONGA 4; Engineer's Report for ANNEXATION NO 9 to the Landscape Maintenance District Number TRAfT 11696, 10277 -1, 10762 f. i C. S i; ,m k& w4 ■ SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to ann ^.x all new tracts into Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. The City Council has determined that the areas to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within Tracts 11696, 10277 -1 and 10762 as well as on the lots directly abutting the _ landscaped areas. All landscaped areas to be maintained in the annexed t•icts are shown on the Tract Map as roadway right -of -way or easements to be granted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. SECTIO11 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for the landscaping have been prepared by the developer and have been approved as part of the improvement plans. The plans and specifications for the landscaping are in cunformance with the Planning Commission. Reference is 'iereby made to the subject Tract Maps and the assessment diagrams for the exact location of the landscaped areas. The plans and specifications by reference are hereby made a part of this report to the same extent as if said Mans and specifications were attached hereto. SECTION 4 Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for parkway improvement construction. All tmq- ovements will be constructed by developers. Based on historical data csntract onclysis and developed work standards, it is estimated that ma•ntenance costs for assessment purposes will equal thirty (S.30) per square foot per year. These costs are estimated only, actual assess- ment will be Cased on actual cost data. 0 0 i� a =; Y �Y :e : x. s; a.. ity " The estimated total cost for Landscape Maintenance District Vo. 1 (including Annexation No. 9 comprised of 11,332 square feet of landscaped area) is shown below" Total Annual Maintenance Cost S 30 X 261,346 square feet 78,403 80 Per Lot Annual Assessment 78,403.80 i 1440 • 54 48 Per Lot Nonthly Assessment 4.54 54 48 : 12 Assessment shall apply to each lot as enumerated in Section 6 and the attached Assessment Diagram. Where the development covered by this annexation involves frontage along arterial ur collector streets, which are designated for inclusion in the n.ir,terance district but will be maintained by an active homeowners assoLiation, these assessments shall W reduced by the amount saved by the District due to said homeowner maintenance. SECTION 5. Assessment Diagram A copy of the proposed assessment diagram is attached to this report and laheled Exhibit A-, by this reference the diagram is hereby Incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6 Assessment Improvement for Annexation No. 9 is found to be of general benefit to all lots within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each parcel The City Council will hold a public hearing in June, 1982, to determine the actual assessments based upon the actual costs incurred by the City during the 1981182 fiscal year which are to be recovered through assessments as required ty the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. SECTION 7. Order of Events 1 City Council adopts resolution instituting proceedings. 2 City Council adapts Resolution of Preliwinary Approval of City Engineer's report. 3. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to Annex to District and sets a public hearing date. ' 4. City Councii conducts public hearing, considers all testimony. i. .- and determines to Annex to the Jistrict or abandon the proceedings:.; S. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the- City Council. - 6. Every year in Junn, the City Council conducts a public hearing N and approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments: J Ai C iL 0 RESOLUTION NO 3 71m, TO TO 7TY OF S IN- APE DISTRICT: NO. 9 PURSUANT NOM, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Ligh.irg Act of 1972, being Division 15 of tine Streets and Highways Code of ti, State of California, as follows: SECTION 1. Descri tio_n_oftMOrk: That the public interest and conveniences requ� an t sd i i the intention of this City Council to form a maintenance district in the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the maintenance- and operation of those parkways and facilities thereon dedicated for comon greenbelt purposes by deed or recorded subdivision tract map within the boundaries of the proposed maintenance district described in Section 2 'ereof Said maintenance and operation includes the cost and supervision of any sprinkler system, trees, grass, plantings, landscaping, ornamental lighting, structures, and walls in connection with said parLways. SECTION 2. Location of Mork: The fcregoing described work is to be locate w t n roadway r g t -o -way and landscaping easements of Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 enumerated in the report of the City Ergine_r and more particularly described on raps which are on file in the office of the City Clerk, entitled "Annexation No. 9 to landscape Maintenance District No. 1 ". SECTION 3. Description of Assessment District: That the contemplateeT rk, in a opinion n� s of more than local or ordinary public benefit, and the said City Council hereby makes the expense of the said work chargeable upon a district, which said district is assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and which district is described as follows: All that certain territory of the City of Rancho Cucamonga included within at, exterior boundary Ines shown upon that certain "Hap of Annexation No. 9 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1" heretofore approved by the City Council of said City by Resolution No. , indicating by said boundary lines the extent of the territory ' included within the proposed assessment district and which map is on file to the office of the City Clerk of said City. ����T:.9.i�.. a \t'Y�.�nl .�!'NL1j13�A..�:. .- /Y/ •. . .w. _.- �.Y'u:i -.. �.'_H �a, t v� SECTION 4. Report of Engineer: The City Council of said City .6 i by Resolution no has approved the report of the engineer of work which report indicates the amount of the proposed assessment, the district Landscape Maintenance titled ton Isnonrfilt in the Annexation Ito. the 9, City Clerk of said City. Reference to said report 1s hereby made for all particulars for the amount and extent of the assessments and fob, the extent of the work. SECTION S. Collection of Assessments. The assessment Khali be ollecte a: a same tae an n e same manner as County *axes are collected The L1ty Engineer shall file a report annually witt the City Council of said City and said Council will annually conduct a hearing upon said report at their first regula- meeting in June, at which time assessments for the next fiscal year will be debsrnined. SECTION 6. Time and Place of Hearing: Notice is hereby given that on the 19�ay o ay, 1#-R— 82,E at the hour of 7:00 o.m. in the City Council Chambers at 9161 Base Line, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, any and all persons having any objections to the work or extent of the assessment district, ray appear and show cause why said work should not be done or carried out or why said district should not be formed in accordance with this Resolution of Intention Protests must be in writing and must contain a description of the property to which each signer thereof is interested, sufficient to identify the same, and must be delivered to the City Clerk of said City prior to the time set for the hearing, and no other protests or objections will be considered. If the signer of any protest is not shown upon the last equalized assessment ro ll of San Bernardino County as the owner of the property described in the protests, then such protest must contain or be accompanied by written evidence that such signer 1s the owner of the property so described. SECTION 7. Landsca in and ti htin Act of 1972: All the work herein proposed she be one an carried roug in pursuance of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. SECTION 8. Publication of Resolution of Intention: Published ;. notice sha be oa a pursuant o ect on o e vermment Code. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the sane to be published 10 days before the date set for the hearing, at least once in The �Dail,yReport, •� a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of ntar0 io, California, and circulated to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 21st day of April, 1982. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ' 0 V., f� F. t' i� 1 p,z CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT Y ! n � C DATE: April 2_, 1982 $ Z '> T0: City Cowell and City Manager 1977 FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Etgiaeer BY: Barbara Erall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Acceptance of Ageaemanr and Bonds for a Siag:o Family Reaidener located at 5727 Ce-nsli= Street - Richard Harney Richard Haruey has submitted the attached agreement and bonds to Suara .tce rho construction of off -elce Improvemento for Carnelian Street for the frontage or his property located at 5727 Carnahan. RECOMMENDATION: It is rat ommended that City Council adopt the attached Resolution accepting the agreement and bonds and authorising the Mayor and City Clark to sign said agreamcat. Respectfully aubm! tt I d, LBH:BR:br Attachments `-�'�'ltbY,�i+y�1��1`i�i- :,.�5. �•.i'o �, -� .f_• .a,'ar*•.r.4i.':'f •1�1iY*,'li�F�,}2 RESOLUTION NO.�,;- ] A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING iMPROVEMEff AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, LOCATED AT 5727 CARNELIAN STREET WHEREAS, •.he City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement executed on April 21, 1981 by Richard E. Harney as developer, for the imyrovement of public right -of -way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located at 5727 Carnelian Street; 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 sdid real property as referred to Ordinance No. 58; and WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified to said _ Improvement Agreement. 1 NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Agreement and • said Improvement SecuriW 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. Y: PASSED, APPROVED, ADOPTED this 21st day of April, 1982. v' AYES: rt• NOES: ABSENT: Mi -. ` Sc osser, yor ATTEST ..iron M. Wasserman, City Clerk - ;y Z�L�' '��t•,e�i.i� s��d'i win ": - � 'a. P`.�• , rryiy���'��A.i'�e�{'��',Xi�, �,yr�; 'ns�..o �n:.{lt� i' :._ ✓[TJ ,,�� � i "r�.+JS t•";5��.h,�� 'sH'a�•5R'+7a�','''t •a. ?k7�''�a.�".aw•t�,k - •�i�r,•. � '- .a � ` - '• ..:r• r1N�#`UTn`§�tv'�GYy$I� i' Y V� CITY of MC6'J CUCAMGHGA IMPROVLYLlfr AGHElJILMT IG1C11 ALL Mfg: BY THEE PIMSEHTS. That this agreement is made and entered Into, in conformance eith the provisions of the Municipal Code and Ra6ulatians of the City of Rancho Cucamaoga, Stets Of Celif- ornis. • sonidipal corporation, 3erelnaftar reserved to as the City, by and betmsen said City and _j t ✓,rr./ 6 Ndtn -r ere re err ea a sop" 01. SITHs THAT, WHERZAS. Pursaaot to said Lode. Developer has requested approval by Its City of 5727 Carnelian Street, in accordance with the provisions of the report of he Community Oevdope or Director thereon. and any aandsents thereto: located on toe east sift of Carnellan, north of Wilson Avenue, and wWEREa, the City has established certain requirmente m be eat by said developer prior to granting the final approval of the developments and WSEM1Se the exs.ntion of this agreement and posting of Improvement .eourity a hm•etnaftor cited and approved by the City Attorney. a.a domed to be equivalaut to prior completion of said requirements for the purpose of securing said approval MOW, THEREFORE, It is hereby agreed by and between the Civy and the 0*veloper an follo.ea I The developer hereby agrees to construct at developer•e expense all improvements described on page 1 hereof within 6 moths true the data hereof 2 The tarn of this agreement shall be 6 soothe, commencing on the date of extension hereof by the City. This agreeesut *hall be In default on the day follwing the last day of the tern stipulated, units, said tern has been extended as hereinafter provided 1 The Developer may request addltl.oal ties In which to complete the Pmvl,Ions of this Agrement. in writing not less than four vats prior to the default data, and Including a statement of circuastsncts of recessity for additional ties. In consideration of much request. the City reserver the right te review the provisions haraof, lncludlnyy coaxtrucolon sta lards, coat estimate, and ouf- emency of the Ivprovemnt security, and to require adjustments thereto when Warranted by rubstantlal changes therein. e If the Developer falls or neglects to comply with the Provutons of thla agreement, the City shell have the right at any ties to cause said provisions to be coepletmi by any lawful teens, and therevcon to recover free aid Developer am /or his Surety the full coat and expense Incurred In to doing. 5 Encroachsont permits shall be obtained by the Dsvelomr free the office of the City Engimer prior te state of any work within the public right-cfaay, and the duveloror shall conduct such work in full camflfaoce With We regulations contained therein, son - compliance eay vault In stepping of the work by the City, and aaeame,nt of the penslcIn provided. ,~��:�)- /°.fir' '.A I•L°: �^�'i"II - I ..,M Y• w. P or • 6 rutlic right -cfway Improvement work required shall be ' constructed in moafo_o with approved Improvement plans, Standard Specifications, and Standard Drawings and any special amsndmer" thereto. Construction shall include soy transitions and/or other Incidental work deemed aec•ssary for drainage or public safety, „ 7 work Cone within esieting guests shall to diligently ••. pursued to completion, the City shall have the right to amp eta any and all work in the event of uniuStified delay to completion, and to recover 1 cost and expenSG incurred from tM Developer and/or his coetractot by say lawful means. .. I- The Developer sham be saspecslb)o for replacamaj0. relocation, or removal of any component of any iarlgatlon water system In Conflict with the required work W the re gfac on of the City Fcglnear and the owner of the %star system. 9 The Developer shall be rsspomeiblt for removal of all a loose rack and other debels from the public riyht-ofway resulting from work done on the adjacent property or within maid right- ofwaf. ` 10 The Developer #hall plant and maintain Parkway trees as directed by the Co®nity Development Dfrem Wr 11 The Improvement security W be furrlshad by the Developer W guarantee completion of the terms of this agreement shall be subject to the approval of the City Atternay. The principal amount of Said lm,.rovtment natality shall be cot leas than the - amount Shown below, IMPROVCm4T SECURITY SUBKZTT'rO, Faithful Performance Dand 417.100. C0 r.. ~M• s Material and Labor Goad 6 6,5!0,00 , Itl MITNLSR NCRLOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents W be duly executed and sckncwlndged with all formalities required by law on the dates set forth oprostta their signatures, DEVELOPER �'^'� -•� DY, DATE, _ MITCCSS, DATE, CITY Or RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA a municipal corporation INYOR ArTLST, CITY CLERK DATE. t V a � 1tr �.• • 4%k� NP wal L � Yat,=d. 4' w iii p • CM 0r SAw.T mcw=% conmT rloo Jm Loco Mmu Tsrmtntim rout ra sme u :dttx0 h 'Iuptttor'. Copy') luR. 3122/82 no" SO. 0y�p.� a J.W. rile 4Tenm. N. Harney y6J Clo7 r rums Na.. ramellan N!o Ylltm 4764 WrT Ibea * mpst ta4gn, eJa "T"s fee for Kttle4 p.mlt oc maaeant roplAC.- ee 6 ComTimcTTO] CttsT arwR I r ..,�. CJ6Tmt7-.C1 CnT 111,R95 I OWTDKMT COSTS -_ TOM CMSTS MMA COSTS 513,10 ' T.AIIML rar07MANCL Soso Qo0t) 213.160 ` LABOR A MTafAI, MW (50t) S 6,550 MOEER1NC ImFmI*w rt; S 655 C me so=w ' Kmad TATt" S m tC1S11 -0• t >' Jt y ..h.et't3`..�w'�TThS•_aalT ,i W -n`t•` �it�i S' s 4. baxr no. %4= hoods 82D6.00 few i Tre rhITMTUL Lzftro wkMedace'n MKCRZAS. •10 City Council of the City of Mncho Cucamonga, State of C41110rnia, and (haraf m(ter designated As Pr nc1 v-!2--- ear qte u agreement whereby r1nC10a1 a9r•u to lnatell and tae designated 110 [,Vista car - dated �� iaprovemeet' 'Mich aid agreement, tom" 19 , and Identified as ld='pa Is her. y CO err, to • me e •pars Area /f�'� 111MSf11S, said yprLtcipal 1s r•guired made[ the tarsus of said agreement to furel ^Is a band for the faithful parforasece of said agreement. MOM' 1T67tfl9AE, w the principal and Iarthrd a,S10at and ILn+�oowro ua�a am o e. eur.cr..ra a an 'city�I, in the panel RUM 4f Ncamn9a (ker•Sna Arr Palled teems o ,Sa ^ w u. Y • n t tetea, or the payment o wn a sun call and truly to M made ve bind ouraslves, our hairs, •uccerors, ese<u. tore and adadntetraters, jointly and severally, firmly by th.ee presents. The condition of bounded obligation is such that if the above ad principal, hit or it hairs, ar.eutors' adalolstrators• suceeuers Or &,Sign.' shall in all things .tend to and abide bYY, and w11 and truly keep and perform N. covenut, wndi- tlone sad provlsione in the said a9rs.munt and any alteration thereof made as therein Provided, on his or their part, to be k.vpt and performed at the time AM in the ouutor thatt'n rpsO- 1fiAd, and 14 all reaped according CO their true Int., uS agent Band And acp ayteles, faA@there o Stipulated.athan� this obligqation •hall becens null and cards otherwise, It .hall be and reasuln In full fort^ and offset. to ��As atpart of se obligation sa"rnd hereby end in addition costs and @'umaunt S eccified therefor• there shall be aelud@4 tor, Panama and feu• including nesorable at- ey's foes, incurred by City in uccosefully enforcing such o011gactoe, ell In be eased as coats one fecladad In My judgment rendered The Surety hereby stlpulates and agrees that no change, ex- tension of time, Alteration or addition re the Tereus of the agreement :got the v rk to be performed thereunder or the .pee - OallgAtlOn• Onthtar bond �hand AAt does hereby valve notice of any much change, utnStan of time, alteration ur addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work or to the apeeifleations. In MITMCSS k, ZRMr, th1S Instrument has been duly eraeuted ar tad prtnctpal and surety above eased, an nnb M. 19=—. �I t Richard S. Harem, Yartlotd aoatdaut and redo m fq r�7W �t K[U �, ( Yabmrt L Soma' Attomarira.pwt J ll� e h; : tt': st.ka,: L "my Ane Tm—tty Caganp Dyl Presume 1. Inal. in Put. base LABOR AND MTERMUM, W.M MC' M. the City Council of the City of Rancho CUenzalnga. State Of California. and (hereLnafter designated as pr T m Ip &VT -. agreement whereby principal agrees to instal Lain designated public dotes V%�b Q6 lg_&L_, And Identified as pro- am in'.. A,Ka Wre—r-ay CONMA! w and vado a part -Reras -7F Ea. "CREAS, under the terms at said agreezontp principal Is re- quired before ant ring upon the perfor,ance of the ,,k. to file a good and Sufficient p&ymmot bond With the City of Naacho Cars- amm, W Mature the claim to which reference Is made is Title 13 (comenclaq with Section 30021 of port 4 of Divisica 3 at no CIVIL Code at the Seats of California. NOW. THEREFORE, said principal and the undersigned as a corporate S-rtty, are hold firmly bound unto the City of Rancho CUcaronga and all contractors. subcontractors. laborers. Material- V man and other per ans "played In the performance of the aforesaid agreement And rsf:rred to In the aforesaid Code of Civil Procedure 1, the am Of 31A r=aaem ri" FRvaoAd Pith em - - - - car materials U .781MrrU;A.=m d" under furnished or Isom- or any xx the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such wirk or Labor* that Said surety will pay the same in = Ammar not exceeding the Amount herela&bave set forth, and also In ca" suit is brought upon this bond will pay In addition to the Jac. Amount thereat, mats and ressonabla expenses and fees, Including reasonable at- t0rn@Y'& fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing Such I ObII9&tImo W bs sv&rC-d and flood by the court, And to be taxed an costs and W be Included in the judgment therein tendered. It In hereby expressly stipulated AM agreed that this bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies, and O =CCO to file claisse under Title 15 Cc ncIaq eel 30921 of Part 4 of DIvIaLmn 3 of the Civtl Coda, so a• to qlv* & right Of acrAm to them or their assigns In Any suit brutght upon this hand, • Should the cmd!tion of this bond be fully P%rform,ed, then this Obligation shall bamou, null and vold, otherwise It @hall be and cousin In full force asd affect. Thu surety hereby stipulates And agrees that as change, ex- taft2lon of times alteration or addition to the Lots, of said 42rcament at 00 apacifications Accompanying the no" shall in -- any manner affect Its ablilatlons an this bond, and It does here- by waive notice of any such change, extension, alteration or ad- diLlon. IU WITNESS Wt=r, this instrument has been dulyy err tod by ttm principol and surety Above named, an Parts st.ka,: L "my Ane Tm—tty Caganp Dyl ■ a s f a� i ,y r^ ORDINANCII NO. 1-70 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA, MIFORNIA, IMPOSING A FEE PAYABLE AT THE TIME Of APPLICATION FOR A BUILD ?NG PERNIT FOR THOSE LOTS OR PARCELS OF LAND WITH RESPECT TO WHICH FRONTAGE INPROVENENTS'HAVE BEEN INSTALLED PURSUANT TO A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Chapter 12.08 of Title 12 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal of Reis amended by adding Section 12.08.075 thereto to read as follows: 'Sec. I:.08.075. Retabursement agreement fee. 'If a frontage improvemnt was constructed !..der or pursuant to a reimbursement agreement betwan M% _ City and another person along a street adjoining a lot or parcel of land on which a building, or other structure requiring a building permit, is to be con- structed, altered or enlarged, then: Of 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 paroel �1I WC tprm�,,q,+`,�l the reimbrursY'ie✓n,(j'a a .and- 1 wstw J R 4 rr '(A) No builiny pft it shall be issued until the stops required to be id by sub - section (a) of this section are paid.'. SECTION 2: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shat al ties[ to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) nays after Its Passage, at least once In the Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation, circulated In the City or Rancho Cucamonga, California PASSED. APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 3rd day of February, 1982. AYES NOES AOSEIIT CF1Y OF RAVCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT� DATE: April 21, 1982 TO: Members of tha City Council and City Manager FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Coanunity Devslopnent Director BY: Joan A. Kruse. Administrative Secretary SUBJECT: IMPA ON C E REPARATION N ENV RONMEIITAL MCST REDCISIR F ELOPMNT T N TACT 11933 - eve arnt o a tots detachedrunitsnand 144.6 creeparkfon695.5nacresaofly land in the R- 1- 20,000 zone located on Hermosa Avenue, north of Hillside. _ At its meeting of March 17. 1982, Council continued this item pending the finalizing of negotiations for the acquisition of a portion of the subject property for use as a City park. Attached is the staff report which was prepared for the March 17 meeting. RECOWNDATION: The matter is academic since the original project s c aT�d Nib the purchase of the part. Technically. however, there is a legal appeal pending and said eppeal must either be heard and decided upon the merits of the original application or the appeal withdrawn by the appellant. Since no withdrawal has been requested, the Council gust address itself to the former. Resnectfetily submitted, JL:JK :jk Attachment opnent Director / t �1 E m J i a ;7 3 `.e ;s �i r CPPY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA c0CA"+o "t it STAFF REPORT 0 1977 j- DATE: March 17, 1982 j TO vembers of the City Council and City Manager FROM: Jack Lm, AICP, Director or Community Development BY: Michael Yairin, Senior Planner SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING CGKIISSION DECISION FOR PREPARATION Ur Ar7€NVIRORM T L IM C E T R THE DEYEL HEN UrT�iATIV C - eve opment OT a tote planned residential deve opment of 185 single family detached units and 14.6 acre park an 95.5 acres of _ land in the R- 1- 20,000 zone located on Hermosa Avenue, noeth of Hillside. BACKGROUND: The appeal of this project was originally introduced to the 76uncfl- at its meeting of October 7, 1981. At that meeting, the Aag jsant had requested continuanee 111 ideration onsba_&"ea4r 5ubsequen y, a earing a •epeal has een cont nu e ver a last several months, the Applicant has been negotiating xith the City's Director of Community Services and the Parks Subcommittee of the City Council for the possible acquisition of the west portion of the project alon7 Hermosa Avenue for a public 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 end 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. ANALYSIS. Currently, the official application and project on file n ti he- Tanning Division encompasses 95 re " ^�••�d �a des of Hermosa Avenue h o Hil side Avenu The require - ment for n a impact a e ommission 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 requiring the preparation of an EIR for the total project. If the ;• City Council upholds the Planning Commission decision, then an Environ- mental Impact Report would have to be prepared for the total project if m J i a ;7 3 `.e ;s �i b. Y s, Appeal of Planning Commission Decision City Council Agenda March 17, 1982 Page 2 J r` V 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 impact. If so, then,the Applicant would need to refile a revised project and staff would conduct anither Initial Study to determine If an Environmental Impact Report otnuld be ne ded on the revised project. Therefore, the Council's decision this evening is on the total overall project t" as it is nor presently submitted on file in the Planning Division. The Appli- cant's options are to either withdraw the appeal, withdraw, the current project and submit a revised project, at which time a new enviro- mental assessment will be conducted, or continue with the present project as submitted in accordance with the Council's decision an this appeal. RECOKIENDATION: it has been recommended by the Planning Commission that an nv ronmenia=mpact 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 Apolicant, then a new environmental assessment will be conducted to determine if an Environmental Impact Report is still needed. _i Respectfull subsdttted, JACA L V' Director of Community Development JL:MV:jr Attachments: October 7, 1981 City Council Staff Report Excerpts from August 26, 1981 Planning Commission Minutes Planning Commission Staff Report of August 26, 1981 r� �9 r M 0 Planning Commission lUnutes -8- August 26, 1981 C' .. �, Mr. Rougeau replied that parcel 2 or 3 would cause this to happen and • both projects would have street improvement plans that are under process y of approval and these improvements could be worked in as part of thuir screet improvement. :5 Clairman ring opened the public hearing. b Doug Aova, applicants stated that a groat deal of time and many had been placed an the study of this intersection. He further stated that the applicants would be paying their System and Development fees to the City, as would the other projects, and t.a felt that this cash flow mould take care of the funding problem of the signal. The dcalwga problem _ had been mitigated " nfactorily between the efforts of City Staff and the project engineers and Mr. Hone felt that surrounding properties as well would benefit from these improvements to this project. t Chairman Ring asked if there were any further public comments, there being none, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hempel stated that he felt confident that the Systems and Development fees from the apartment project or any u.her project in that ,1 area would be sufficient to cover the Installation of the traffic signal. r Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the reworking of lemon Avenue was going to take care of the water runoff an that street. F ' Hr Rougeau replied that in the future a storm drain Is planned to eupplment the enlacing pipe to get the eater into the ground This project drains entirely onto Haven Avenue. Chairman Ring called for the motion. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Dahl, "cried unanimously, to adopt the Resolution approving the evislon to Condition for Site Approval Y No. 80-01 eeaa• G TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 11933 - WOODLAND PACIFIC - A public hearing to consider a requlr,xent for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on a total planned residential developtent of 185 single - family detached units and 14.6 sera park on 95.5 act" of land in the R- 1- 20,000 race located on Hermosa Avenue, north of a Hillside Michael Vairin, Senior Plawer reviewed the Staff Report Chairman Ring asked Mr Vairin if what was before the Commission at this meson; was the determination of whether or not the project In question needed an Environmental Impact Report M 0 Planning Commission lUnutes -8- August 26, 1981 !'.�" C � 4 Mr. Vairin replied that this we Staff's intention. Commissioner Dahl asked if the density of the project had any bearing on r the draft EIR. Mr. Volrin replied that the density was over the two dwelling unit per acre designation of the General Plan and would, therefore, require a General Plan amendment. However, Is act the sole reason for an EIR. Comissiomr Dahl called attention to the font that a Resolution had been adopted by the Planning Clmaiseion regarding lots in the R- 1- 20,000 zone classification that the lot Sire would be 20.000 square feet net. Mr. Valrla stated that this would have to be resolved by the applicant In the EIR process. Hr. Vairin stated that the EIR would cover many "pacts of the project, one of them being the land use category. ` Commissioner Dahl stated that the General Plan designated the vest side Of Hermosa as park. Chairman Ring opened the public hearing. Peter Templeton of the Planning Center In Newport Reach, representel Mt. 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 mat with City Staff to see chat the requirements would be for this project and if an EIR would be necessary. Hr. Templeton sated that staff informed him that as EIR would not be required. He further stated that geologic, soil, and hydrology reports had been obtained by the Planning Center as well an the study into various types of fire retardant building materials. He said that the applicant vould be willing to sell the property to the City as a perk or to develop one quarter of the property and give three - quarters to the City as a park as veil as many other alternatives. He stated that Mr. Scott would be placed under a financial burden if his project were postponed another five or six months while an EIR vas being processed. Commissioner Dahl stated that the property In question has been for sale sine. April and that this applicant may mt a¢cessarily be the person who would develop this property therefore he felt that it could not be darned a hardship that the Commission would be placing on the applicant to request an EIR. Mr. Templeton replied that this was placed in the newspaper approximately nine months after submittal and at the: time Mr. Scott felt that he vas getting nowhere with this project. Hr Vairin stated that he would like to clear up three items which Mr. Templeton commented on. One comment being the length of time since Planning Commission Minutes -9- August 26, 1981 • the project was filed, Mr. Vairin stated that the project was not o!flcially filed until April of 1981. The second Issue is not whether or not the City vo�jld be losing a park but is that the area is Ceaeral 'y 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 park. mss... The third issue was the densi•y factor and this would be one of the points of the EIR. Ronnie Steven, 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 problem in the area. Christine Benoit, Alta Loma resident, asked it the project would be brought back to the Plannln9 Commission for a public hearing after the completion of an Fig. a Mr Vairin replied that the EIR would be used to help mold and design the finished project or help the decision makers to decide whether the project should be approved. He explained that the EIR Is a tool to determine the kinds of impacts as a result of this project the way it is proposed or alternatives to the project. Mr Lem stated that the developer of this property would have serious drainage problems to consider as they were at the top of the Alta Loma Channel and this issue would be a consideration of the developer i, ' • Commissioner Sceranka asked for an explanation of what the Co®iesion's responsibilities were wheo a project such as this was filed with the City. Mr Lam replied that anyone is free to submit an application to the City with what ever proposal they have. V 'y+ +, Christine Benoit stated that she hoped that the Commission would keep In mind that the beauty of the arm was the reason for designating the area as park in the General Plan. Chairman Ring asked if there were further public comments, there beicg none, the public hearing vas closed Commissioner Sceranka stated that he was very concerned about this particu- lar piece of property. He stateJ that very few cities in the area are '.� fortunate to have a forest and it was his intention as a Planning Commis- sioner to retain this piece of forest as the Ceneral Plan designation of park He further stated that economic considerations of the applicant were not an issue that the Planning Commission should deal with. Com- misaioner Scaranka stated that he use totally opposed to any mechanism other than an EIR for this -oject which would discuss the issues pre- sented by Staff. s Planning Commission Minutes -lo- August 26, 1981 Chairman Ring stated that he felt that an EIR should not be required for for area w ould the of The development Ile felt that it wid no[amlCSgate environmental impacts. He further stated that evaryooa vas were of the mitigating circumstances of the fault zonal and drainage problems plus all of the other arena addressed in the reports attached to the Staff Report and It was his opinion that if the property were planned properly st 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 mould not. Camminsloner Dahl stated that density would have a tremendous amount Of impacts and the decision at this meeting mat be based upon the ten- , tctive map as It was submitted to the City. He asked if the Commission could state that based upon the density show, an EIR would be required; however, if the developer wished to come back with a lower density, the EIR would be reconsidered. Hr Vairan replied that the deCLglon is to be made on whether or not an EIR most be made on this tentative map as submitted If this statement is made to the developer, they would have the option to drop this ten- tative and draw up a completely new project thus necessitating a net _ Initial Study to determine what potential impacts would be created from that project Bob Dougherty, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the area of environ- mental review has been an active area In the courts and some atandcrds • for judicial review have been developed to either require or not require EIR's He further stated that the trend of the decisions have bona to- wards the requirement of an EIR if there In any doubt on how the issue should be resolved. If the question of whether or not significant im- pacts are a result of the projact is debatable, then the courts damn that an EIR should be prepared. The etfact upon a developer in not re- quiring 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 • year or so later. It could have a financial Impact upon the City as the attorney teas are frequently awarded against the City whera the decision uas not to require an EIR and the City vas sued over that decision Commissioner Scerankc asked if this area was designated as a park In the General Plan shouldn't the Commission be acting upon a negative impact on th, General Plan aacadmant before action an the tentative map. Hr Vairin replied that It would be done concurrently C�Isstoner Sceranka stated that he could not understand Chairman Ring's statement that there are no negative Impacts or an EIR required on a Place of property where a General Plan amendment would have to be made from a park designation to s proposal for a subdivision development. He felt that an EIR would most definitely be required when you were com- pletely changing the land use of a piece of property ' - y0 Planning Commission Minutes -11- August 26, 1981 �+ rnX • Hr. Vairin stated that the State Cuidelines states that public contro- versy alone was grounds to require an SIR, despite the Sasua of density. Commissioner Sceranks stated that the proposal on this property is to take a public park and make it a private park. Commissioner Hempel stated that it is not a park, it is a proposed ponsible park. He further stated that he was In agreement with Chairman Ring that the applicants come In with a proposal of a much luver density. He also stated that a study of the fire danger in that area should be looked into. Chairman Ring asked for a motion. Notion: Haved by Tolatoy, seconded by Dahl, carried to require wa Environmental Impact Report for Tentative Tract 11933. Chairman Ring voted No on this project for the reasons stated previously. AYES: CO:LIISSIONERS: TOLSTOY. DAHL, REMM. SCMWirA NOES: COIWSSIONERST RING ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - a a a a a OLD BUSINESS • Commissioner Sceranka askal about the status of a Resolutlor or Ordin- ance he requested to have draw up requiring all residents buying a home in the City to sign off on the Ceneral Plan Hap Hr Lam replied that a priority list of work programs would be brought back to the Commission and they would be able to select which ones to act an first. J NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Rempel requested that Staff suggest an Ordinance to the City Council which would state that any time a house is remodeled or Improved over a certain percentage, the Planning Coalufon could re- quire the dedications and improvements necessary to be mado to the property SunCommissioner Dahl asked Hr Lam if he had reached a decision on haviug one or two Commissioners present at the meeting with the homeowners ' concerned with the Marlborough tract. Mr Lam replied that this time the homeowners expressed a desire to t meet with Staff only Hr Lam stared that he trould report back to the Commission the Items di cussed at this mention and try to arrange for the r •} Commissioners to be in attendance at a later toting with the homeowners. `F Yy ±ZPlanning Ca ®lesion HSautes -12- August 26, 1981 .ate r t-+!;C -""xs S "i t. •`,'�....r :v CITY OF RANCHO W&MONGA STAFF REPORT a C: August 26, 1981 0 x Wr TO: Hembrrs of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Las, AICP, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSWNT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 11933 P.D. 81 -03 OeOt&cLhN D uPAC - A Total panne eve o family and a 14.6 acre park on 95.5 acres of land in the R- 1- 20,000 zone located on Hermosa Avenue, north of Hillside. S• 4 E ABSTRACT: The project 1s a single family residential development submitted In accordance 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 a t and west side of Hermosa venue north of H11 The project site tot& s acre stnglo etached homes are proposed to be Wilt on 80.9 acres while a park 11 be devee�lopedo�nt�hn,,LtWULO0.14 6 e propas entat ve Tr- t • Map, Exfii6{t�g nIcates 4 is are 2 0 and 36 lot are 0 000 s ft. Curren znn ng is R -1- , , and the Genera Pan es gna es e ma or a property as a proposed park site. The apDlicant is re- questing a General Plan Amendment to very low density (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) and a zone change to the PO Comtining District. The surrounding zoning and land use 1s provided on the attached Zoning Map (Exhibit •C'). t: EHVIROIMENTAL SETTING: Approximately BOS of the site is densely covered ;T th 6 -year o re gum Eucalyptus trees which are In good condition. The i overall gradient of this site is approximately 10% with the slope running north to south The majority of this site empties Into a natural drainage course which flows northeast to southwest runoff from the easterly portions Of this site travels 1 n ._rho �..e+ - .,,,,����a a eas pro ect boundary of the property — Tine. Sur ace slow and the - erosion hazards sT•i9Fi£.. uu ft—ng across the northern part of > t,e property 1s the Cucamonga Fault. Ex s ni g development on s e s m ed to Aermsa Avenue, d con ser it near the south property line, a forest s service road along the north project bo,.dary, several internal dirt roads, and small borzon 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 of land uses including agricultural uses, singe family residences,vacsnt land, ± and a flood control basin. ITEti G �i -�.i •-` 41 EWE TT 11933 (P.D. 81 -03) Staff Report _2_ August 26, 1981 ENYIRONNENTAL ANALYSIS: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the app cant and s attached for your review. Staff has conducted a field investigation and has completed Part 11 of the Initial Study. Following 1s a brief discussion of the major issues and potential adverse impacts which may occur as a result of this project. 1 Drainage: Currently, the onsite soils are excessively draineJ 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 Sound. Compounding this problem, is the fact that approximately 750 acres of land outside of the project area drain into and across the site. The magnitude to which the increased runoff will affect the ground water table and erosion potential is not known 2 Biota: Removing a large number of Eucalyptus trees from the site cOuM 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 Plan, 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 City's Ion term goal of providing a much larger park some time in the future. Also, the economic feasibility of the City developing 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 possibio alternatives could range from the clustering of hones on smaller lots to maximize open space or to maintaining a minimum lot size of 8 acre or larger throughout the project site. Public Safet : Public Safety is a concern which must also be addressed. }.a nta n ng t e maximum number of Eucalyptus trees will make the homes highly susceptible to fire Potential fire hazard is increased for this site because the northern project boundary abuts the foothills. Also of concern is the Cucamonga Fault which runs through the northern portion of the property. Since the .tt an earthquake in this fault could reach 6 5 to 7 0 er Scale, ere is a significant public safety concern e Ti 11933 (P.D. 81 -03) Staff Report n u PEP Pr d; -3- August 26, 1981 RECONNENDATION: Based upon staff's -eview and prepa•ation of the nitii ai Study, It is recommended that an Environmental Impact Report be prepared for this project. If the Commission concurs with this finding, then the scope of the E.I.R. sh;.aid be determined by consi- dering the information presented in the ;ritial Study, this report, and the public hearing. Respectfully su fitted, JACK LAN, AICP Director of Community Development JL:CJ:cd Attachments: Exhibit •A• - Vicinity Map Exhibit •B• - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit :CO - Zoning Map Exhibit •D• - Site Plan Exhibit °S• - Grading (two sheets) Exnihit . Fa - Naturai features Map Exhibit •G• - Conceptual Landscaping Plan ii ,x Q. L' 1 C - - - - -- • - - - -- ------ VICINITY MAP CITY Or RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DIVMN 0 s 2^199—I'm �f ECHIBR'1 "All SGtLE1S • to - I - a RANCHED -- ; ''} UCAMONGA ;I r •ia I" I . I i r • (�� 1 1 1 • I 1 P . ; r wwwww VICINITY MAP CITY Or RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DIVMN 0 s 2^199—I'm �f ECHIBR'1 "All SGtLE1S • to ' r 'IZNrATin TIIAcr NO. 11839 ws wn�wr wx•rl wru - VrM a � lip � o p M 4 FC%m Y p p/ • b $ $ »w p 1 i. Q M Ew .w . f. > THE WOODS AT RA11CHO CUCd:rflO?1G93 A Pfamad CoffkrAWty-by V/&dland Pacific Developrwt, hr— tt BN ` i OO IN AP THE WCC D5 AT RaHCHO CIDC MoflGA R Pwnned Connuilty by Wo -dland Pacinc E emreloF t, im t� 0 CONCEPTUAL GRADING AND DRAIWACE PLAN ��rarn T - J—z—r- '-71 ..+ -wo s.r rerr �1 r� TYPICAL FINISH aRADINa PLANS TAE WOODS AT RANCHO (U(a OC3ICA *�narrnw .`as E 4.. THE WUQODS QT'RAII(H® (UCc3;n©jjG4 !i PlwMd C'offMMIIY by Ykadlu d P6dW 6q"elalxrtsnt, - �: - � - - •., • � TE,+"� C� ., F- �181'T "�' (.sll,ESt.s tf zi ,-.. • CDNCLP'fUAL DLVVG AND DRAINAGE lLAN TNr i. 1111,' / •. / \� I 4.. THE WUQODS QT'RAII(H® (UCc3;n©jjG4 !i PlwMd C'offMMIIY by Ykadlu d P6dW 6q"elalxrtsnt, - �: - � - - •., • � TE,+"� C� ., F- �181'T "�' (.sll,ESt.s tf zi ,-.. C f�ATU'RAL ,AT'UR�S TIME WOODS AT Ralil(HO :UciardlOPiGq A Plumed Can="i y by VOo I nd Pwlflc t7ev 10Wunt, Inc. 0 • 11 1 1 1 . A G CITY OF RAICRO CDCAMO\GA • INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEEP - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $80.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of thLs application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review 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 Nagative Declaration will be- filed, 2) The 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 TITL ?: The Woods APPLICAAT'S NAHE, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: OF PROJECT paen - Nnn1A PERSON To re and Peter ADDRESS PARCEL NO.) LIST OTHER PER?IITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: r......1 el -- •___i__. - __ Imo) a �s i r PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF A.Nys 95.5 sere DDSCRIBF, THE ENVIROV.%tEVrAL SETTIgG OF THE PROJECT SITE _ INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURAOUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY — EXISTINO STRUCTURES AIM THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): Sna to Mm+nt r •, ,y. rry r r _1 Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series- Of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? no •i i. �e71 IMPORTANT: I= the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits p.esent the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the ' best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be mad"Dev4lop Review Co=ittee. :a Dato %G ?'�1��Signatur/J .� w�`a• Title /J__ w-r' 1116 n VIA WILL Tll7S PROJECT: ITS .fib _ # 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? E 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration! x 3. Create a substantial change in demand for • municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)! X — 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? r X _ S: Remove any existing trees! How many? _ ,X_ 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as• toxic substances, flammables or explosives? ocplanation of any YEs answers above: (3) The project, by going from undeveloped to developed has the ootentlal of channinn rh.. IMPORTANT: I= the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits p.esent the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the ' best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be mad"Dev4lop Review Co=ittee. :a Dato %G ?'�1��Signatur/J .� w�`a• Title /J__ w-r' 1116 n VIA • r1S:DENTI.IL CONSTMICTIO') Tire follotring info- nation should be provided to the city of Rancho Cucaconga Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the j school district to accotcaodate the proposod residential developr_ent. +� nano of Developer and Tentative Tract NO.: 400dland Pacific Develo nt inc.. --ff 11,13 : Specific Location of Project: Hermosa 0.verae. North of Hittstde 3. PEASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL 1. Ncaber of single ,j fanil, units: 2. 1% .ber of multiple • fan'' -y units: i y 3. Date prceosed to I.. • beer. ccnstruction: ` 4. Earliest date of ': The development will have six phases as indicated A Model 4 on the phasing exhibit. Construction activities n and a of Tentative will start approximately 120 days after recordation ?5. Dedroc -s Price Rance with Path phase approximately 6 months apart. 3 a .. e n a s,S �Cu :i``P-�u 'yi; •� � :. '� "4 v.�a,k'f1 T-4 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING - THE HOODS T000Oraphy Located at the base of the San Bernardino National Forest, The woods has a high elevation in the northeast corner of 2170 feet above sea level dropping 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 10X, 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 the drainage area, although also having a gradual change, slopes 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 grading only for streets, access, end housing structure. vegetations Approximately 80% of the site Is densely planted with red gum eucalyptus (Eucalyptus camaidulen,is) approximate]. 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 f011Oytng exhibit. As can be seen from this exhibit, the groves do not exist on the most eastern and western portions on the site. the 'woodsm plan will preserve the maximum number of trees Possibly restricting tree removal to that necessary for streets, access, building en%elope and fire station. Additionally, those areas not niw planted will have Intro- duced eucalyptus. t Riparian habitat exist In the natu at drainage areas of the site and will be preserved in t•e park area. Soils LJ The site lies In the northwestern portion of the San -r Bernardino Valley in an area of granular alluvial soils. hese soils, derived from the San Gabriel Mountains, have "S been deposited t0 great depths. _ >� FA ner -T- T 27 zi elM� ■ o� + >•V 1-m 0' A (REST" 11 THE WOODS as RaacHo cudaMoNGa _ 80k. A Planned Community by Woodland Pacific Development, Inc ��� I S Soils in this area are part of the Tujunga- Soboba Associa- ,: tion A soft association 1s a landscape that has a dis- tinctive proportional pattern of soils. Specifically. r these soils are of the Soboba gravelly, loamy sand aeries ZI, (SOC), are nearly level to moderately sloping, and are excessively drained. Runoff on these soils is very slow, erosion hazard is slight, and the degree of limitation for r' septic tank absorption fields is also alight. ;y rest hole, 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 c the maximum depth penetrated. A full soils engineering report prepared by Richard Hills Associates, Inc., 9223 -C Archibald Avenue; Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730, (714) 989 -1751, is available upon request. The study old not indicate that soils would be a problem during this development of the site provided guide Itnes are followed. Seismicity The Woods is located largely on the northwest extremity of the veer Canyon alluvial fan to the upper San Bernardino Valley w The northmost portion of the property extends locally into the foothills of the San Gabriel Nuurtains and is tran- sected oy the Cucamonga fault. An Alquist- Prielo Special .: Studies lone has been established for this fault. Bedrock b exposeresyare limited to the foothills area north of the fault The potentially active Cucamonga fault cuts across the J northern part of the praperty. It is typically a thrust fault striking N60-81f and dipping from zero to 19 degrees north. Sign iftcant local veriatiai.s 1n strike and dip suggest an uneven thrust plane. The southerly dip has been noted in adjacent areas along the Cucamonga fault. a it may repr -cent a -tectonic-slide- feature: the movement of the edge of the thrust plate downslope across the land ,4r surface during repeated fault movement The maximum credible earthquake magnitude for the Cucamonga fault, and for other active or potentially active faults that should be considered ir, design are listed below: Distance -o Magnitude MaAimum Site (Ill.) Crediblel • San Andreas 10 C.5 San Jacinto 7.5 7.5 Whittle. 20 7.5 Cucamonga On -Stte 6.5 -7.0 A full seismicity report is available from Richard ✓ills Associates, Inc., 9223 -C Archibald Avenue, Rancho Cuca- monga, CA 91730; (714) 989 -1751, upon request. Said investigation indicates that the site is considered feas- ible for development within the limitation and 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 1n evidencp on the exist- ing ground surface. A small spring discharging less toan an estimated 1 gal/ min was noted about 130 feet north - northeast of the • northeast property corner. Water from this spring was not In evidence on the site. Surface wat:r flowing at an estimated rate of 1 gal. /min disappeared into the alluvium (Qal) at t..e 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 Department of Water and Power Transmission line right -of- way and the South by a county roedway 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 105.0302 A drainage study made for tl.is report yields results consistent with Oistrict's. ' -i 'v�B In addition to the improvements listed above, a County Flood Control channel hounds the property on the south, a large natural channel traverses it near the west line and 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' proj- ect The complete drainage report is 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 nn -site is limited to Hermosa Avenue, a concrete reservnir in the southwest portion, a forest service road along the nortn property line, severai un- paved internal roads and paths cad small borzon pits on ✓; the northwest The site ut.lization map filed as part of this apPlic:tivc. .raphicalty describts surrounding land :r • uses Comprehensive Storm Drain Project No. 2 (CSOP2), System •�., No. 3, is intended to serve the area. Construction of the Corps of Engineers' Hillside Basin and Channel are re- quirea before the CSOP2 system can function adequately as .i proposed. Approximately 750 acres, offsite, drain to and across the site Of these, about 484 acres will be intercepted by .A. the Hillside Basin and Channel System, construction of y which is currently scheduled to commence in the spring of 3 1982. Development of the site prior to 1982 must allow for the possibility of flows from the approximately 390 + acres of drainage from Hillside Creek as well as the P_ approximately 94 acres east of the Hillside Creek drainage boundary and north of the proposed Hillside Channel 9 Existing drainage improvements on the site, constructed in connection with the improvement of Hermosa Avenue, include a from north to south respectively, a 48' rorrugated Metal ' Pipe (CMP), 30' CMP, two 24' CMP and a double 5' x 3' Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert (RCS). (Plate 4) Their respective capacities, assuming one foot of nead at the entrance befire 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 -0 -year dis- charges Required capacity for the 48' CMP is 133 cfs Capacity of the double 6' x 3' RCS is sufficient to handle the 100 -year discharge once the Corps' Hillside Basin and . Channel improvements are completed. In addition to the improvements listed above, a County Flood Control channel hounds the property on the south, a large natural channel traverses it near the west line and 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' proj- ect The complete drainage report is 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 nn -site is limited to Hermosa Avenue, a concrete reservnir in the southwest portion, a forest service road along the nortn property line, severai un- paved internal roads and paths cad small borzon pits on ✓; the northwest The site ut.lization map filed as part of this apPlic:tivc. .raphicalty describts surrounding land :r • uses M _ : 1 / 1 CITY OF RANCHO COCA:4011GA PART II — INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FILING DATE: 9f MY j LGC NUMBER: 93'; ( pow, PROJECT: PROJECT I. ENVIRO"MMAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yas" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). A v l J • YES MAYBE NO 1. Soils and Ceoloay. Will the proposal have significant results in: a unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic .at.onships? / b. Disruptions displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? — -- c Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? d The destruction, mvexing or srodi£ication _el of any unique geologic or physical futures? a. Any potential increase in wind or voter erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site conditons? f Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? V g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides' Red- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? 1/ h. An Increase in the rata of extraction and /or _ use Of of any mineral resource? 21 Nrdroloay. Will the proposal have significant results in: A v l J • s7xn ` 1- 4 • Page 2' " 1 YES MAYBE NO a. Changes in currents, or the Course of direction of flowing stream, rivets, or ephemeral stream channels? —_ b. Changes in absorption rates, dra•nsge patterns, or the rata and amount of surface water runoff? .L e. flow to the Course or Pl o[ flood watersT waters? — -- d. Change in the amount of surface ester in any body of water? e Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? — _ L. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? g. Change in the quantity of groundwater,, either through direct additions or with - drwale, or through interference with an aquifer? - Quality? Quantity? h the reduction In the amount rater visa available for public water aupplles7 supplies? — 1. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or Belches? 3 Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant result; in: a Constant or periodic air emission, from mobile or indirect e ourc ,/ Stationary sources? — b. Letcrloratlon of ambient air quality and /or interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? _ Z C Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? s More 7 Flora. Will the proposal have significant results in—: S j a. Change in the characteristics of species, ;c Including diversity, distribution, or number 4 of any species of plants? `� b. Reduction of tha.numbars of any unique, race or endangered species of _ T 3 ; yu(yi plants? ti YES HAYBE HO of nev or disruptive species of C. harts + Plants into m areal Into � • d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural production? Paura. Will the proposal have significant results —_ the a. Change in the characteristics of epecim, Including dlvereltys distribution, or number, of any species of animals? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare / or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of or disruptive species are animals loco m area, or result SQ a barrier er to the migration or movement of animals? ✓/ _ d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? habn ✓ S. Population. Hill the proposal have significant resulta in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or grouch rate of the human prpulation of an area? _ b Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. £aclo-ECOnomie Paetoze. Will the proposal have significant results 1n: a. Change in local or regional socio- economic characteristics, including economic or i" alues? l diversity, valuas7 tax rate, and property b. Will project costa be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, I.e., buyers, tax payers or project users? , / 7. Land Use and Planntna Considerations. Will the Proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? b. A conflict vith any designations, objectives, politics, or adapted plans of any governmental entities? V/— �• c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of — is (, existing consumptive or non - consumptive recreational opporrunitiest rage 4 YES HAYBO NO 8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant r • results ins a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular Y movement? • b. Effects on exists ug reeu, or demand for new street construction? V/ C. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? w d. Substantial impact upon existing traneporta- tion systems? e. Alterations to present patterns of circula- r tion or movement of people and /or goods? t f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential water -borne, rail, cam transit or / air traffic? S. Increases In traffic hazards to motor vehicles, - bicyclists or pedestrians? 3 9 Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have significant results ins • a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and /or historical resources? — 1/ 10. Health. Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: n ° a. Creation of say health hazard or potential health + hazard? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? — 1 - c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous / substances in the event of an accident? 1/ ! d. An Increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to Ruch organlam?? V e. Increase in existing noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous / Mime levels? u _ \• g. The creation of objectionable odors? /8 a �' h. An isercnse in light or glare? -� Mi i r 11 Aesthatl:s. Will the proposal have significant W-31 lts in: a. the obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? # b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site? ' c A conflict with the objective of designated or potential Scenic corridors? 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a Significant need for new system,, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? b. Natural or packaged gas? C Communications systems? d. Water Supply? e. Wastewater facilities? f Flood control structures? g. Solid waste fatilities? h. Fire protection? I. Police protection? J Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilitles? I. Maintenance of public facilities, .acluding roads and flood control facilities? m. Other governmental Services? _ 17 EneEGJ and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: a Usc of substantial or extensive fuel or energy? b Substantial increase in d d upon existing sources of energy? e y+ c M increase in the damand for development of new sources of energy? S� d. M lnerasaa or perpe tunelon of She eonsurption of non - renewable tams of energy, when feasible fir• rerevable Sources of energy are available? yob „is•.;�c..t; YES MAYBE No Y n LJ l yr .a Yyl I +Page 4i •` _ ` 6 �.+.' YFS JIBE NO +� s' i e. Substantial dcplotion of any nonrenewable or / - scarce natural resource? ✓ 14. K ndatory Findings of Signlfleanee. ka. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the enwirotment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or vildlifa species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop ? below self sustaining levels, threaten to K eliminate a plant or anise' community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate Iwportant examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? _�- �� b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -tarn, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals? (A short -corm impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long- / term impacts Will endure wall into the future). c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively ry considerable? (Cumulativ::y considerable ? - �• mesas that the incremeaC.t?. effects of an individual project are coviderabla when viewed in connection vita the of vast projects, and Probable future projects). jects)a — d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? r_ II. DISCUSSION OF LWIRONMI AL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discuesiom of proposed mitigation measures). i% t� Ij 4 V 7 t ?` I C: III. DEm,,,\ATION On the basis of this Initial evaluation: aI find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect • on the onvironscat, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. J, I find that although the proposed project could have a significant Ueffect on the emlromurt. there will not be . a:anificant effect in this ces. ue..dse the mitigation measures described on an attached shaet have beau added tc -ha project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL HE PREPARED. I find the Proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the envir[rmont, and an ENVIRONMENT IWACT REPORT is required. Date gm[ 'tit a 1 w r r L6 . e! ADDENDUM TO ENVTROI8IENTAL CHECI3.TST FOR TENTATTVE TRACT 11933 s Explanation of "yes" and 'maybe- answers: I. Soils and Geology (c) The applicant intends to maintain the existing natural grade wherever possible. This is to be accomplished by grading only for streets, access, and the building footprint. te) 8 (f) The grading and drainage plan Indicates 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 whict. 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. (q) The northern most portion of the property is transected by the Cucamonga Fault. An Alquist- Priolo special study zone has been established for this fault. The maximum magnitude of an earthquake on the Cucamonga Fault at this location is projected at 6.5 to 7 on the Richter Seale, there- fore could exonse people or property to potentially significant geologic hazards 2. Hydroloev (b) Construction will increase the area covered by buildings and paved areas which will reduce rain and flood water absorntion rates and will increase the amount of surface water runoff. (i1 Development of the site could concentrate off water, particularly in the existing natural drainage courses, which could At 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 is densely planted utth Red Gum Eucalyptus approximately 65 years old The proposed development has been designed to restrict tree re- movai to the minimum necessary for streets, access, building envelope, and fire protection ..K _,L western and eastern portions of the project site are out- side the grove and are ".,. .ed 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 habitati.n will have an } effect on the diversity, distribution, and mmbers of specie: of animals inhabiting the site. q`*Y � 5 Mz M ri " tf�• S_ - Addendum to Enviramatntal Checklist for Tr 11 %.3 -2- xS. Population 'i (a) The project site is designated 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 ' 12,003 square foot range. The surrounding properties are designated very low (less than 2 dwelling units per acre)residentia1 on the General Plan _ ante are presently zoned R- 1- 20,000. Therefore, the project will alter the density and growth rate of the human population in this area. 7 Land Use and Planning Considerations (a) 8 (b) The project site is designated as a park in the City's General 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, which is " in conflict with the very low residential density established by the General Plan for this area of Alta Loma. - 8. Transportation (a), (b) d (d) This project will generate increased vehicular traffic volumes which will effect existing streets end require new street con- struction and Potentially impact existing transportation systems. (g) The proposed development will result in an increase in the population for the area and associated vehicular traffic The 14.6 acre park shown on the development plans does not indicate off -street parking facilities. Bath of these factors could potentially result in traffic hazards to motor vehiclas, pedestrians, or bicyclists. 10 Health, Safety, 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 rea. Noise levels will temporarily increase during construction. 11 Aesthetics (b) This site, commonly known as the Hermosa Grove, is recognized as a significant natural resource for ti,: 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- s, cations in some or all of the utilities and public services noted in the Environ- • mental Checklist. The most significant impacts would be upon fire protection t „ services. !'p; +:dendum to Environmental Checklist for TT 11993 -3- 14. Handstory Findlnas of 51on1ftcante `: (a) The development of ::mts project ma; have th, 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. e UK&-CM6 'f G M&--Ugri)T L (DUE AT AGENDA MEETING) i For Council Fleeting of _APRIL 21, l9g2 It LOCatidn on Check one (X) () 1. Public Rearings () 2. City !tanager's Staff Reports W 3, consent Calendar ill. Titles Of= (as it mill appear on agenda). and the development of y .....yoe ramaiy Residential /Planned Development) of land in the R -1 zone located n the asouth 2side of Arrow, between Turner and Center Avenues - APR 209 -091- 05,06,07. IV- Will there be an Accompanying Resolution or Ordinance ( ) yes (x) no. V, if Yes, provide title of Resolution or Ordinance directly below. Oepartant plennina O1P1oY0e Responslblc for Report Dan Coleman Associate planner - 2' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA atgt STAFF R TORT , ii DATE: April 21, 1982 0 T0: Members of the City Council and Cif Manager FROM- Jack Lam, Director of Community Development tvn BY: Dan Grleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIR MENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 0 R n9 - a C- macs so a ow a"& Use uses su ert to review and approval of a Condttlonal Use Permit. N. f SUMMNRY: Per Li y Council direction, staff has prepared the attached Zoning nance Amendment concerning arcades and amusement devices. This item was presented to the Plannin; Commission on March 24, 1982. After review and discussion o` e.e Ordinr ^e, the Planning Commission suggested changes regarding square 'ootage each tachine occupies, keeping aisles clear in ctores, and stomage "rages. 1.,e Planning Commission recommended approval to the Ctty Council w'th the suggested changes that are reflected in the attached Ordinance. 'lease find attached a copy of the Staff Report, Minutes and Resolution. Also attached is a copy of the City Council Minutes of January 20, 1982, concerning the original report on video games and arcades. The, proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment has been reviewed by the City met�nand arcaderoperatorrs. The proposed aamendmentireceivedeaifavorablert- response from these groups. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council review all materials tpropordingti Ordinance item. heAmenndm , Planning has recommended adoption of the Respectfull4 submitted, JACK LAN, AICP Director of Community Development JL OC kep Attachments March 24. 1982 Planning Commission Staff Report Resolution recommending ApProval to City Council Minutes of March 24. 19C2 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of January 20, 1982 City Council Meeting Ordinance :I. -i: x.!•,,j ��VYyYn r' e �l ' 4T3 CITY OF RtU ICHO CUCAAMONGA STAFF REPORT 7. DATE: harsh 24, 1982 a z TO: Members of the Planning Commission tm FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner e BY: Dan Colman, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT -0 - n ng - t - zones o a ow arcade uses subject to review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit. SUMMARY: As directed by City Council, staff has prepared the attached Zo— 70rdfnance Amendment concerning arcades and amusement devices The ' proposed amendment was prepared In accordance with City Council and Planning Commission Sno t. the amendment has been tevieved by the City Attorney, _ the Chamber of rcamerce, Ordinance Review Committee, and arcade operators. The draft ordinance received favorable responc- from the groups. Also at- tached, is a survey on arcades, completed by the Sheriff's Office, which supports requiring a Conditional Use Permit for arcades. If the proposed amendment meets the desires of the Planning Commission, then a motion to approve the Resolution to recommend aduption to the City Council would be ' appropriate BACKGROUND: The Zoning Ordinance Amendment No 82 -03 will do the following: 1 Define arcades and amusement devices. ' 2. P "rmit arcades in the CA and C -2 zones subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit 3 Establish basic criteria for reviewing a Conditional Use Permit application for an arcade 4 Allows up to three (3) amusement devices in the C -1 and C -2 zones as an accessary use to the main business. An ar..er0 -ant to the Munfciral Code ct.,c -rning licensing and "tagyging" amusement devices is being prepared separately b) the Finance nivision. ANALYSIS 'aa key provisions o' the Amendment relate to the definition of wfUt constitutes an arcade versus an accessory use The proposed amendment would classify as as arcade, 'any establishment with four (4) or more amuse - r went devices' In adliti„n, an accessory use is defined as being an estab- µ 1lsnment with 'not more than three (n) ( (amusement devices) (; however, tat to exceed five percent (5t) of the public floor area ". % ITEM F C E.A. AND Zo,iing Ord. Amendment No. 82 -03 March 24, 1982 Pago Three These numbers are based upon a comparative analysis of existing businesses w,th amusement devices. For example, a small convenience market with 600 square feet of public floor area kith 3 gdmil machines would use 27 square feet or 1 5% of the public floor area. The reason for including a per- centage figrre in the definition of an accessory use Is that a very small business may have only 2 or 3 amusement devices, yet, be utilizing up to one -third of their pubiic floor area. A 14rger business, such as a pizza parlor, could obviously accommodate more than three amusement devices. However, the impart of five or six rachines in a larger business can be as great as a small arcade operation. There- fore, the Chamber of Commerce and local arcade operators feel that uses with four or more machines shou.d be subject to the same CUP review process. These numbers are consistent with existing businesses with amusement devices Out of sixteen businesses surveyed, that are known to have video games, on.y four businesses hod four ar more machines T.io of three are pizza parlor. of over 3,600 square feet and one is the Roller City Skating Rink. The other 1s a liquor store Darts I and II of the Initial Study have been completed by staff and no 40 significant adverse impacts were found that will result from this amendment. If the Comn.sston concurs with such Pindings, then Issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order. CORRESDONDDNCE: A public hearing notice was advertised in the Daily Report newspaper, and notices were sent f,i arcade operators and the Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber of Commerce and the arcade operators support the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended tlat the Planning Commission issue a Nemat a eclaration for the proposal and recommend approval of Zoning Orninance Amendment No 82 -03 .o the City Councii Shou1J the Commission concur, the appropriate Resolution has been attached R�spec tfull submitted. tick mez C,,ty Danner RGk DC J Attdcm-ents Ordinance Resolution Sheriff's survey ALA c' BITER- OFFICE M °.' DATE February 11, 1982 i FROM Rancho Cucamonga Sheriff's Station a TO Laurun Wasserman, City Manager City of Rancho Cucamonga i SUBJECT Video Arcades Sfaco the video arcade popularity has made giant strides in all communities, I had requested one of my deputies to con- duct an investigation for "in- house" use so that we would, be familiar with the problems c..d have a contingency plar. should we start experiencing those problems While that investigation was being conducted Pete Tolstoy, Planning Commissioner, contacted me and requestLa informa- tion He was then advised of the in -house study, at which �} time he requested a copy of that study - Attached you will find a copy of the arcade centers investi- gation for your review and possible dissemination to the planning commiaaionerc � r.,,+ T c El MI. `d r L r� Lx i ,r m:ro Sfaco the video arcade popularity has made giant strides in all communities, I had requested one of my deputies to con- duct an investigation for "in- house" use so that we would, be familiar with the problems c..d have a contingency plar. should we start experiencing those problems While that investigation was being conducted Pete Tolstoy, Planning Commissioner, contacted me and requestLa informa- tion He was then advised of the in -house study, at which �} time he requested a copy of that study - Attached you will find a copy of the arcade centers investi- gation for your review and possible dissemination to the planning commiaaionerc � r.,,+ T c El MI. `d r L r� Lx i ,r I i, ARCADE ANn AD.ISEMENI CEATERS i' This survey was conducted to determine problems and experiences • other cities have encountered from arcades and ass&:ement centers within their jurisdiction. Some cities surveyed experience major difficultias and problems from amusement cantors and arcades while other cities had relatively mirur or no problems from the same type of establishments. A major factor which affected the operation of these amusement centers was the amount of supervision provided by their owners. The establishments that were the most trouble free were those i that PProvidad at least two adult employees on duty during opera - tang havrs Some arcades also used security guards to patrol the interior and exterior of the arcada to control loitering and other related problems. the problems experienced were generally eliminated when each city put in effect in ordinance and /or conditional use permit, which gave the city more governmental control on how these businesres are managed, operated and supervised - ? This survey includei large and small arcades and also business astablishmenta, such as liquor stores, markets, department stores, etcetera, which provide use of video game mahr-ines within the business premises The folloviug is a survey of four cities and the problems these cities encountered from such establishments prior to putting into effect an ordinance and /or conditional use permit regulating and governing said establishments CITIES CONTACTED: City of Montclair: This city experienced ro perb,ems with arcades Thera is presently one arcade in operation v}irh is in the Monteleii Shopping Nall. A soccnd arcade is to be open.,d in the rear future in a small res /den- rial shopping center Vie (.tty of Montclair allows the operation of arcades under a c,ndicicnal use permit City_af ortnPe: This city experienced se%arai different types of problems in and near arcades General Problems: S:_deecc ditching school and %anging mat in .. arcr.dou and loiterin; inside rnd iu:side of „1 the arcades, spending thoi, lunch money ^r arcade games Tee loitering in front of the arcades - asaltnd in harassment of pedestrians ar customers,` from orher businesses, passing or near the arcades. FW rA Theft race went up in stares surrounding the arcades. 'ipecific Problems in Oranger 1. ARCADE THAT WAS ADJACENT TO A SHOPPING HALL PARKING LOT. Cars speeding and driving rackleasly, in the parking lot and in frout of the arcade and shopping mall Harassment and assaults on customers in the arcade and on pedestrians and customers of adjacent businesses. Increase of shoplifting, in retail stores close to arcades. Narcotic dealing within the arcade and adjacent areas outside where people .:ongregated and loitered Prostitution, including teenage prostitution. Gambling, youth found to be betting money on the highest game scored. Ocher nuisance problems such as setting fires, noise, urinating on the walls, dtLetera Most problems occurred y in the outside area, near the arcades. 2. VIDEO GAMES IN A LIQUOR STORE. Liquor stores with video machines had problems with teenagers hanging around and Ioiterin; in the stores. Increase of candy and other items being shoplifted Problems of teenagers hanging around the adult book section reading and shoplifting adult books getting in the store, after star,' closed, with adults r placing bets as high as $100 on high game scores. City of Costa Mesa: ' General Problems: Diaruptive traffic in franc of some arcades Hangouts.fo. undesirables. Mangoat for juveniles truant from school Intiuidat!on by juveniles to public in and naar arcane The Costa Mesa Police Department raported that they conducted a truancy sweep on the arcades. During the time of the sweep, the, residential hurglaiy rate ::ant down substantially in daytime burglaries. Interviews that were conducted with some of the juveniles arrested for triancy and other charges resulted in several of the juveniles admitc.ng to ccscsitting burglaries for money to play the arcade games City of Redondo Beach: This city reported chat they had problems with some arcades, but generally the arcades were well behaved. The trouble free arcades depended on who operated the arcade and how it was operated. General Problems: A place for youth gangs to hang out and congregate Gangs from within the city and gangs outside the area created a potential for gang wars and other gang activity. Found-to be a place to meet for drug dealing Had problems with youth overdosing on drugs and alcohol to the extent of finding juveniles passed out in the area of the arcade. Some arcades did not have adequate parking space It was found that the customers usually spend a great deal of time in the arcade and the arcade needed a proportionate number of parking spaces to the video machines. • Problems with small arcades can be just as bad as those with large arcades. PLANNING CONSIDERATION:, The study clearly showed that proper manage:aent, operation and supervision are the most important element7 in maintaining a trouble free amusement canter or arcade Thought should be given to a number of other considerations: ZONES: Distance from schools Juveniles on the way to and from school, as well as ditching school car become a problem Residential areas Business establishments Should arcades be allowed in businesses such as liquor store- or other establishments where the main retail item is alcohol There ie a possibility of such places becoming hang outs for teenagers bmall neighborhood shopping centers. HOURS OF OPERATION LIMITATIONS: Should arcades be located near a school one may wart to consider the hours of operation (closed until after school hours except on weekends and holidayal By establishing a time, students will i be leso inclined to be truant. / r 3 In the cities surveyed, there were major problems at arcades that S'e were open all night. D OR AND LIGHTING• Decor: An establishment giving a go I appearance, wall kept and properly maintained "commands' more respect than one can demand from its customers. Design, carpet, paintings and cleanliness are important factors in a trouble free arcade. Lighting: Adequate lighting inside add outside Installation of outside security lighting in parking areas can help deter disturbances, vandalism, thefts, as well as deter the use of narcotics and alcoholic beverages. FC•OD SERVICE: Min4mum food service is an asset if eating area is designated within the ouilding and kept separate from the game area Uncontrolled food service can cause damage to equipment and litter problem around all businesses NOISE CONTROL: When large groups of juveniles and /or young adults congregate, excessive amounts of noise can be generated. Building should be planned to minimize all noise by installation of self closing doors, acoustical tile, etcetera. ADULT SUPERVISION: The presence of an adult attendant can avoid the possibility of any disturbances occurring. An adult should be in each room of an arcade Consider one or two adults, monitors /managers. VISIBILITY OF MACHINES: All machines should be located so they are in clear view of the attendant or clerk Machines located in back rooms or around corners have been a source of problems unless partitioned by 6, _lean see through windows Also, the close proximity of the machines to one another Not enough elbow room has a clear b•szring on player's conduct I,- B,CYCLE FACILITIES: Bicycle racks can avoid tha possibility of obstructing pedestrian pathways to all businesses • a� Our study shows that there is the potential for problems developing at any arcado It was found that size of an arcade is generally not a factor. Small arcades can be just as troublesome as largr arcades or amusement centers. These establishments can have an adverse impact on adjoining areas, such as loitering, littering, J, vandalism and excessive noise ^'': ' It is recommended that the Sheriff's Office ask the city to define what constitutes an arcade or amusement center and include in this definition the number, space required and type of machines allowed. We should recommend that amusement centers be prohibited from residential areas or locations wehre there is direct access to residentially zoned property Recommend a buffer zone between arcades and residential property such as buildings, major streets, permanently open land, etcetera, not to include block walls. • Operating hours of an arcade or amusement canter should not extend past 10:00 p.m. Arcades that have late, or worse yet, all night operating hours have a tendency to draw undesirable juveniles and young adults from other areas outside our city. It is further recommended that establishments such as liquor stores, convenience markets or any store -jr business selling .• alcoholic baveragas or adult books and /or magazines be prohibited, "• from operating video games on their premises Conditional use permits seem to be a very viable method of regulating the arcade and video game businesses. The conditional use permit affords the city the ability to set conditions that - are unique to a spacific site. , I 3 Y� f ' • CM OF RANCHO CUCMMGA INITIAL STUDY r PART L - PROJECT I277ORMATION SHEET - TO be comgleto8 by applicant i Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $87.00 i For all projects requiring onvironmontal review, this '- form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is mado. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare part II of the Initial Study. The Development Ravin Committee will meet and take action no later than t•:, :A (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project it to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no significant _ environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have a significant environmental inpact 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 pronosed project. PROJECT TITLE, 709196 C1201w4w 7 dof)lnav' 9' -Ce' APPLICANT'S Z ADD 7i TELEPISONEa C NT _ qg c.l n.e _2. .G, .C'1( -q /7 ISo _ NAME, TELEPHONE �C 1_ DE CONTA y _ OONCERNI G THIS PROJECT: � g9R -/4S1_ LOCATION �OF PROJECT (S'i. riT ADDZESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL M.). ,e LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND v FEDERAb XENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH ?ERMITS: . I -t PROJECT DESCRIPTION • ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IP ANY: kiA DESCRIBE THE ENVIRON%tiNTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING IHiORI•LATION ON.TOPOGRAPHY, PLANT'S (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE 01 SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OP ANY _ EXISTS %G STRUD1(RES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series Of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole havo Significant environmental impact? t IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. , CERTIFICATION: -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 beat of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the beat of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted Review an adequate evaulatlan n be ma J the- .payslaDmant ` Review Cormait e. Data 1 _tn. Signet a Title -71 ��' is _,�,_� - _ .._ _ - ._., .,"-' _ ." - Ce `.•`.:+� HILL TftIS PROJECT: ' L 00 Create a substantial change in ground contours7 e' 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration! _ 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (plice, fire, water, sewage, etc.)! , 4.' Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations: , - 5: Remove any existing trees! How many? 6. Create the need for ,use or disposal of ,potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flamaables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. , CERTIFICATION: -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 beat of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the beat of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted Review an adequate evaulatlan n be ma J the- .payslaDmant ` Review Cormait e. Data 1 _tn. Signet a Title -71 ��' is _,�,_� - _ .._ _ - ._., .,"-' _ ." - Ce `.•`.:+� I •, . r, CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONCA PART II - INITIAL STUDY ' ENVIR04KENT'AL CSECRLIST DATEr 1 bt _- APPLICANTt 6, MIN'C DATE: �- LOG NUMBMI PROJECT: zMay MrcQ e, PRO..'EC? LOCATION: %CaQ I. ENVIROMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on •ttachad $heats) YEF MAYBE NO 1. Soils and Geology. Mill the proposal have .t significant results inr e. Unstable ground conditions or in changes In geologic relationships? " b. Disruptions, displacements, eoapaction or burial of the soil? c Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? _ d Its destruction, covering or modification tof any unique geologic or physical features? 1� a, a. Any potential increase in vind or vita% erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site conditoms? af Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? g Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landalidas, mud - sliden, ground failure, or similar hazards? h. An increase in the rat, of extraction and /or l use of any mineral resource? I r ' �— 2. Hydrology. Will the proposal have significant { results in: 0 El u Page 2 ' YES MAYBE ED i' e. Changes in currents, or the course of diroetion of flowing streams, rivers, or ephmarel access r_ channels? _ _ b Changes In absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? I Ile c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood ' w waters? _ _ d Change in the • -•, nt of cur-Ace water in any body of water? _ _ a. Discharge Into surface water*, or any alteration of surface water gaallty? f Alteration of groundwater characteristics? / / a Change in the quanrity of groundwater*, 7 either through direct additions or viGR- diawa's, or through L.terferance with an - a, offer? - Quality? Quantity? a t. T ^e reduction In the amunt of wataz tber- Q� v vise available for public water suppl:ea? ' I. Exposure of people or property to water / / irelated h hazards such as flooding or sciches° _ _ ^ 3 3. Air jali . Will the propzsel have signifirart results In: r' a a. Ccnstant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? Stationary sources? yr� b b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or Y i inta•farence with the attainment of applicable i o of quality standards? ' - - c. Alteration of local or regional climatic Conditions, affecting air movement, moist ro or temperature? _ _ 1 pT 4 4. BS_ini ota ^Lora, Will the proposal have significant results - -'.. a. Charge in the charactoriatics o: species, '• ' '� including diversity, distribution, or number of any species of plantar b. Reduction oD the numbers of any unique, rare o L1-2i b u i c. Introduction of a" or disruptive species as patats into an area? d. Reduction is the potential for agricultural production? Fauna. Will the proposal Lava significant results in: i 1' i a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbars of any species of animals? b. Reduction of the ambers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? C. Introduction of new or disruptiva species of aalmals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? S. Population. Will the proposal heva significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- buticn, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area? b. WUI the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. Socio•feanomic Factors. Will the proposal have signilicant results in: a. Change in local on regional socio-economic characteristics, including economic or coaercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? b. Will project costa be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project users? 7. ?and Use and Planning Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substanti..l alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? b. A conflict with any dealgnaclens, objectivas, rolicies, or adopted plans of any.guvornmental entities? c. An impact upon the qul airy of quantity of existing consumptive or'non- consumptive Yea, recreational opportunities? ��'. �• 41a���t"'+; P 's \�d��d�.i�,,e+�Y9'�:.,i,..e :' .� • .. , it i YES MAYBE NO le .Yage 4 • - YES H46YBE NO B. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results in: .�•� a. aenaration of substantial additional vehicular t movement? L e. • h. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? — r i, e. Ktfacta on existing parking facilities, or V, danand for new parking? — 1 d. Substantial impact upon existing tramporta- 9 _ tian systems? t e. Alterations to present patterns of clrcula- S tfon or movement of people and /or goods? C f Altexations to or effects on present and • potential waterborne, tall, mass transit or - air traffic? — �( C• Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, - bicyclists or pedestrians? — y/ i t• 9 Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: Jk f� a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and /or historical resources? 10. Health. Safety, and Fufsance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? L b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? c. A risk o! explosion or release of hazardous r substances in the avant of an accident? — �� d. An increase in the aumhar of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenlc i organisms or the exposure of people to ouch organises? r — e. Increase in existing colas levels? ,r If. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous levels? ;r ?{ noiso S. The creation of objectionable cdora7 -�' h. An Increase In light or glare? ].1s}' —C, �Z�c ' =r`e •t,.h'.1n�`:tY�p,i,ri ♦♦ tw r.` or�-,r"t,`�:. F�'f. � r_ Y.. ti� °`+�..�7��^t� }�- ty�.i. i b �,,,- 1a '�`•�ia•;ra�'�+ti2,�r,'A +� -,�i, '( [•,r��°= s + i 4 3p3, Pa- C C • YES MAYBE NO 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results int a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? / L b. The creation of an aeatheticslly offensive site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated or 1 potential scenic corridors? _ 12 Utilities and Public.. Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new, syste-..s, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? r b. Natural or packaged gas? / c Comnications systems? d. Water supply? _ e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures? g Solid wrste facilities? VL h. Fire protection? I. Police protection? J. Schcols? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? �- 1. Maintenance of public iacilitles, including roads and flood control facilities? l ^, m. Other govarrzental services? 11. Energy and Scarce R- sources. W111 the proposal have significant res.•acs in: a Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing aeurcei of energy? c. An increase in the demand for development of now sources of energy? d. An Increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non - renewable +. Erma of energy, when [uaslble renewable sources of`energy are available? • L r SET•''n•�ik ^:W.Sy�+'{„'t;� ( 'i Page Gc, • YES MAYBE NO a. Substantial depletion of any ooarenewablo or starts natural resource? 14 Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does tbi project have the potential to degrade the quali.y 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 eliminate a plant or animal co®+mity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of / California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve shcrt -term, to the disadvantage of long -term. mvEronmuntal goals? (A short -term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively bLief, de,initive period of time while long- term impacts into the future) will endure well c. Does the project have impacts which are S,Wividually limited, but cumulatively y considerable? (Cumulatively considerable .• means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed ' in connection with the effects of past yrojects, ;o and probable future projects). d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects ! on human beings, either directly or indirectly? — II DISCUSSION OF ENVIRO:MENTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). P4 SET•''n•�ik ^:W.Sy�+'{„'t;� ( 'i Page 7 III LETERNINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant affect on the anvirooment, ona a NEGATIVE DECLARATION vill 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 bceause the mitigation maasures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. ( E:1 I find the prop Bed project MAY have a significant effect on the envircwend, an an PNY' 0RY is required. i Date 1/17 Q Z / \1I "J (Signature a 14146 r4wA+uY Titlo M1 e • 0 4 J :40 + � L ,•u ,cy� r F: a r, M RESOLUTION NO. 82 -34 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING C"ISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 82 -03, AMEND - ING SECTIONS 61.022, 61 027A AND 51.0278 OF THE RANCH? CUCAMONGA ZONIr.G ORDINANCE WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing to consider Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 82 -03; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission feels that such amendment is necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare: and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found it necessary to regulate the operation of arcades and the use of amusement devices. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this pro ect will not create it significant adverse impact on the environment and has recommended issuance of a Negative Declaration on March 24, 1982. - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 6484 to 6SR47 of the California Government Code, the Planning Com- mission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 24th day of March, 1982, of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 82 -03. 2. That the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 82 -03 as shown on the attached Ordinance. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and re- lated material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 1982. PLANNING CO14ISSIOII OF TILE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I i s 1 �v ii .. m Resolution No. 82 -34 Page 2 i, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, d. hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of March, 1982, by the following vote - to -wit. AYES: COMUSSIONERS: Sceranka, Rempel, Tolstoy, King NOES: COMISSIONERS: None ABSENT COMMISSIONERS. Dahl ;y �y'ti u Ll 1r .'Y ' ) tI y ti7i- i Y E.gVIAOWFtrfAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING ORDINANCE AlOZlDMEhT 82 -03 - Amending C-1 sad C -2 zones to allow arcade uses subject to review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the Staff Report. Commissicaer Sceraoka asked if it use staff's intent not to prohibit or restrict these kinds of machines from liquor storm. Mr. Gomez replied that the Ordinance would allow up to three machines in unspecified areas within the C -1 and C -2 zones. " Commissioner Sc tirank asked if thought had been given to making an exception in the rases of liquor storm. He felt this vas not a desir- able place for young people to gather to play gmea. fir. Gomez replied that liquor stores had not been singled cut as an exception to being allowed to have machines. ` Coemisslonor Tolatol stated that he shared the concern of Commlanioner it Sceranka In that liquor stores were not a good place for children to be .S playing these m:th -- s. +p Michael Vatrin Sento, Planner, stated that he had worked closely with i ASSlstant Plaw . Coleman, in drafting this Ordinance They had come up with the cl,.dltion In the Ordinance that there must be adult supervision in establishments at all times where these machines were placed He further stated that they could not come up with a solid foundation for statl:.g that liquor stores should not be able to have Y video games. Y yb� Commissioner Scaranka asked if there was a definition of a liquor store. •" y planning Comm /salon Minutes -il- March 26, 1982 ••' 1. ,, 0 r Mr. Vairin replied that he did not think that the present Zoning Ordinance l contained a definition of a liquor store, but felt that the definition wouid have to be that the main we of the store be for the sale of • .. alcoholic beverages, Commissioner Tolstay stated that he had a concern relative to the definition Of adult supervrviisionn . M:. Vairin replied that adult supervision would mean an adult on the premises at ell times able to sea the machines. Commissioner Sceranka asked if an adult was a person ovsr 18 or 21 years of age. Ted Hopson, Assistant City Attorney, replied that an adult was a person 18 of age or over. Commissioner Scerauka asked for clarification of Section III D -2 of the Ondinance regarding storage garages for the use of pacrom. Mr Vairia replied that the statement was a part of the original Crdinaaee and that was the reason it was included in the mendicg Ordinance and he interpreted it to be storage garages for we by the store owners as a - storage area. Hick Gomez, City Planner, stated that if the Commission wee act comfortable with that terminology, they could change the wording of the Ordinance. Commissioner Sceranka stated tl= he would prefer :t to read storage garages for the exclusive we of the above stores and businesses and eliminate the use of patrons. Chairman King opened the public hearing. Bob Clascock, representing the Sign 01dinance Haview Committee, addressed the Commission and asked if the floor space requirement had been changed from the draft Ordinance. Mr Vairin replied that it had been changed to read three machines or5Z of the floor space, whichever was less. I Mr Clascock asked if the definition of ao amusement device had been chansei in the original Ordinance Mr Vairin replied he thoujitt the definition had remained the qme. Mr Clascock stated that hie only concern then was the same as Commissioners Sceranka and Tolstoy regarding the placement of amusement devices In liquor stores, other than that he felt it was a vary good Ordinance. Planning Commission Minutes _12- e N March 24, 1982 . .Y • s., A. City Council minutes t• January 20, 1982 E Page Eight ' SC VIDEO CWHES AND ARCADES -- �. Michael Vairin reviewed the staff report on the issue of video game arcadca in relation to existing laws and the possible impact upon the i community. ' Councilma Ilikels stated that he agreed with the Planning Commission recommendation as outlined In Option 2 of the staff report as follows: j The City could mend the Zoning Ordinance, such as allow- - ing amusement enterprises In the C-1 and C-2 zones with the ., approval of a Conditional Use Permit, plus clarify the 9 incidental use of video gams according to the desires of the Cl ty.,. Councilman Hikals indicated that he saw no problem with continuation of - use in a C -2 zone but concurred there should be some restrictions in C -1- In particular, he expressed hie concern about viaeo games In liquor storea. f, Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public input. • a Julie Bazlek, student, Inquired about definitions of tome of the terms used. She concurred that video games should not be is liquor stores or In close proximit• to schools a Joe Mannolla, zrcada owner, stated arcades should ba scattered through- out cbe Community and not concentrated In any one area. He agreed 4 that their use should be monitored in liquor stores and pizza places, and stressed the importance of responsible adult supervision. He st.ggested a 10:00 p.m, closing date on weekdays and 11:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday. P A Chuck Buquat expressed concern about video games in liquor Mores an enforcement to insure responsible adult supervision. 4 Thera being no further response, public hearing was eloced. s Councilman Mikels outlined the following criteria for granting C.U.P.s to h1lov video games /arcades in C -1 zones: 7 1. Hours of operation (whether theyconflict with school hours). 2. Restriction of the numbs[ psrmfcted as an accessory use. 3. Need for responsible adult supervision. 4. Avoid close Proximity to schoo_ and other community uses. Notion: Moved by Hlkels, seconded by Palumbo that an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance be established creating a C.U.P. requirement for arcades in a r , C-1 zone. Ito furthdr moved that tha Planning Comaiselon establish certain criteria, including those Stems indicated above, for determining whether - a C.U.P. should be granted, and these requirements be brought back to Council, ell - for approval. Motion carried. 5-0. _�t , y .. _ _ � -, � •raj $�� `�:':'`L_alj &��?h[Y.M'� ,n.4:`:u; �'aki,:am• fii -;'C4rf'�:: 4' t` ORDINANCE NO. 174 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS 61.022, 61.027A and 61.0278 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA WERIH ZONING ORDINANCE BY DEFINING AN ARCAOF AND ADDING SECTIONS 2`27)(1 7I. AND WENDING b))(A) TO PROVIDE FOR ARCADE USES IN THE C -1 AND C-2 ZONES AND ' REQUIRING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. < dues ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Section 61.022 of the Rancho Cucamonga Interim Zoning Or nad ni ce {s hereby amended by defining Amusement Devices and Arcade as follows: "Amusement Device ": Any electronic or mechanical machine which provides amusement, or entertainment, which may be _ operated or played upon the placing or depositing there- in of any coin, check, slug, ball, or any other article or device, or by paying therefor either in advance of or after use. This definition shall not include juke boxes, • telephone devices, or machines that sell merchandise. "Arcade': Any establishment containing four (4) or more amusement devices. This definition shall not apply to recreational premises such as bowling alleys or skating rinks, where an arcade is part of the primary use. SECTION 2: Section 61.027A(4)(5) of the Rancho Cucamonga • Interim ng 0 ZoniRrnance is hereby amended by adding subsection 61.027 (A)(b)(5)(B), to read as follows- (B) Arcade - (1) The Planning Cocmission, in reviewing an appli- cation, shall consider such criteria as, but not • limited to, the need for adult supervision. Murs of operation, proximity of use to schools and other . - community uses, cWatibility with the surrounding neighborhood and businesses, noise attenuation, ,( bicycle facilities, and interior waiting areas. y' a' !` P Z�:(•(0;.f,V-, '4..�Y�i �.'•YYi:%�e"'K`�V ,�- T.{ +.Yl ��� sY IFY ,�; z Ordinance No. Page 2 submit tion, threepsetseof the name and address of all businesses within the shopping center and all landowners within a 300 - foot radius of -the shopping center or arcade. (III) Each application shall contain a description of the types nf machines, a floor plan showing their t arrangement, and hours of operation. SECTION 3: Section 61.027A(d) of the Rancho Cucamonga Interim Zoning 0 mace s hereby :.mended to include amusez.,ent devices to read as follows: ACCESSORY Uses r storage ) tomarilyPInnccidental to any of the above uses and accessory buildings, when located on the same lot, including the following: (1) Amusement devices, not more than three (3); however, not to exceed five percent (5Y) of the public floor area. For the purposes of this - Ordinance, a typical device and playing area needs ten (10) square feet. Amusement devices shall not obstruct or cm:d entries, exists, or aisles. The use of such devices as an accessory use requires adult supervision, with the machine , • placed in an area which is vitable at all times by the supervisor. (2) Storage garage for the exclusive use of the above stores and businesses. SECTION 4: Section 61.0278(b)(1)(A) of the Rancho Cucamonga ' Interim Zon -i y UWnance is hereby amended to read as follows: (A) Amusement enterprises (except arcades as defined in Section 61.022). SECTION S: Section. 61.0278(d) of the Rancho Cucamonga interim , Zoning O nardi c s hereby amended by adding subsection 61.027(B)(d)(6), " to read as follows: (6) Arcade uses, provided such uses shall be governed by the regulations applied to them in the C-1 zone in which they are first listed as conditionally permitted uses, as provided for in Section 61.027A(b)(5)(B). SECTION 6: The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, ?� California, ere y finds that these amendments -will not cause significant i 4 adverse impacts on the envirorwunt and issues a Negative Declaration for " "i this Amendment 5*' Ordinance No. Page 3 t T SECTION ): The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall :cruse the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once in TheDa�ily R�e�e�rt, a newspaper of general circulation published in th�'ity o� Ontarfo, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. '& PASSED, . 4VED, and ADOPTED this day of 19. AYES: to NOES: •c ABSENT: i' Phillip D. Schlosssr, Mayor s ? ATTESI auron assetviar., ty TUFT 6441 Y :, •• Bn0NN.VENCE&ASSOCIATES Erwin, wd Enwo+ra WEighem •�', April 6, 1982 Mr. Lauren Wasserman, City Manager ,.. City of Rancho Cucamonga •$i P. O. Box 2A7 `r A Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 } ' JOB NO.t 81020 A` PROJECT: San Bernardino County Waste- to-Energy Project Y` SUBJECT& Request for Support 1 Dear Mr. Wasserman: We have mentioned to you earlier that the County Board of Supervisors Is seeking support from Interested parties concerning Its )nvestigetion of the possibility of combusting solid waste to produce energy. The next step to bring such a project to fruition In the Valley p, Area of the County Is to proceed with Phase B of the U.S. Department of Energy funded Investigation. Mr. Lloyd Hubbs of your office has received a copy of the draft report for - review and comment. i Attached for your convenience are samples of a resolution of support and a letter of support. Either cne from you would be most appreciated If we are fortunate enough to receive such support from you, please mail to Mr. Robert L. Hammock, Chairman of the County Board of Supervisors and send a copy to me. Both addresses are listed on the sample letter of support. If there are any Tuestloro, please do not hesitate to ca0 we or Mr. B. C. Escobar (383- 2600) at tM County Environmental Public Works Agency. Very truly yoi.rs, BROWN, V iNCF & ASSOCIATES .o (z , Thomas r Rel .y TC'(:jb Ercl. 12 4SPEFISTREEr P.O.80%7202� SAN FRAN.Cl/''S�CO. CAUFORNIA 94120 015) 434 0900 •. r �4 i t! Ni . - LETTER OF SUPPORT DATE • hit. Robert L. Hammock Chairman of the Board of Supervisors County of San Bernardino County Civic Building - West 173 West Fifth Street San Bernardim, CA 92013 Dear Mr. Chalrmrn: Our (City Council. Board, ARexy, Association, Finn, Cffltt Is %ware that the San Berna -dim County Solid Waste Management Master Plan promotus the recovery of material' end energy !rom solid waste as a mid to long range alternative to landfilling. We have also been made aware that certain landfills are running out nt capacity In the valley area of the County mud that replacemett landfills are difficult to site. W. understand that the U.S. Department of Energy has provided the County with grant funds to conduct a two-phase Investigation of the possibility of combusting solid waste tu. make steam and generate electricity and that the results of the first phase Indicates such an approach is economlcaBy feasible. We have been Informed that Cie next step to bring a waste • to -energy project to fruition • is to proceed with Phase 11 of the Investigation, the solicitation of proposals from private industry. We realize that successful Implementation of such a project r&qulres an indication of support Iron, Interested parties. We therefore want to enthusiastically support the Ctunty of San Bernardino In proceeding with Phase If of the solid waste -to- energy o•.)ject. Very truly yours, ccs Mr. Thomas C. Redly Brown, Vence !t Associates P.O. Box 7202 San Francisco, CA 90120 i r+ . .:i •i} County of Gen Benlardk/o SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COUNCIL 1111 EaH 1111151•ut, Bw9d'#.,,i Aa Bwnraan,Ge2416.17i413711tl7 "... REDUCE REUSE „ Y RECYCLE. �PnisiW7.a: eouay CIO" SAN BERNARDINO COUHTI � •h &xvv SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COUNCIL fsnmeu e V Ale 0l&p : MINUTES 1111 EAST HILL STREET SAN BERNARDINO. CALIFORNIA 11: MARCH 10, 1982 t �• a a R# a a} f a R e R a f A} a a R a f a a f a a R a A a a a} a a A a# a a A a a COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard L. Roberts R. C. Escobar • Joseph H. Martin Don Doneen Clive ra"Bay Willard Maust t` COUNCIL ID]OlERS ASSENT: Supervisor McElwain Dennis Paulsen Patricia Chamberlain Clsan Wilson Saylor Rmvles .. ALTERNATES PRESENT: Mary Hartman Jack Dorn Jack Raker Harold )bore a A R a R a a a A f} a a a R A A a a R f a a a a a a a a R a a a a a a a a a f A A a A. INTRODUCTIONS - ROLL CALL ' The meeting of the Solid Waste Advisory Council was called to order at 9:73 a.m. Harsh 10, 1982, by Rit'Yard L. Roberts, vice - Chairman. Mr. Roberts asked Council Members and other ar :endees to introduce themselves. Nr 2oborts advised Council that Supervisor McElwain w attending a CSAC Meeting in Sacramento, therefore, the Special Report on Solid Waste Disposal Practices in Japan would he given at a future SWAC fleeting. REVIEW /APPROVAL OF H)NUIES /ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS Mr Roberts asked tar nation to accept Minutes of November 17, 1981 Meeting. Notion roved, seconded and carried. ' Hr. Roberts noted adjustment& to the Agenda. s Mr. Roberts introduced Ht. Jack B. Peddp, EPYA ndminlsttator, to the Couaeil F advising that he would be addressing Council on the issue of the County's consid- T'r� station of private operations of landfills. 'R N tc° COMITY CONSIDERATION OF SANITARY LANDFILL OPERATION BY PRIVATE yr INDUSTRY ............... ......... ............................... J. B. Paddy Hr. Roberts gave Council background on this Item advising of various issues in•,olvad if private industry assumed operation of the sanitary landfills, whicn ware dlscu.s.d at the November 17, 1981 SWAC Meeting. Advised Council Members that following the November 17, 1981 SWAC Heetiug there bed beea considerable discussion between staff and the Board of Supervisors Further, that the Board, on March 8, 19829 had created a five (5) person committee to study the issue of private industry takeover. At this point, Hr. Roberts called upon Hr. Paddy to inform how Council could be involved in this effort. Hr. Paddy reported that the Board of Supervisors took action on Harch 8, 1982 to authorise the Agency to engage the services of a consultant to prepare Plans and Specifications in order to go out to bid on the Fontana Sanitary landfill Site to be operated under contract. The Board also authorised the eetabLishment of a Task Force to select and matter consultants' work and to report back to the Board on bids received The Task Force would be limited to five (5) people, as followae I Environmental Public Works Agency - Jack B. Paddy 2 EPWA Solid Waste Management - B. C. Escobar 1. Busi.ess Consulting Council (BCC) - Bill Boasdiman 4 Solid Waste Advisory Council - Hr. Paddy asked Mr. Roberts to consider. 5. County Administrative Office - Had net been named as yet. . Hr Paddy advised that on Friday, March 5, 1982, Larry Wallender, representing Y R. E. Wolfe Enterprises, Inc. (landfill operators), was In his office to discuss a proposal that their firm would be interested in operating the entire landfill system. Hr Paddy also advised that this firm was aware of the Pilot Study at the Fontana Sanitary Landfill am that this firm had approached the Board. The Agency i is to review with B E. Wolfe Enterprises, Inc. proposal and evaluate it along with matter of going to single site on pilot basis and report back to Board of findings. Hr Harold Hoore (City of Redlands), expressed concerto indicating that this looks like a rallroad lob Stated that this needs a lot was public participation in the decision making than the five (5) camber Task Force effort. Also, that the costs could boggle the mind it not handled properly. Further stated that the City Is golog to be taking a lord look at this because it's the cities dollars that we Are playing with and that the County is moving to quickly to have input it deserves from thevarious cities in the County Hr Paddy assured Hr. Moore that the County in net going to do anything that is going to turn ato a more costly program than we be" now Hr Paddy asked Hr. Moore if he voula furnish any Information on private operations he has to tNe Agency for consideration. Hr Paddy advised that the Pilot Program is planned to be underway by July 1, 1982 but that with the added responsibility of working with R. B, Wolfe Enterprises, Inc , nay be delayed as ouch as a ninth. Mr Escobar advised that the Task Votes is being set up to look at putting together bid package and that there was no reason why Council could net be working concurrently throjgh proper committee to consider issues of concern and provide findings to Task Force. I 1 U - 2 Gil Geri Ferris (Liquid Waste Haulers Assoc.) asked if the County is looking at .,.� liquid waste handling at that site? Mr. Paddy advised that the reason that the Finacna Sanitary Landfill Site was chosen was because it has liquid, solid and &bastes waste disposal. Alan that the bidding process would be wide open for _ 1_ anyone who is Interested as long As they seat speclfitecione. Mr. Paddy was asked about the disposal face when considering County vs. private takeover. Mr. Paddy advised that this question couldn't be anawared as yet and would be ono of the considerations in bid evaluation. Larry Walleodar, R. R. Wolfe Enterprises, Ine., advised that the cost of operating the landfills 1s controlled by County or municipality as far As tipping fees. The only thing that contractor does is bid on operating the landfill. Mr Classey (Mountain Disposal) asked if the Task Force is only suppose to be a ' five (5) man committee? Mr. Paddy informed that Council might want to consider recommending to the Board that the Task Force be a larger committee. Mr. E Roberts briefly vent Sack to the Minutes of the November 17, 1982 Council Meeting regarding the establ— Ahment of an eleven (11) member Ad Hoc Committee to review Issues of concern. Advised should discuss what Council's feelings would be on how they should construct cmaittee of this type In recommendation to the Board. Should consider the Board's precast committee people categories then suggest , that there be people added. - Mr. Roberts suggested that perhaps recommendation should go to the Board to expand Task Force to include more representatiou from cities, private haulers, etc. Hr. Paddy advised that their recommendation to the Board was that the Task Force • ccnslst of representation from the Board of Supervisors, County Administrative office, Business Consulting Council, Solid Waste Advisory Council, Cities, Refuse and Liquid Waste Haulers Association and Associated Coastal Contractors, to be staffed by the Environmental Public Works Agency. Clive Glassey recommended to expand Task Force to 1 or 2 city representatives and 1 or 2 private hauler (collectors) representatives. Discussion ensued As to what categories of people should be represented on the Task Force. !tr Roberts suggested that the Council recommend to the board of Supervisors tat the Task Force be expanded from five (5) to nine (9) =there, which would include me (1) representative from the cities, one (1) from private collectors, me (1) frm Liquid Waste Haulers, and one (1) to be chosen by EPW.(. Motion made, f• seconded auf carried Hr Roberts then asked Caunc1. who they wu4d like to represent they on the five• (5), and /or the nine (9) member, Task Force. Joseph Martin made a motion that r' Glenn Wilson, City of San Bernardino, be the representative to the Task force as presently established by the Board. Motion carried. Larry Walilnder. R. E. Wolfe Enterprises, Inc., asked if it would be proper for a non- member to recommend a amber to the Task Forest Advised that knowing the ° background of Mr Clive Classey es President of the California Refuse Removal Council, etc . would like his name to be considered. Mr. Roberts advised Mr. Va:linder that if the Task Force Comittee is expanded by the Board that his L nominee would be cocsldered y e 3- G� w RESOURCE kPJZIVERY /IIAZARDOUS WAJM Hazardous Materials Mauarment Propria Update .. . . ....... sun Jcnke Hr Janke reported that they had recently had a denting with John Hinton, State Department of Health Services, who seem to be supportive of local government involvement and of allowing decisions to be made at local level. Stated that they would be continuing to work with the State on this. Advised of new document out from the Covarnor's Office, which is the "Community Right to Know- document. This document has dot yet been adopted in statutes but is a recommendation that is going around the State for Community input and private industry input. The basic ideas behind it era rot only the Community -at -large but also emergency agencies having the right to know what materials are being wad, stored, ate. Mr. Janke advised that a group of cities have adopted ordinancav which follow this dotuxnt and that this ordinance would require each industry to submit a manifesto to local government agencies listing hazardous waste materials that they use or store. This report would be available for the public -at- large to impact. Infectious Waste Disposal ..... ............................... [en Juke Hr Janke reported thet this County has become aware of the problem as a result of public use of Orange and Los Angeles Counties with respect to the disposal of infectious waste. Noted that there my be a need to do further study on this in San Bernardino County. Advised that Environmental Heals ' "It" had beam assigned to do the Initial survey to decide whather or not there is a problem and if so, begin looking into handling and disposal practices. Noted that on a group of occasions have found infectious materials in red bags being handled in routine regular refuse. Advised that In the process of developing Interim plan for the handling of infectious materials have already sought the involvement of Solid Waste Management and that they will be comtacting the Refuse Haulers Associacion to obtain input with respect to what problem and /or difficulty that this my pose for the hauling industry. Hr Jeske advised that to data Environmental Health had only beep working on this project for two (2) weeks. Advised had completed initital contact survey of 40 majnr medical facilities in the County and found that 30Z use total Incineration and do rot have a need for the handling, transportation or final dtepoual and that of the ramining 702, 302 of those contract with special hauling firm, :0Z that are disposing of infectious waste at landfill sites In the County by using refuse hauling companies or municipalities. This will probably be the arm where the fee" of concern will be. Hr Roberts said that the State Health Department advised that they will be establishing infectious waste standards within the next sixty (60) days S tats -vide. Hr. Janke advised that there are 3 proposals being considered and that the State Health Department has formed a task force in L. A. County, which Cnvironmental Health has a representative on the Commit!ee, to recommeo� regulations. Also that there is a bill being latrcducted through Assembly in order to get regu'%tlous in this arm. Y - 4 Q;L Harold Moore, city of Sao Boroardlao, asked how eockcbls the plane are? • Mr. Task* advised that the biggest burden will be on generator add vocal enforcement agency to review and approve alternate methods that generator would want to "a in case they do not have incineration available Hr Roberts asked Hr. Jeske to mako a presentation on these regulation^ and analysts on imparts at neat Connell resting. Hr Escobar stressed to haulers to pass on to oth,r haulers in the County that it would be apprecinted If they let us know rt rho ,wales if they an handling medical or infectiova waste so that it tar. be properly handled at the tables In order that it be disposed of iasmdiatety. Advised that if anyone has any questions to contnct John Jeaka at Environmental Health. Bu[fer Tense Arou,d 6xiatiuA Hazardous Wasto Facilities ...... Roberta /Escobar Advised that this is a joint effort between the Planing Department and Environmant -t Health Services with Environmental Health taking the lead because of the nature of the issue. At this time the Planning Department is offering support In terns of implementation on regulation, etc., that nay effect the land we of the County or development. Southern. California Patardous Waste Siting Study Update ..... B. C. Escobar Hr Escobar reported that the seven (7) counties in Southern California (San Diego. Orange. Son Bernardino, ESvaraids, Ventura, We Angeles and Imperial) P O only enjoy one (1) hazardous waste landfill for entire area, which is BKK Site in West Covina. Hr. Escobar stated that the BKK Site is under threat to be closed A study had been underway to decide the possibility of identifying additional landfills until the Governor came out with a report that diecouragea disposing on land. At the present time the landfilling study had been put on the back - burner to work concurrently with alternate disposal processes. Right new the Committee is concentrating on supplemental criteria of establishing treatment facilities for industry. The issue of adequate buffer tunes are also being considered. Feasibility of Waste -to - Energy (DOE) Study . ....... .. ... Escobar /Reilly M. Escobar briefly gave background information of the Feasibility Study being conducted by the County advising that during the Carter Administration San Bernardino County was awarded a $675,000 Grant to study the feasibility of waste -to- energy for the Valley area. Advised that the Consultant has Completed the Phase I report and have found the project to be economically feasible with corcain reservations. We are now ready to move into the next phase, Phase II, Involving Solicitation of Proposals from Private Industry. Mfr. Escobar intro- duced Hr Tom Reilly, Project Hangar, from the firm of Brow, Vaned and Associates in San vrancisco. Hr. Roil.y reported that he would like to take 10 to 15 minutes with overheads r and slides then open up for queations after thut. Hr. Reilly shoved overhead elides looking at solid waste disposal alternatives for the Valley area of San Bernardino, basic situations of landfills, and the transfer of waste to a • distant landfill when the Valley area landfills reach capacity. -5' `i3 Mr. Reilly advised Nat with resource recovery we have two (2) alternatives which can operate in the ease coaraunity at the name times which are waste -to- • ` energy and ter /cling. Mr. Reilly briefly covered such questions as: 1. What are the banefico of Resource Recovery? 2. Whey do we want to implement Resource Recovery? 3. Conservation of recyclable: will make valuable landfill space. Explained that with the implementation of resource recovery we can double the capacity at the landfills in the Valley. Right now there are four (4) landfills operating in the Valley, two (2) of which will be closed by 1986 leaving two (2) Valley landfills. The conservation of von - renewable fossil fuel, with the implementation of resource recovery, can conserve approximately 800,000 barrels of all a year. Alan, the creation of jobs depending on the option of the resource recovery facility can create up to 100 acv jobs. In reso•rce recovery there are a number of Isms that vied to be considered, such ass 1. Waste Supply - Is there sufficient waste in the Valley area N do resource recovery and, in fact, our analysis of the quantities that are going Into the landfill and the City of Redlands landfills n7re than sufficient to use resource recovery. 2. Energy Market - Looked at electricity and stew. These are the two (2) products that are moat readily generated using dennstrated technology. Southern California Edison, by regulations enacted by the Public Utilities Commission, has to purchase electricity from alternative energy generators• Investigated the number of steam markets in the area and found they have small energy demands. There's one potential energy user whets chinking about Installing a facility in the Valley, wbicls is Inland Container (manufacturer of boxes using recycled cardboard as Its raw materials). 3. technology for Resource Recovery - Evaluated 17 different technologies and No technology Nat Is most demonstrated in the U. S., Europa and Japan in mass- burning combustion (showed schematic sboxiing mass- burning). 4. Procurement - There is a number of ways that the system can be procured. Procoed with Architecture and Engineering Fire to design, send out construction for bid then got someone to operate the faeillty nr she system or approach YOU can use, which is recommended for this project, is to solicit proposals from those tires that have experience in the industry. 5. Financing Alternatives - The financing that is rec000eaded is the private financing approach which is to use industrial development bonds issued by the State of California Pollution Control Financing Authority. 6. Spina Evaluatfona - Looking at utilizing anyone of the existing landfills. number of sites that are available and arc more attractive than existing landfills. ?. Environaental Imasets and M1[iRating Heaevrns - Weed to be evaluated. Did look at the number of eoncerna v1N respect to the environment. One of the major concerns is air emissions . A facility of this type does generate air emissions and to implement a project in the San Bernardino area will O have to apply best available control technology as defined by the State Air Resources Board and local Air Pollution Control District. - - 6 - C7, v r 8. Transportation Costa - Weds to be considered in siting. One of the • siting criteria is the effect an haul Coate of the various cities and private operators that take refuse from the last Paler of collection to the disposal site. 9. Risk Alloestioo - llisk with teepee[ to in[anring, design, construction, operation all need to be evaluated and all need to be asaigned to A particular party in feplesenting a resource recovery project. Mr. Reilly proceeded with the review or identification of various resource recovery or disposal options that are available. Advised that they than looked at various resource recovery scenarious (1, 2 3 and 4) the "at. SDividedtthe Into two of thehpolittcal jurLdictions,dor the way the politics are sat up in the Valley and the. Want End government haves In the past, worked together, cm work together, ate., and in the seat Valley to seen fueling so that the six (6) citian can work together, so looked at two (2) resource recovery facilities; one in the east and one in thu vest end. Also wanted to evaluate what would happen if everyone couldn't work together on an even scale. Shoved Scenario 3 where they placed a resource recovery facility in the vest and and transfer station in the east valley to move all the refuse to the vest valley for resource recovery and 5ceario 4 where they reversed it, had resource recovery facility in the Cast .md and transfer station in the vast and. • In all, there ure 17 different solid waste disposal options that they did look at and looked at power only selling electricity to Southrrr. California Edison, looked at co- generation which is the simultaneous production of steam and electricity and also looked at the possibility of importing waste from East lea Anvalac County or Vent Riverside County where those areas might be facing problens with respect to landfill shortage and might ba willing to transfer refuse into San Bernardino which would benefit the rate fare in San Bernardino County Concluded, after evaluating economics, that resource recovery Sa economically attractive and the most attractive project is the Valley- ids project sited in the vast valley with the transfer station sited in d.e east valley. It is recommended that •ro proceed with Phase 11, the Solicitation of Proposals from Private ?I=$ to fivance, design, construct and operate. Mr. Reilly solicited the support of the Council, Crown. Vence and Associates is recommending the foswation of a joint powers agreement bringing the cities and County together. Mr Reilly then showed slides indicating the technology that is moat demon- strated in the United States and Europe. General discussion ensued with Mr Roberts orating that this is a very exciting project and suggested that Council should take action to support project. Mr. Reilly reiterated the need to show support to being Phase II. Jack Dorn (Southveatarn Cement) advised that he felt that resource recovery vas in step in the wrong direction, that it would make more some if va didn't have • the landfills. Also stated that energy recovery is defeating recycling r processes. Mr. Escobar advised that large portion of waste sttaam, which is combustible, has on recyclable value. Clive Glaeaey (Mountain Disposal) asked r what percentage is actually recyclable of total vsste strew] Van advised that k it could reach as high as 60% depending on community. 10Z is ressonsble number. Hr. Escobar reminded Council that under the Master Plan this is ono of the tasks to look at for long - text,, encouraging private industry to become • L Involved. Plan calls for seeking grant money to study possibility of getting Into resource recovery. This is net something that in going to be in short or mid -ten but 7 to 8 years down the road. Mr. Roberts asked Council their desires with respect to action. Clive Cheesy coved to receive report as information. Jack Dorn seconded, action carried. LITIER CONTROL /EDUCATION .......... ............................... Wendy Barren= Ms. Rartanen explained Litter Bear avd how it relates to litter control program and efforts to raise the general publics' "stances about keeping America clean. Advised that there's a group of events planned, such ae the Crest California Resource Rally (April 19-25, 1982) sponsored by the State Sold Waste Management Board, and the Recycle Olympics 82 (April 17, 1982) sponsored by the Clean Connection /San Barnardiuo. Wendy also advised at' the Zed Dump Run at San Tlwteo landfill, briefly explaining last years' program which consisted of 200 runners and we conducted in order to make the general, public aware as to the location of the site and Environmental Health Services' concerns. Advised had good support from natural life and local public, including Yucaipa Dispcsml. Hr Roberts advised Ccuncll that this fiscal year the State Solid Waste Management board gave us contract grants for litter control and education for $94,000, used to gain community support, etc. Also that rase funds terminate at the and of this fiscal year and that there are an further Lunde for this, therefore, would like to submit to Board a policy item to retain portion for litter control activities. • San Timoteo Site vehicular Survey .......................... B. C. Escobar Hr Escobar advised that the issue Is that the citizens' along San Timteo Canyon Road, coming from Yucaipa and vest side to some extent, have concerns with respect to litter caused on this road due to the vast= hauled to San Timteo. Advised that with Supervisor McKenna and staff had mot with a group of concerned citizens to anever questions, such as, to what "tent our people covering their loads when going to the Landfill? Since this information was net readily available it was decided to run a survey at the landfill to determine this. The survey, from August 12 through August 25, 1981, revealed that 1,000 loads out of 2,000 were uncovered. Larry Vallender of R. E. Wolfe Enterprises, Informed Council of Orlando, Florida's procedure for this which has a surcharge for vehicles that are net covered. Hr Roberts asked Hr Vallender if be could bring any information on this procedure /policy to the next Council meting. Mr. Roberts Iwtructed Jack Baker that Environmental Health Services should address this issue from the enforcement standpoint. STORACE /COLLECfI(IN /TRANSPORTATION China Hills Project Scudy Update ............... ................. Richard Roberts Employ Consultant, under County Supervision, to study the establishment of SWMP for the China ''.la Develnpment. Mr. Roberts advised that Environmental Health Services wiled out more than 200 RFP's to Consulting first to reply to the St. and that they had received 15 proposals from those flrns. Also advised that " tolloving a County Policy on How to Select a Consultant, they had narrowed the list- `� 8 - down to interviewing three (0) consultants. the Committee will be holding inter• . views for this consultant and will race ad oce (1) firm to the Board of Super- visors LOCAL ORDINANCE /YNFORCCEIEEHT /MANDATORY COLLECTION Model Oroinance Update .......... . ............................... Jack Baker Mr Baker advised Council that he had nothing to report at this tine. State Board LEA Review ............ ............................... Jack Baker Mr Baker advised that the State Solid Wad[a Management Board, Enforcement Division, has was up with an Idea that in reviewing LEA activity, 582 of LEA's throughout the State, in their minds, are not accomp'ishing what Local Enforcement Agencies should be doing. Environmental Health Services is Hoot concerned with the State Board Staff Report on RCRA Inspections for open dump; there were eight (8) criterias that all disposal sites have to be in compliance with in order met to be put on the oven dunp inventory and the names of the sites are published in the Federal Register. In essence. the State Board is saying that if any Site does not meet avan oat (1) of the criteria then the site Is declared as open dump and that the Local Enforce- ment Agency is not doing their job bemuse they allowed the condition to exist. Explained that It site or sites has deficiencies at one given time what the end result is that the site or sites are given a 90-day period to correct and at the end of this 9D-day period, if not corrected, the site is placed on the open dump inventory list. Advised that the Federal Government vents to clean -up the County and that by 1984 no burning will be allowed at the sites and that they want all open dumps closed at that time Mr. Baker advised that it appears that the State Board is proposing to got legislation to Increase their staff so that the Inspections can be performed more frequently and to work with the Local Enforcement Agencies to bring their performance up to higher standards. This would burden the local enforcement agencies who see no possibility of lncreasiag their staffing. Mr. Baker advised that in San Bernardino County four (4) sites, privately operated, bave been placed on open dump inventory list. Advised that the State boards three (1) weeks ago, inspected the baaanca of sites in the County. Which there were ID-12 sites involved, and of those sites one (1) had a deficiency and was given 90 -days to correct; this was a privately operated site Ht Baker advised Council that Mr B. C. Escobar had recently addressed a memo to Supervisor McElwain reporting on these inspections and that the County operated sites have been up to State Standards. Refuse Probleas — Big Bear City ...... ........ ......... Richard Roberts Mr Roberts advised Council that Big Bear City had written Environmental Health a letter indicating the trash problems occurring in the City where people are throwing trash out on the road, in commercial brae, etc., and that Supervisor Older had requested that we work with them to solve this problem. Therefore, a meeting IS with representatives of the City, along with Environmental Health, Solid paste - Management and the Scato Solid Waste Management Board was held to address issues. As a result of this mating short and long-term; recommendations ware established, as follows[ I . Short -Ten - Deteradne whether or met State would finance a couple of disposal bens in the area, looted on private or public property, to to collected by private collectors. 2. Lon - ern - Work with all comumers in the Big Bear Va31ay area to follow the model set by Big Bear Lake Coaaualty Services District's mandatory service throughout the entire area and to eatablish an effective anti - litter prograe. Advised that this would take a considerable amount of tim and is generally adverse. Clive Glaseay (Mountain rdsposal) stated that on the Short -Tam Plan the Collector In the area would end up t...liug sounds of rubbish away and that mandatory collection service, in his opinion, would be the only way to go. Mr. Roberts advised that the group recognized concerns and would make ca a trial basis until solution can be reached NEW BUSINESS NEW LEGISLATION AND STANDARDS Solid Waste Standards ............. ............................... Jack Baker Hr Baker advised of various meetings held by the State Solid Waste Management Board to review solid waste standards in which this County participated with input. Hr. Baker briefly reviewed this input from prior meetings stating that all State Codes have been reviewed and brought up-to -date and that the State Board did take into consideration local enforcement agencln cauerm. Gemrally had final meeting in November in S•crmento where Standards were accepted as proposed, how nothing has happened. The nest step would be for the Standards to go to the offie0a Of Administrative Law to review insuring mode or law requirements. The State Board has no idea when this will be done. Hazardous Waste Standards .................. ..................... Ken Jeske Ken Teske advised Council of Senate Bill 1483 a6vising that currently the person responalole is the Law Enforcement Agency or the police agency. Stated that the bill being proposed would allow the police agency to delegate responsib_lity, i.e., to the local fire agency. Mr. Roberts advised Council that the Tamer Bill, Sanate Bill 1343, has been adopted into law establishing a Hazardous Wants Siting Council. Further advised that asst of the members have been selected but suggested that someone make a motion to Willie Brow, Speaker of the Asseably, to eppoimt Pe,zy Sartor to that Council became there is still one (1) opening. AeLs for matica. Jack Dom made motion, seconded and carried. Carl Parris stated that is ter needs to go in today Ken Jeska advised that the South Coast Air Quality Hanageamnt District is proposing ' eegulations on landfill gas emissions and that a report can be given at the vex. Council meeting Senate Bill 95 we discussed which relates to this and is already Into law, signed last week. Hr. Roberts asked Hr. Escobar to give Council mote Information on CASs at next meeting. t �'at, RESIGHATLON FROM CDLIMIL .......... ............................... Richard Roberts �• Mr. Roberta advised Council that Sue Burk, Publirat -largo Member from the Big Bear Ares, vas resigning free the Council. Suggested motion to cosaend Sue for way + great efforts in attending and participating in Council eeetiags and being a founding member recommending commendation be sods by the Board of Supervisors. b Joe Martin stated that Sue Burk was a very conscientious member and motion vas made, seconded and carried. MEMBERSHIP UPDATE ................. ............................... B. C. Escobar Report will be given at next Council Meeting. COUNTY SANITARY LANDFILL CLOSURES IN VALLEY ................ ..... B. C. Escobar Report that we to be given as a part of the budget presentation :or ?. Y. 1982/83 was postpored until next meeting. Informed that the Board of Supervisors say be hearing new and revised fee proposals on March 22, 1982. CREASE TRAP WASTE DISPOSAL ........ ............................... Cori Ferris Cori Ferrir. advised of important problem that is being created and has been brought to their attention mostly it the RS- desert at" because of the travel distance. This is a problem due to the fact that there isn't any facility in the desert to accept this waste. therefore, it must be hauled to Riverside County. Susanna • advised thr.t Victor Valley RWTA is accepting this vaste and is charged an bard -to- handle. Mr. Roberta asked Cori Ferris to make presascation an this item at the next Couucil meeting. ADJOURNMENT The next meeting of the Solid Waste Advisory Council is tentatively sober Sed for March 31, 1982 at 9:30 P.m. Meeting adjourned at 12:05 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, ,• Deborah Scruggs Recording Secretary OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE: -t Jack E. Peddy, EPWA Administrator Ed Carlson, EFWA Tim C Lassen, Santa To Railroad Company Reza Akranian, California Regional WQCB David R. 2aenra, City of Colton Ken Jesk., Environmental Health Services Geri Ferris, President, Liquid Waste Rattlers Virginia Former, City of Grand Terrace Robert J. Kruk, Environmental Health Services . Carl W. Reinhardt, Best Disposal Company Jim Samptcn, Boat Disposal Company Larry Wallinder, R. E. Wolfe Enterprises, Inc. r Wanly Bartenzn, Environmental Health Services e4,N Cum Ronnabeck, City of Adelanto 11 r�C �_6 i� ±a �.� {1ii�T K- YH :i.P,_L.Y'' Y. . '.•YA .�T. -t 'v - RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. URGING THE SUPPORT OF THE PROZECT TO PROMOTE THE RECOVERY OF MATERIALS AND ENERGY FROM SOLID WASTE WHEREAS, the County of San Bernardino Solid Waste Management �;- Master Plan (1981) promotes the recovery of materials and enern„y from t' solid waste; and WHEREAS, the Solid Waste Management Master Plan has been approved by the titles and recognizes that in the mid to long range planning a fort, alteratives to landfilling in the valley area of San Bernardino County 1 must be pursued; and WHEREAS, certain sanitary landfills in the valley area are nearing capacity and replacement landfills are difficult to locate and extremely costly to purchase; and WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Energy has provided the County of San Bernardirm with grant funds to conduct a two -phase investigation ti of the possibilit- of combusting solid waste to make steam and generate electricity; and WHEREAS, the results of the first phase of the investigation Indicate a Ovate -to- energy project may be economically feasible; and WHEREAS, the next stop to bring a waste -to- energy project to fruition is to proceo4 with Phase II of the investigation - the solicitation of proposals from pi late industry; and WHEREAS, the successful implementation of a waste -to -energy project requires an indication of support from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and other Municipalities in the Nest Valley of San Bernardino County NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby urges the County of San Bernardino to proceed with Phase It of the Solid Waste -to- Energy Project PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 21st day of April, 1982. AYES: e NOES ABSENT: y - ��y,✓n�-- ffi�aimi. �- � %- .l� "� :u "vim :h sk: �� -T..' ��.ar?n.d� +yZ,. F • RESOLUTION NO. 82 -76 A RESOLUTION OF.THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY ' .w OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TIME OF REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does resolve as follows: s Section 1: Tire time of the regular meetings of the City Council shall be changed to be held at 7:30 p.m., thus changing the time from the previously set Lima of 7:00 p.m. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 21 • yty of April. �5 1982. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: _ I .Mayor ATTEST: s Lauren asscrman, 4Y C er V" 'r( c •tk 5 �C� 4 a' �5 a � sj?;% -.'•S � 3 Fes. � , ,l`yr�•.�" u „.� `yjx, . rr'7n bu YS(C.i _ 3 'P' . April 21, 1982 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA „ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Regular Meeting 1. CALL TO 02DER r The regular mating of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held in the Lions Park Comunity Center, 9161 Base Line goad cm Wednesday, > April 21, 1982. The meting vas, tolled to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor .� Jon Mlkels. ' Present wezet Councilmen James C. Frost, Phillip D. Schloemer, Charles Buquet, ' Richard Dahl and Mayor Jon Hikels. •c Also Present went City Manager, Lauren M. Wasserman, City Attornoy, Robert Dougherty; Assistant City Manager, Jim Robinson; Community Oevolopa t Director Jack Lam; City Engineer, Lloyd Hobbs; Pinance Director Marry Empty; City Planner, Rick Comer, and Community Services Director Bill Holley. 2. ANNOUNCEMENTS a Mayor Mikele announced the Thursday, April 22, 1982 Advisory Commission meting had been cancelled and the next regularly scheduled meting would be held on Thursday, May 27th. ,! b. Mayor Nlktls announced thtz” mould be an Erivanda Specific Plan Meeting at Etiwnda Intermediate School on Tuesday, April 27, 1982. x: ,r c. Mayor Nikals announced the Spring Clem Sweep Week, May 8-15. N d. Mayer MSkels announced there were vacancies on the Planning Commission and C Advisory Commission and applications could ba obt0 ed from the City Clerk's office or from the secretary at the meeting tonight. It vas the consensus of Council that applications would be accepted until May 7. 1982 and public interview would be hold at as adjourned renting of the City Council prior to May 19th. It we requested that applicants _ attach a copy of their resume to their applications. ,y e. Notion: Ho-t ad by Proat, seconded by Duque[ that the Mayor senA a letter to the Chaffey High School (bard encouraging them to Dame the new High School to be located is Etivanda, the Etivanda High School. Notion carriad f t. City Clark Wasserman mad a correction to the Title and description oC Item "k" on the consent calendar. (Corrected title is reflected in minutes). i g City Clerk YaKtrma requested that the Approval of agreement Dt[w.en ,,. "Agency and the County of San Bernardino" and "Agency and Foothill Fire �r District" be added as items "1" and "n" respectively to the Consent Calendar. h. Councilman Frost announced sour of the activities that will take place at the Ecivanda Centennial celebration. t 3 3. OONSLNT CALENDAR Ya t rrr Councilman Frost requested that Itama "1" and "m" be removed from the consent F' slander and acted upon separately since they had been added without prior publication. ' Notion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Frost to approve consent calendar vi � Its= "1" and "m" removed. Motion Carried 5 -0. a. Approval of Warrants. Register No. 82 -4-21 in tho amount of $422,058.20. ;t :u �xt rj IWO s{{-- ,y City Council Minces April 21, 1982} Page Three i r 5. Acceptance of Bonds and Agreezents for a Single Family Residence at 5727 Carnelian Street - submitted by Richard E. Harney. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -74 i c A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IIPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY )y FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 5727 CARNELIAN STREET. £ k. Set Public Rearing for Environmental Assessment and Planned Development 81 -02 (IT 11915) - !Mayer . A change of zone from R -1 (Single Family Residential) to R -3 /PD (Multiple Family Realdeutlel /Planned Development) and the development of 44 patio homes and 322 townhouse unite on 35 acres of land in the RO1 zone located on the south aide of Arrow, between Turner and Cancer Avenues - AP,; 209 -091- 05,05,07. Set ' Public Hearing for Nay 5, 1982. 1. Approval of Agreement between Agency and County of San Bernardino. Motion: Moved b Frost seconded b Schlosser that y y Agreement be approved and the Mayor be authorized to alga. Notion carried unanimously 5 -0. (� m. .,pproval of Agreement between Agency and Foothill Fire District. 3 ` lotion: Moved by Buquet, seconded by P vat that agreement be approved and Mayor be authorized to sign. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. G 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4A PUBLIC IMPROVEODTf REUMURSM2D.TITS. Staff report presented by Jack Lam. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordlnancc No. 170. ORDINANCE N0. 170 (Second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF ME CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, IMPOSrIG A FEE 5• PAYABLE AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION FOR A BUILDING - rERHII FOR THOSE LOTS OR PARCELS OF LAND WITH RRSPECT TO WdICH FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEF4 INSTALLED PURSUANT TO A REIMBURSEMENT AGRE*M?T. Councilman Schlosser Indicated he did not feel Ordinance was fair because it does not provide any provision for interest to be included and suggested an Literest relmbursement rate of 71I or SZ. Reber: Dougherty, City Attorney, indicated this In the Ordinance which would allow the collection of many to fund reimbursement agreements and in no way would preclude areimbursement agreement of having an Interest factor. Ha stated Ordinance does not lock City into any interest rate and recommended that no interest factor be Included in this particular document. Councilman FLahl expressed his concern that Ordlnance my not be clear and M' inquired if it would Mr appropriate to !mart within this Ordlumm that �(• is does not preclude the negotiation or a�rerest rate. t ,., hr. Dougherty responded that "including accrued interest, f env" could be 4G. added in subsection A. However, he stated this would require a new first E, reading. Mayor Male questioned whothar Council wished to leave incoresc open for negotiation with each agreement or wished to set a fixed rate by Resolution. Councilman Schlosser stated he would rather see a fixed number. Councilman Frost referred to previous City Council discussions at which time he had recommended that we not have a percentage reimbursement. ^a ; ,t c `52 t V i D -city Council minutes ,t,; "' -April 21,- 1�82 Page fro b. Award of Design Eetvieae for street widaning, reconstruction, and resurfacing act Hillside Road from Amethyst Street to Sapphire Street; and Beryl Avenue from Mantanita Drive to H111a1do Road. Recotxand that coutract be awarded to Associated Engineers as the lo-+est bidder. c. Forward Claim by Rattly L. Oliva CO the city attorney for handling. d. Forward Claim by Stanley Arthur Antlocer to the city attorney for handling. e. Alcoholic Beverage License Application for on -sale general eating place by Douney 6 Robert, Inc., the Boars Hand, 6620 Carnelian Street. f. Approval of a Resolution to oppose using PERS Pension funds to balance the State budget. RESOLUTION N0. 82 -68 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING THE USE OF PEES PENSION FUNDS TO BALANCE THE STATE BUDGET. S. Acceptance of Improvement Agreement, Bonds, and Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for Director Revlew'81 -34 Charles Hofgaarden: located at 8789 Archibald Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 82-69 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT ACREEl417f FOR IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 81 -34. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -70 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA. ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY TMPROVENFM CO1?TRACr AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM CHARLES HOFGAARDEN AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLEAR TO SIGN THE SANE. h. Acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and Liam Agreement from O'Gorman and Smith: located at 8861 Strang Lane. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -71 A RESOLUTI0N OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT Ate LIEN AGREEMENT FROM JAMES O'GORMAN, MARCELLA O'COAMAN, AND BRIAN SMITH AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME. (8861 STRA:LC LANE) L. Intent to Annex Tract No. 11696, Tract No. 10762, and Tract No. 10277 -1 as Annexation No. 9 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. r � . RESOLUTION NO. 82 -72 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, OF PZELININARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION N0. 9 TO LANDSCAPE NALNTEiANCE DISTRICT NO. 1. v4i?'3. u'•wlu or }e City,Wundl ":flauear J.byJ ?. _April <21.. 1982 Your i nCouncilman Buquet stated he would prefer net to put in addit tonal warding ;3,y but to go ahead and approve Ordinance as 1s and work with Re olution aspect rt', when Sets Information vas available Nuclear Moved by Dahl, seconded by Schlosser to valve further reading of Ordinance No. 170. Councilmen Frost requested that Ordinance be r. d in Its entirety. Motion and Second were withdrawn and City Clark Wasserman mad i Ordinance No. 170 In Ste entirety. . , Mayor Nlkelo opened the mosting for Public Hearing. • Dick Scott, 111 Ninth, Upland, suggested agreement be changed to indicate prior to issuance. • Doug Hone Stated he felt be should be entitled to interest at going rate and suggested that anyone who is Interested in ralebursement be invited to a mating to discuss matter of uniform reimbursement agreements. He alw suggested sume means of notifying property owner. Them being urther 8 to response, public hearing vas slaved. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Schlosser to approve Ordinance No. 170. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. Council requested that staff continue to meat with developers and interested parties and prepare a report regarding options for notification and interest reimbursement for review at the May 19th Cowell meeting. ' 4B APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FOR PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRON- MENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF TENTATIVE fRACT 11933 --W— development of a total planned residential davalopmnt of 185 single family detached units and 14.6 acre park on 95.5 acres of laud in the R -1- 20,000 zone located an Hermosa Avenue, north of Hillside. Staff report by Jack tam. Mayor Nikels opened meeting for public hearing. a Dick Scott, 111 W. 9th Street, Upland, appellant, asked if this t ' could be continued until the park issue wan resolved without prejua. „ their appeal. ' Thera being no further reaponse, public bearing was cloned. Motion: Moved by Dahl. Seconded by Frost to continue appeal until May 19. 1982. Motion carricd unanimously 5-0. 4C ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING ORDINANCE AHENW Fl7T 82 -03. Amading C -1 and C-2 zones to allow &made was subject to review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Staff report presented by Dm Coleman, Associate Planner. City Clark Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 174. ORDINANCE NO. 174 (First Beading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS 61.022, 61.027A and 61.0278 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA i INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE BY DEFINING nN ARCADE AND ADDING SECTIONS 61.027A (b) (5) B AND 61.027B (d) (6), AND AMENDING SECTION 61.0273 (b) (1) (A) TO PROVIDE FOR ARCADE USES IN THE C-1 AND C -2 ZONE AND REQUIRING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. Notion: Moved by Dahl, secontxd by Schlosser to valve further reading of Ordinance No 174. Motion Carried unanimously 5 -0. hit'= 4 'it,t4'I;�,K'�i,°''+..o.�r.;b�. ..»'�i °_'•e:`. <. • a ;� . �;,, - � .1 -ice • City Council Minutes 4 April 21, 1982 «a : Page Five , , Mayor Mlkels opened the mating for public hearing. • Al Colt commented on the excessive noise generated by arcades. ty �• • Brett Praetor, 6078 Opal Strut, inquired if this amendment would prohibit machines it liquor stores. k- Dan Coleman, Associate Planner, replied that this p rticular zoning { ordinance would not prohibit them from liquor stores. Brett Proctor Inquired if there ws any justification for a limit of three. ` Dan Coleman replied that th- size of the mathineas along with the limited space available was the basis for a limit of three. • Patrick Preece, 8714 Sommerset, stated he did not feel arcade uses should be allowed within the City limits, and particularly not in liquor stores. • Tom Wickmq Captain, Rancho Cucamonga Shurlff, reported that an In-house study indicated wa really have not had a lot of problems state arcades have been in the City. However, be stated he was not in favor of arcade uses in liquor stores because of the shoplifting problm or in close proximity to schools. i • Joe Maeella, Owner of J.J.'s Arcata, concurred that arcade uses should not be allowed in ?-tquor stores. There being an further response, public hearing van closed. � Councilman Frost stated although he vas agreeable to setting a date for second reading, we were on the borderline of dictating what Is beat for the citizens for their own good as opposed to letting the free enterpeim system raise to Its own level. He stressed that this should not be taken lightly. Mayor Mikels stated that suce of the direction given by Council prior to the Ordinance being drafted revolved around proximity of arcades to schools and their "a in liquor states. He noted that the Ordinance does provide for some of these individual concerns to be addressed through the conditional use permit process. Councilman Buquet stated it is easy for us to say adult supervision but difficult i to enforce. He suggested that second reading be scheduled for Joan 2nd to allow adequate time to study the matter. Council concurred and second reading + was scheduled for Junta 2, 1982. S. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS ( SA. REQUEST FROM SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FOR SUPPORT OF WASTE TO ENERGY PROJECT Staff Report by Lauren Wasserman, City Clark Wasserman rend title of Resolution No. 82 -13. RESOLUTION 110. 82 -73 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIr'ORNIA URGING THE SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT TO PROMOTE THE RECOVERY OF MATERIALS AND ENERGY FROM SOLID WASTE. .t. !-; Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Schlosser to waive further reading. t` lotion carried 5-0. ,'. Mayor Mlkele reviewed the comments at the last mating of SANBAG regarding this r project. He stated that in his opinion gains out for bids at this time for a facility of this type Se premature. After general discussion, the following motion was made. �+�'�.•� Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Buquet to approve Resolution No. 82 -75. z. r. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. �! !T D r 1. 011 i t: I 0 WE', Eity ;Council bina[ea 1.- ' ApC cil'.21, L82 , 58. A RFSOLOTION AMPNOING TIME FOR COUNCIL MEETINGS. Staff Report by Lauren Vasearmm. City Coua =*r ngs Will begin at 7:30 p.m. ' ,a City Clerk Wasserman reed e;re Title of Resolution No. 82 -76. RESOLUTION 82 -76 10ZSOL.UTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFDLLYIA, AMENDING THE TIME OF REGULAR tMINCS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. Notion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Euquot to waive further reading and to approve Resolution No. 82 -76. Notion Carried Unanimusly 5 -0. 6. CITY ATTORNEYIS REPORTS. There were none. 7. ADDED ITEM Council Dahl stated that be bad asked to staff to look into Resolution for clarification for North Alta Loma regarding 20,000 square loot lot and that this Res,lu0on will be brought up at the next City Council meeting. R. WOURNMEIT Motion: Moved bM 8uquet, seconded by Dahl :o adjourn. 'Motion carried unallmously 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. 'ow':.. Respectfully Submitted, Ginny Zientara Acting Deputy City Clerk RANCHO CUCAMONGA <: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES . April 21, 1982 1. CAI I. TO ORDER A meeting of the Redevelopment Agency we hold on Wednesday. April 21, 1982 at the Lion Park Community Center, 9161 Base Lim Road. The meeting vas called to order at 6:40 p.m. by Chairman Jon Mikela. Present wro: Agency members Janes C. Frost, Phillip D. Schlosser, Charles Buquat, Richard Dahl and Chairman Jon Mikols. Also Present were: Executive Director, Lauren M. Wasserman; legal Counsel John Brow; Coamnity Development Director, Jack Lam; Senior Planar, Time Boodle. Chairman Mikela called an executive session at 6:42 p.m. Redevelopment Meeting reconvened at 7:02 p.m, with all members of Agency and .toff present. 2. CONSENT CALENDAR No Items submitted 3. STAFF REPORTS 3A. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN AGENCY AND THE FOOTHILL FIRE DISTRICT John Brow briefly summarized the agreement endorsed by the Foothill Fire District Board. :i-2b,4, s N t Chairman Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Buquet to approve agreement between agency and Foothill Fire District. lotion carried unanimously 5 -0. 3B APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN AGENCY AND THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO John Brow summarized the agreement between the agency and the County of San Bernardino. Chairman Mikela opened the meting for public hearing. There being no response, public hearing was closed. ` lotion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Frost to approve agreemant between agency and County of San Bernardine. Notion Carried 5 -0. John Brow noted for the record that it has been the Agency's practice in a spirit of cooperation to extend formally and informally the statute of limi- tations sat out in the Community Redevelopment Inv with respect to challenges to this redevelopment plan. He noted that the legal effect of Council's action tonight is to have concluded that extension with respect to these agencies and all others who my choose to challenge the plan under those particular provisions of the Community Redevelopment Law. 3C ADDED ITEM: CHANCE OF STARTING TIME FOR REDEVELOPMENT It was the consensus of Council that in the future Redevelopment meetings be ` scheduled at 7:OU p.m. and City Council at 7:30 p.m. So moved by Frost, -, seconded by Dahl. Notion Carried unanimously 5-0. r. 4. ADJOURHMPNT Al Motion: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Schlosser to adjourn the Redevelopment ' Meeting. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. The meeting adjourned at 7:14 p.m.'� vA �. Respectfully submitted, z ,,pv, Canny ZSaatara Kx`'�~ if - ti _ Acting Assistant Secretary �,.1�4j �,N+r,• s �.7i :a-i' y.k, #� -• µ'eVC�- Vn_,] r a... n T9'ni_. li l.z