HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-06-06 - Agenda PacketAGENDA
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD -HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY -
SUCCESSOR AGENCY -PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY -CITY COUNCIL
Wednesday, June 6, 2018
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
REGULAR MEETINGS: 1st and 3rd Wednesdays - 7:00 P.M.
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
CLOSED SESSION TAPIA CONFERENCE ROOM 5:00 P.M.
REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCILCHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.
MEMBERS:
MAYOR L. Dennis Michael CITY MANAGER John R. Gillison
MAYOR PRO TEM Lynne B. Kennedy CITYATTORNEY James L. Markman
COUNCIL MEMBERS William Alexander CITY CLERK Janice C. Reynolds
Sam Spagnolo CITYTREASURER James C. Frost
Diane Williams
Rancho Cucamonga City Council Mission Statement
. Make decisions, and be perceived as making decisions, for the general welfare of the community.
. Always work to improve existing services and develop policies to meet the expected as well as anticipated
needs of the community.
. Work together cooperatively to respect all persons and their ideas in order to develop and maintain the trust of
the community.
Reflect the community's desires and priorities by assuring that decisions accurately reflect the community's
interests by fairly translating public feedback into public policy.
. Enhance the quality of life of all Rancho Cucamonga residents through the continued pursuit of excellence and
commitment to the City's core values and goals.
• Set the vision for the community for the future.
• Have a professional, objective and respectful relationship with each other in order to more effectively address
the challenges of the future.
Page 1
.A.%
INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC
[ UCAMONGA
TO ADDRESS THE FIRE BOARD, HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY. SUCCESSOR AGENCYY,
PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITYAND CITYCOUNCIL
The Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority and City Council encourage free
expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the Agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others
have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson
may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from
clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience.
The public may address the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority and City Council by
filling out a speaker card and submitting it to the City Clerk. The speaker cards are located on the wall at the back of the Chambers, at
the front desk behind the staff table and at the City Clerk's desk. Any handouts for the Fire Board, Successor Agency, Public Financing
Authority or City Council should be given to the City Clerk for distribution.
During "Public Communications," your name will be called to speak on any item listed or not listed on the agenda in the order in which it
was received. The "Public Communications" period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the business portion of the
agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given
priority, and no further speaker cards for these business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the
business portion of the agenda commences. Any other "Public Communications" which have not concluded during this one-hour period
may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per
individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak.
If you are present to speak on an "Advertised Public Hearing" or on an "Administrative Hearing" Item(s), your name will be alled when
that item is being discussed, in the order in which it was received. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as
deemed necessary bythe Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak.
AGENDA BACK-UP MATERIALS
Staff reports and back-up materials for agenda items are available for review at the City Clerk's counter, the City's Public Libraries and
on the City's website. A complete copy of the agenda is also available at the desk located behind the staff table during the Council
meeting.
LIVE BROADCAST
Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority and CityCouncil meetings are broadcast live on
Channel 3 for those with cable television access. Meetings are rebroadcast on the second and fourth Wednesdays of each month at 7:00
p.m. Streaming Video on Demand is available on the City's website at www.cityofrc.us/cityhall/council/videos.asp.
The Fire Board, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority and City Council meet regularly on the first and third
Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive.
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and
Public Financing Authority.
Copies of the agendas and minutes can be found @ www.cityofrc.us
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 477-2700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
Please silence all cell phones and devices while the meeting is in session.
Page 2
JUNE 6, 2018
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, SUCCESSOR AGENCY, HOUSING
SUCCESSOR AGENCY, PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITYAND
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
D1. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9591 SAN BERNARDINO ROAD;
NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, REPRESENTING THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND MARTIN ZVIRBULIS, GENERAL
MANAGER/CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT;
REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS.—CITY
D2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCES
DIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2 REGARDING LABOR
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION
(RCCEA) AND TEAMSTERS LOCAL 1932. — CITY
D3. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTH WEST
CORNER OF ARROW ROUTE AND ROCHESTER AVENUE AS PARCEL NUMBERS
0229-012-08-0000 AND 0229-012-10-0000; NEGOTIATING PARTIES MATT BURRIS,
DEPUTY CITY MANAGER/ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT,
REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND DAN DE LA PAZ,
REPRESENTING THE PROPERTYOWNER; REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. — CITY
D4. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(A) — SOUTHWEST VOTERS REGISTRATION
EDUCATION PROJECT AND LOUISA OLLAGUE V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA;
CASE NO. CIVRS 1603632. — CITY
Page 3
D5. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(d)(1) — CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH;
CITATION AND NOTIFICATION OF PENALTY, CSHO ID H2O40, INSPECTION #1281145.
- CITY
CLOSED SESSION TO RECESS TO THE REGULAR FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, HOUSING
SUCCESSOR AGENCY, SUCCESSOR AGENCY, PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY, AND CITY COUNCIL
MEETINGS AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT CITY HALL, LOCATED AT 10500 CIVIC CENTER
DRIVE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA.
THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY,
SUCCESSOR AGENCY, PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY, AND CITY COUNCIL WILL BE CALLED TO
ORDER. IT IS THE INTENT TO CONCLUDE THE MEETINGS BY 10:00 P.M., UNLESS EXTENDED BY
CONCURRENCE OF THE FIRE BOARD, AGENCIES, AUTHORITY BOARD AND COUNCIL.
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call: Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Alexander, Spagnolo and Williams
Al. Presentation of Life Saving Citations for Bystander CPR by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire
Protection District.
A2. Presentation of the 45th Annual We -Tip National Conference "Mayor of the Year" Award.
This is the time and place for the general public to address the Fire Protection District,
Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City
Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Fire Protection
District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City
Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire Protection District,
Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Council
may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.
Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the
Mayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to
be addressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council
not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum
Page 4
are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or
engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.
The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the
business portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic
contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for
these business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business
portion of the agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during
this one hour period may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.
C1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: Special Meeting of April 17, 2018. 10
C2. Consideration to Approve Bi -Weekly Payroll in the Amount of $1,159,428.63 and Weekly Check
Registers in the Amount of $959,803.90 Dated May 08, 2018 Through May 28, 2018 and 16
Electronic Debit Register for the Month of April 2018 in the Amount of $585,670.64.
C3. Consideration of a Resolution Approving the Annual Local Responsibility Area Wildland 34
Protection Agreement with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection in the
Amount of $39,492.
RESOLUTION NO. FD 18-002
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF 36
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY AREA WILDLAND
PROTECTION AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
AND FIRE PROTECTION (CAL FIRE) FOR SERVICES FROM JULY 1, 2018 TO JUNE 30,
2019
C4. Consideration for the Approval of a Four Year Agreement for Maintenance, Support and Cloud -
Hosting of the City's Land Management Software Platform with Accela, Inc. in the Total Amount of 38
$784,157; Funded in the Amount of $588,118 from the City General Fund and $196,039 from the
Fire District Fire Fund; and Authorize an Additional Appropriation to Pay for the First Year of the
Agreement.
D1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: Special Meeting of April 17, 2018. 10
E1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: Special Meeting of April 17, 2018. 10
Page 5
F1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: Special Meeting of April 17, 2018. 10
G1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: Special Meeting of April 17, 2018. 10
G2. Consideration to Approve Bi -Weekly Payroll in the Amount of $2,270,070.51 and Weekly Check 40
Registers in the Amount of $3,325,338.00 Dated May 08, 2018 Through May 28, 2018 and
Electronic Debit Register for the Month of April 2018 in the Amount of $800,914.17.
G3. Consideration for the approval of a Four -Year Agreement for Maintenance, Support and Cloud -
Hosting of the City's Land Management Software Platform with Accela, Inc. in the Total Amount of 58
$784,157; Funded in the Amount of $588,118 from the City General Fund and $196,039 from the
Fire District Fire Fund; and Authorize An Additional Appropriation of Fire Funds Pay for the First
Year of the Agreement.
G4. Consideration of a Five Year Support and Maintenance Agreement for Chameleon Software to 60
HLP I nc., in the Total Amount of $150,885 for the Animal Care Management Platform.
G5. Consideration of a Contract with Wright Construction Engineering Corporation in an Amount of 62
$296,571, plus a 10% contingency for the Detention Basin Improvements at Rancho Wash
located on Hillside Road West of Buckthorn Avenue.
G6. Consideration of a Contract with Calpromax Engineering Inc., in an Amount of $639,464, Plus a
10% Contingency, and an Appropriation in the Amount of $725,500 from the AB 2766 Air Quality 67
Fund for the Pacific Electric Trail Safety Enhancements and Green Bike Lane Along Base Line
Road, MSRC Contract No. ML14070 Project.
G7. Consideration of a Street Frontage Reimbursement Agreement (SRA -65) for Construction of
Public Street Improvements on the West Side of Wardman Bullock Road, from the Southerly 74
Boundary of Tract 16324 to the Northerly Boundary of Tract 18741, Excluding Parcel Map 15550
Frontages (Approximately 1,500 Feet) in Conjunction with Development of Tract 16324,
Submitted by Meritage Homes.
G8.
Consideration to Reappropriate Funds in the Amount of $89,150 from the Measure I Fund for
79
Fiscal Year 2017/18 Installation of Traffic Signal Video Detection at Fifteen Locations Project.
G9.
Consideration of Amendment No. 002 Authorizing an Increase to Professional Services
175
Agreement with Tanko Streetlighting, Inc. in the Amount of $82,000.
G10.
Consideration of Amendment No. 001 Authorizing an Increase to the Professional Services
Agreement with Tanko Streetlighting, Inc. in the Amount of $100,000 for Fiscal Year 2017/18,
178
Authorizing the Renewal of the Professional Services Agreement for Fiscal Year 2018/19, and
Authorizing an Increase to the Professional Services Agreement in the Amount of $60,000 for
Fiscal Year 2018/19.
G11.
Consideration of an Agreement to Dedicate an Easement for Street and Related Purposes for the
Extension of Santa Anita Avenue through the Edison Power Corridor, North of 6th Street,
181
Submitted by Southern California Edison Company on Behalf of the Developer, CRP Oakmont
Santa Anita, LLC.
G12.
Consideration of Parcel Map No. 19836; Associated Improvement Agreement, Improvement
Securities, Monumentation Cash Deposit; and Ordering the Annexation to Landscape
190
Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Light Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 2.
RESOLUTION NO. 18-033
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 193
CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO
Page 6
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (GENERAL CITY) FOR PROJECT CASE
NO. PM 19836
RESOLUTION NO. 18-034
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO STREET 198
LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS) FOR PROJECT CASE
NO. PM 19836
RESOLUTION NO. 18-035
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 203
CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO STREET
LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 (LOCAL STREETS) FOR PROJECT CASE NO.
PM 19836
G13. Consideration to Accept Public Improvements on the Northwest Corner of Day Creek Boulevard 208
and Etiwanda Avenue for Tract 16226-2 as Complete, File the Notice of Completion and Authorize
Release of Bonds.
G14. Consideration of a Contract with R.J. Noble Company in an Amount of $740,550, Plus a 10% 211
Contingency for the Fiscal Year 2017/18 Local Overlay Pavement Rehabilitation
G15. Consideration of a Contract with TSR Construction and Inspection in an Amount of $44,170, Plus
a 10% Contingency for the McKinley Street Drainage Improvement Project located on McKinley 215
Street West of Willow Drive.
G16. Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Amended Measure "I" Five -Year Capital Improvement 220
Plan Covering Fiscal Years 2017/2022.
RESOLUTION NO. 18-037
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 222
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE AMENDED MEASURE "I" FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM COVERING FISCAL YEARS 2017/2022 FOR
EXPENDITURE OF MEASURE "I" FUNDS
G17. Consideration of the Addition of a Communications and Marketing Officer Job Classification and
225
Approve a Resolution Adopting the Salary Schedule for RCCEA Covered Employees.
RESOLUTION NO. 18-036
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
232
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING UPDATED RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION SALARY SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017-18
G18. Consideration of Resolutions Pertaining to the November 6, 2018 General Municipal Election.
233
RESOLUTION NO. 18-038
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL
MUNICIPAL ELECTION ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2018, FOR THE ELECTION OF
235
CERTAIN OFFICERS AND REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO TO CONSOLIDATE THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD PURSUANT TO
ELECTIONS CODE SECTION 10403 RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES
RESOLUTION NO. 18-039
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE 237
PERTAINING TO THE PREPARATION OF MATERIALS SUBMITTED TO THE
ELECTORATE AND THE COSTS OF THE CANDIDATE STATEMENT FOR THE
NOVEMBER 6, 2018 ELECTION
G19. Consideration of a Project Study Report and Determination of Statutory Exemption for the 239
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation Project Located Between Whittram Avenue and Napa Street.
Page 7
- H. CONSENT ORDINANCES
- I. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM
J1. Rancho Cucamonga City Council/Fire Protection District Joint Public Hearing to Consider New
and Amended Fees for Various City Departments (Fire District, Finance, Library Services, 336
Building and Safety, Engineering and Planning) and First Reading And Introduction of Ordinance
No. 931.
RESOLUTION NO. FD 18-003
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE 344
PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING, REVISING,
AND UPDATING VARIOUS FEES
19110-birk "W109011111100 elm
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AMENDING THE RANCHO
CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE THE APPOINTMENT OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE 356
HEARING OFFICER, PERMIT, FEE AND APPEAL REQUIREMENTS FOR TAXICAB SERVICES,
SALES OF GOODS OR MERCHANDISE FROM VEHICLES AND CHARITABLE AND
NONCHARITABLE SOLICITATION PERMITS AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF
RESOLUTION NO. 18-040
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, 359
ADOPTING FEES FOR SERVICES PERFORMED BY FINANCE, LIBRARY SERVICES,
BUILDING AND SAFETY, ENGINEERING, AND PLANNING
J2. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance No. 930, Amending Title 17 of the Municipal Code to
Revise Sign Regulations for Public Property. 383
(Item Will Be Continued To June 20, 2018 City Council Meeting)
L. COUNCIL BUSINESS
L1. COUNCIL ANNOUCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
L2. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
Page 8
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee,
hereby certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on
May 31, 2018, at least seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500
Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, and on the City's website.
Page 9
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Linda A. Troyan, City Clerk Services Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: SPECIAL MEETING OF APRIL
17, 2018.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the April 17, 2018 Meeting Minutes for the Fire Protection District, Housing
Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority and City Council.
BACKGROUND:
N/A
ANALYSIS:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Minutes
Page 10
April 17, 2018
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CLOSED SESSION, FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY, SUCCESSOR AGENCY,
PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AND CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETINGS MINUTES
The City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council held a closed session on Tuesday, April 17, 2018 in the Tapia
Conference Room at the Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Mayor Michael
called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Present were Council Members: Bill Alexander, Diane Williams, Sam Spagnolo, Mayor Pro Tem Lynne Kennedy
and Mayor L. Dennis Michael.
Also present were: John Gillison, City Manager; James L. Markman, City Attorney; Elisa Cox, Deputy City
Manager/Cultural & Civic Services, Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services, and Matt Burris
Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development.
No public communications were made.
No discussion or actions were taken.
D1. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9591 SAN BERNARDINO ROAD; NEGOTIATING PARTIES
JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND
MARTIN ZVIRBULIS, GENERAL MANAGER/CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CUCAMONGA VALLEY
WATER DISTRICT; REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. — CITY
D2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF BASE LINE
ROAD AND DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AS PARCEL NUMBERS 1089-031-360000; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES CITY MANAGER JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND STEVE PONTELL REPRESENTING DAY CREEK SENIOR HOUSING
PARTNERS, LP; REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. — CITY
D3. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR
PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (RCCEA) AND TEAMSTERS LOCAL
1932. — CITY
**DRAFT**
April 17, 20181 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Financing Authority and City Council Special Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 1 of 5
Page 11
D4. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF ARROW
ROUTE AND ROCHESTER AVENUE AS PARCEL NUMBERS 0229-012-08-0000 AND 0229-012-10-
0000; NEGOTIATING PARTIES MATT BURRIS, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER/ECONOMIC &
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND DAN
DE LA PAZ, REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER; REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. — CITY
D5. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT 12467 BASE LINE ROAD IDENTIFIED AS
PARCEL NUMBERS 1090-331-03 AND 04, AND 1089-581-04; NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN
GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, CANDYCE BURNETT, CITY PLANNER AND DOMINICK PEREZ,
ASSOCIATE PLANNER, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND JOSEPH
FILIPPI REPRESENTING FILIPPI WINERY REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS FOR NEGOTIATING THE
PRICE, TERMS OF PAYMENT, OR BOTH — CITY
The closed session recessed at 6:15 p.m.
The special meetings of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor
Agency, Public Financing Authority and the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council were held on April 17, 2018 in
the Council Chambers at City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Mayor
Michael called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Present were Council Members: Bill Alexander, Diane Williams, Sam Spagnolo, Mayor Pro Tem Lynne Kennedy and
Mayor L. Dennis Michael.
Also present were: John Gillison, City Manager; James L. Markman, City Attorney; and Linda A. Troyan, City Clerk
Services Director.
Council Member Spagnolo led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Al. Presentation of a Proclamation declaring April 22, 2018 as "Earth Day" and participation in the Energy
Upgrade California "Do Your Thing" Energy Efficiency Campaign and recognition of GRID Alternatives and
program participating residents for their contributions towards making Rancho Cucamonga a more healthy
and environmentally sustainable community.
Deborah Allen, Management Aide -Sustainability, provided a PowerPoint presentation on the City's effort for Energy
Efficiency and Conservation and presented a video highlighting the partnership between the City and GRID
Alternatives, a non-profit organization. Residents interested in the program can obtain additional information at
www.gridalternatives.org
Mayor Michael and Members of the City Council presented a Certificate of Recognition to Grid Alternatives for their
participation in the City's Energy Efficiency efforts and Deborah Allen, Management Aide -Sustainability, accepted a
proclamation on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga declaring April 22, 2018 as "Earth Day".
**DRAFT**
April 17, 20181 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Financing Authority and City Council Special Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 2 of 5
Page 12
B1. Enrique Espinoza, VFW 8680, asked the City for help in obtaining a building to rent for VFW functions that
is affordable due to the rent increase they are currently facing.
Mayor Michael indicated that staff will be available to reach out to them.
C1. Consideration to Approve Bi -Weekly Payroll in the Amount of $674,115 and Weekly Check Registers
in the Amount of $3,026,790 Dated March 28, 2018 through April 09, 2018 and Electronic Debit
Register for the Month of March in the Amount of $374,019.
C2. Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedule as of March 31, 2018.
C3. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: Regular Meeting of March 21, 2018.
MOTION: Moved by Board Member Spagnolo, seconded by Board Member Alexander, to approve Consent Calendar
Items C1. through C3. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
D1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: Regular Meeting of March 21, 2018.
MOTION: Moved by Vice -President Kennedy, seconded by Council Member Spagnolo, to approve Consent
Calendar Items D1. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
F1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: Regular Meeting of March 21, 2018.
MOTION: Moved by Agency Member Williams, seconded by Agency Member Alexander, to approve Consent
Calendar Items F1. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
G1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: Regular Meeting of March 21, 2018.
G2. Consideration to Approve Bi -Weekly Payroll in the Amount of $1,513,178 and Weekly Check
Registers in the Amount of $5,628,174 Dated March 28, 2018 through April 09, 2018 and
Electronic Debit Register for the Month of March in the Amount of $2,029,919.
G3. Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedule as of March 31, 2018.
G4. Consideration to Approve Sports Advisory Council Fall/Winter 2018 Field Allocations.
**DRAFT**
April 17, 20181 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Financing Authority and City Council Special Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 3 of 5
Page 13
G5. Consideration of Approval of Amendment No. 10 Renewing the Professional Services
Agreements for All City Management Services, Inc. (CO#13-150) for Professional Crossing
Guard Services for Fiscal Year 2018/19 in the Amount of $393,000.
G6. Consideration of a Contract with California Professional Engineering, Inc., in the amount of
$190,974, plus a 10% contingency, and an Appropriation in the Amount of $89,150 from the
Measure I Fund for the Fiscal Year 2017/18 Installation of Traffic Signal Video Detection at
Fifteen Locations Project.
G7. Consideration of a Revised Amended and Restated Agreement Between the City of Rancho
Cucamonga and Cucamonga Valley Water District for Waiver of Development Fees.
G8. Consideration of Amendment No. 001 Authorizing an Increase to the Professional Services
Agreement (CO 17-022) with Curtis J. Dahle, AIA, Architect, in the Amount of $87,400 for the
Design of a New Warehouse Building.
G9. Consideration of a Resolution Supporting Proposition 69 on the June 2018 Ballot to Prevent
new Transportation Funds from being Diverted for Non -Transportation Purposes.
RESOLUTION NO. 18-019
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 69 ON THE JUNE 2018 BALLOT TO PREVENT NEW
TRANSPORTATION FUNDS FROM BEING DIVERTED FOR NON -TRANSPORTATION
PURPOSES
G10. Consideration of Amendment No. 4 to a Use Agreement with the County of San Bernardino for
the Use of 80 Parking Spaces in the County's Superior Court West Parking Lot.
G11. Consideration to Schedule a Public Hearing for May 16, 2018 for Placement of Liens for Cost
of Nuisance Abatement Services on Private Property.
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Spagnolo, seconded by Council Member Williams, to approve Consent
Calendar Items G1 through G11. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
E1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: Regular Meeting of March 21, 2018.
MOTION: Moved by Agency Member Spagnolo, seconded by Vice -Chair Kennedy, to approve Consent
Calendar Items E1. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
No Items.
No Items.
**DRAFT**
April 17, 20181 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Financing Authority and City Council Special Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 4 of 5
Page 14
No Items.
K1. Presentation on WalletHub's 2017 Safest Cities in America; Update on Design for the West Side
Public Safety Station and expanded Victoria Gardens Substation (Verbal Report).
John Gillison, City Manager, provided a PowerPoint presentation on a Study released by WalletHub on WalletHub
2017: Safest Cities in America, which ranked the City of Rancho Cucamonga number 46 as the safest city in the
nation and the 2nd in the State of California. City Manager Gillison introduced Fire Chief Ivan Rojer and Deputy
Fire Chief Mike McCliman who provided an update on the design for the west side public safety station and Chief
of Police Donny Mahoney who provided an update on the expanded Victoria Gardens Substation.
In response to Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy's request for clarification, City Manager Gillison explained capacity and
space needs for the stations, services to be offered at a substation, the design structure, and retail corridor
servicing for businesses along Foothill.
City Manager Gillison remarked the City has a strong commitment for public safety.
Mayor Michael requested the City Council receive a copy of the PowerPoint Presentation and thanked staff for their
efforts in keeping the City safe.
L1. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES
Mayor Michael reported that he attended a meeting with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority last
week regarding consolidated transportation services.
L2. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
None.
Mayor Michael adjourned the meeting at 7:50 p.m.
Approved: **********
Respectfully submitted,
Linda A.Troyan,
City Clerk Services Director
**DRAFT**
April 17, 20181 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Financing Authority and City Council Special Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 5 of 5
Page 15
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: President and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Tamara Layne, Finance Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE BI -WEEKLY PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT
OF $1,159,428.63 AND WEEKLY CHECK REGISTERS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$959,803.90 DATED MAY 08, 2018 THROUGH MAY 28, 2018 AND
ELECTRONIC DEBIT REGISTER FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 2018 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $585,670.64.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Fire Board approve payment of demands as presented.
BACKGROUND:
N/A
ANALYSIS:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adequate budgeted funds are available for the payment of demands per the attached listing.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 Check Register
Attachment 1 Electronic Register
Page 16
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00007962
05/09/2018
ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC.
19,231.14
0.00
19,231.14
AP
00007963
05/09/2018
CALIF GOVERNMENT VEBA/RANCHO CUCAMONGA
13,390.00
0.00
13,390.00
AP
00007964
05/09/2018
NORMAN A TRAUB ASSOCIATES
4,777.50
0.00
4,777.50
AP
00007965
05/09/2018
POWEREX CORP
39,489.80
0.00
39,489.80
AP
00007966
05/09/2018
RCCEA
1,888.50
0.00
1,888.50
AP
00007967
05/09/2018
RCPFA
11,512.57
0.00
11,512.57
AP
00007968
05/09/2018
RIVERSIDE, CITY OF
6,909.00
0.00
6,909.00
AP
00007969
05/09/2018
SHELL ENERGY NORTH AMERICA
203,593.75
0.00
203,593.75
AP
00007970
05/09/2018
US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
12,618.65
0.00
12,618.65
AP
00007971
05/16/2018
RE ASTORIA 2 LLC
114,165.99
0.00
114,165.99
AP
00007972
05/16/2018
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
126.00
0.00
126.00
AP
00007973
05/16/2018
WESTERN RENEWABLE ENERGY GENERATION INFO
133.04
0.00
133.04
AP
00007974
05/23/2018
AHUMADA, ALEXANDER R
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00007975
05/23/2018
ALMAND, LLOYD
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00007976
05/23/2018
BANTAU, VICTORIA
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00007977
05/23/2018
BAZAL, SUSAN
0.00
585.98
585.98
AP
00007978
05/23/2018
BELL, MICHAEL L.
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00007979
05/23/2018
BERRY, DAVID
0.00
1,152.40
1,152.40
AP
00007980
05/23/2018
BROCK, ROBIN
0.00
923.03
923.03
AP
00007981
05/23/2018
CAMPBELL, GERALD
0.00
826.04
826.04
AP
00007982
05/23/2018
CAMPBELL, STEVEN
0.00
1,327.27
1,327.27
AP
00007983
05/23/2018
CARNES, KENNETH
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00007984
05/23/2018
CLABBY, RICHARD
0.00
1,152.40
1,152.40
AP
00007985
05/23/2018
CLOUGHESY, DONALD R
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00007986
05/23/2018
CORCORAN, ROBERT
0.00
540.73
540.73
AP
00007987
05/23/2018
COSTELLO, DENNIS M
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00007988
05/23/2018
COX, KARL
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00007989
05/23/2018
CRANE, RALPH
0.00
968.28
968.28
AP
00007990
05/23/2018
CROSSLAND, WILBUR
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00007991
05/23/2018
DAGUE, JAMES
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00007992
05/23/2018
DE ANTONIO, SUSAN
0.00
540.73
540.73
AP
00007993
05/23/2018
DEANS, JACKIE
0.00
585.98
585.98
AP
00007994
05/23/2018
DOMINICK, SAMUEL A.
0.00
923.03
923.03
AP
00007995
05/23/2018
EAGLESON, MICHAEL
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00007996
05/23/2018
EGGERS, BOB
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00007997
05/23/2018
FRITCHEY, JOHN D.
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00007998
05/23/2018
HEYDE, DONALD
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00007999
05/23/2018
INTERLICCHIA, ROSALYN
0.00
249.30
249.30
AP
00008000
05/23/2018
KILMER, STEPHEN
0.00
1,152.40
1,152.40
AP
00008001
05/23/2018
LANE, WILLIAM
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00008002
05/23/2018
LARKIN, DAVID W
0.00
1,538.02
1,538.02
AP
00008003
05/23/2018
LEE, ALLAN J.
0.00
1,264.92
1,264.92
AP
00008004
05/23/2018
LENZE, PAUL E
0.00
1,093.58
1,093.58
AP
00008005
05/23/2018
LONGO, JOE
0.00
183.34
183.34
AP
00008006
05/23/2018
LUTTRULL, DARRELL
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00008007
05/23/2018
MACKALL, BEVERLY
0.00
509.70
509.70
AP
00008008
05/23/2018
MAYFIELD, RON
0.00
1,304.96
1,304.96
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 1
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 17
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00008009
05/23/2018
MCKEE, JOHN
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00008010
05/23/2018
MCNEIL, KENNETH
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00008011
05/23/2018
MICHAEL, L. DENNIS
0.00
923.03
923.03
AP
00008012
05/23/2018
MORGAN, BYRON
0.00
1,714.62
1,714.62
AP
00008013
05/23/2018
MYSKOW, DENNIS
0.00
1,152.40
1,152.40
AP
00008014
05/23/2018
NAUMAN, MICHAEL
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00008015
05/23/2018
NEE, RON
0.00
585.98
585.98
AP
00008016
05/23/2018
NELSON, MARY JANE
0.00
183.34
183.34
AP
00008017
05/23/2018
O'BRIEN, TOM
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00008018
05/23/2018
PLOUNG, MICHAEL J
0.00
558.94
558.94
AP
00008019
05/23/2018
POST, MICHAEL R
0.00
1,586.77
1,586.77
AP
00008020
05/23/2018
PROULX, PATRICK
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00008021
05/23/2018
REDMOND, MIKE
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00008022
05/23/2018
ROEDER, JEFF
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00008023
05/23/2018
SALISBURY, THOMAS
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00008024
05/23/2018
SMITH, RONALD
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00008025
05/23/2018
SORENSEN, SCOTT D
0.00
1,736.35
1,736.35
AP
00008026
05/23/2018
SPAGNOLO, SAM
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00008027
05/23/2018
SPAIN, WILLIAM
0.00
826.04
826.04
AP
00008028
05/23/2018
SULLIVAN, JAMES
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00008029
05/23/2018
TAYLOR, STEVE
0.00
1,461.55
1,461.55
AP
00008030
05/23/2018
TULEY, TERRY
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00008031
05/23/2018
VANDERKALLEN, FRANCIS
0.00
982.80
982.80
AP
00008032
05/23/2018
VARNEY, ANTHONY
0.00
923.03
923.03
AP
00008033
05/23/2018
WALTON, KEVIN
0.00
1,538.02
1,538.02
AP
00008034
05/23/2018
YOWELL, TIMOTHY A
0.00
1,304.96
1,304.96
AP
00008035
05/23/2018
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
873.07
0.00
873.07
AP
00008036
05/23/2018
CALIF GOVERNMENT VEBA/RANCHO CUCAMONGA
17,649.97
0.00
17,649.97
AP
00008037
05/23/2018
NORMAN A TRAUB ASSOCIATES
3,675.00
0.00
3,675.00
AP
00008038
05/23/2018
RCCEA
1,924.00
0.00
1,924.00
AP
00008039
05/23/2018
RCPFA
11,512.57
0.00
11,512.57
AP
00008040
05/23/2018
SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT
11,181.95
0.00
11,181.95
AP
00390297
05/09/2018
49ER COMMUNICATIONS
0.00
1,330.00
1,330.00
AP
00390298
05/09/2018
A AND R TIRE SERVICE
209.00
0.00
209.00
AP
00390299
05/09/2018
ADAME, LORI
29.82
0.00
29.82
AP
00390300
05/09/2018
AFLAC GROUP INSURANCE
40.97
0.00
40.97
AP
00390301
05/09/2018
AFLAC GROUP INSURANCE
9,287.34
0.00
9,287.34
AP
00390302
05/09/2018
AIR EXCHANGE INC
0.00
4,152.08
4,152.08
AP
00390303
05/09/2018
ALBERT GROVER & ASSOCIATES
263.00
0.00
263.00
AP
00390304
05/09/2018
ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT
43,892.23
0.00
43,892.23
AP
00390305
05/09/2018
ALL CITIES TOOLS
0.00
63.75
63.75
AP
00390306
05/09/2018
ALL STATE POLICE EQUIPMENT CO. INC.
475.18
0.00
475.18
AP
00390307
05/09/2018
ALLIED NETWORK SOLUTIONS INC
8,520.45
0.00
8,520.45
AP
00390308
05/09/2018
ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT INC
0.00
1,213.80
1,213.80
AP
00390309
05/09/2018
ALPHAGRAPHICS
0.00
282.79
282.79
AP
00390310
05/09/2018
ALTA LOMA ENTERPRISES LLC
289.00
0.00
289.00
AP
00390311
05/09/2018
AMERON POLE PRODUCTS LLC
366.59
0.00
366.59
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 2
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 18
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390312
05/09/2018
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP
0.00
11,090.00
11,090.00
AP
00390313
05/09/2018
AUFBAU CORPORATION
4,150.00
0.00
4,150.00
AP
00390314
05/09/2018
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, THE
1,750.00
0.00
1,750.00
AP
00390315
05/09/2018
BARTEL ASSOCIATES LLC
0.00
2,050.00
2,050.00
AP
00390316
05/09/2018
BELTRAN, OSBALDO ALVARADO
515.89
0.00
515.89
AP
00390317
05/09/2018
BUREAU VERITAS NORTH AMERICA INC
10,498.70
0.00
10,498.70
AP
00390318
05/09/2018
C V W D
201.18
0.00
201.18
AP
00390320
05/09/2018
C V W D
19,913.34
934.26
20,847.60 ***
AP
00390321
05/09/2018
CAGLES APPLIANCE
0.00
590.79
590.79
AP
00390322
05/09/2018
CAL PERS LONG TERM CARE
254.14
0.00
254.14
AP
00390323
05/09/2018
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
100.00
0.00
100.00
AP
00390324
05/09/2018
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
8.44
0.00
8.44
AP
00390325
05/09/2018
CINTAS CORPORATION #150
0.00
248.87
248.87
AP
00390326
05/09/2018
COMMUNITY BANK
2,310.12
0.00
2,310.12
AP
00390327
05/09/2018
COOK, JANA
126.53
0.00
126.53
AP
00390328
05/09/2018
CREATIVE BRAIN LEARNING
1,861.20
0.00
1,861.20
AP
00390329
05/09/2018
CUEVAS, AYLA
16.91
0.00
16.91
AP
00390330
05/09/2018
DELTA DENTAL
1,497.10
0.00
1,497.10
AP
00390331
05/09/2018
DELTA DENTAL
42,058.81
0.00
42,058.81
AP
00390332
05/09/2018
DEVANE, JAMES
4.53
0.00
4.53
AP
00390333
05/09/2018
DOMINGUEZ, DESTINIE
216.00
0.00
216.00
AP
00390334
05/09/2018
ELITE CUSTOMS CONSTRUCTION
2,340.00
0.00
2,340.00
AP
00390335
05/09/2018
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
60.00
0.00
60.00
AP
00390336
05/09/2018
ERICKSON HALL CONSTRUCTION
0.00
77,937.00
77,937.00
AP
00390337
05/09/2018
ESKENAZI, MOISES
125.00
0.00
125.00
AP
00390338
05/09/2018
ESTRENO CATERING
1,550.00
0.00
1,550.00
AP
00390339
05/09/2018
EXECUTIVE AUTO DETAIL
1,020.00
0.00
1,020.00
AP
00390340
05/09/2018
FLEET SERVICES INC.
0.00
33.33
33.33
AP
00390341
05/09/2018
FONTANA RADIATOR SERVICE
0.00
960.00
960.00
AP
00390342
05/09/2018
FRONTIER COMM
643.54
290.41
933.95 ***
AP
00390343
05/09/2018
GJOKA, KLODIAN
262.00
0.00
262.00
AP
00390344
05/09/2018
GRAINGER
0.00
14.03
14.03
AP
00390345
05/09/2018
HEARTSAVERS LLC
176.00
0.00
176.00
AP
00390346
05/09/2018
HI WAY SAFETY INC
2,568.69
0.00
2,568.69
AP
00390347
05/09/2018
HILLS PET NUTRITION SALES INC
271.69
0.00
271.69
AP
00390348
05/09/2018
HOLTZ, LUKE
0.00
301.69
301.69
AP
00390349
05/09/2018
HORIZONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INTERNATIONAL
0.00
309,558.88
309,558.88
AP
00390350
05/09/2018
HOSE MAN INC
36.38
0.00
36.38
AP
00390351
05/09/2018
HOYT LUMBER CO., SM
19.16
91.10
110.26 ***
AP
00390352
05/09/2018
I A A P CALIFORNIA DIVISION
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390353
05/09/2018
INSTITUTE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
3,500.00
0.00
3,500.00
AP
00390354
05/09/2018
INTELESYS ONE INC
803.84
2,612.36
3,416.20 ***
AP
00390355
05/09/2018
INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP INC
7,096.85
0.00
7,096.85
AP
00390356
05/09/2018
J AND S STRIPING CO INC
54,615.79
0.00
54,615.79
AP
00390357
05/09/2018
JOHNNY ALLEN TENNIS ACADEMY
5,356.20
0.00
5,356.20
AP
00390358
05/09/2018
JOSEPH T CHENG DDS INC
131.00
0.00
131.00
AP
00390359
05/09/2018
KVAC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC
0.00
3,692.65
3,692.65
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 3
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 19
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390360
05/09/2018
LANCE SOLL AND LUNGHARD
475.00
0.00
475.00
AP
00390361
05/09/2018
LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS
4,750.00
0.00
4,750.00
AP
00390364
05/09/2018
LOWES COMPANIES INC.
8,955.18
2,225.28
11,180.46 ***
AP
00390365
05/09/2018
M&C CORPORATION
670.20
0.00
670.20
AP
00390366
05/09/2018
MACIAS, DAVID
118.86
0.00
118.86
AP
00390367
05/09/2018
MAGELLAN ADVISORS LLC
21,477.27
0.00
21,477.27
AP
00390368
05/09/2018
MAIN STREET SIGNS
150.00
0.00
150.00
AP
00390369
05/09/2018
MAM-A INC
6,351.52
0.00
6,351.52
AP
00390370
05/09/2018
MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC
1,366.92
0.00
1,366.92
AP
00390371
05/09/2018
MARLINK SA INC
0.00
164.90
164.90
AP
00390372
05/09/2018
MATANGA, JULIE EDWARD
331.50
0.00
331.50
AP
00390373
05/09/2018
MC AVOY & MARKHAM
1,113.75
0.00
1,113.75
AP
00390374
05/09/2018
MEDIA CONTROL SYSTEMS
2,100.00
0.00
2,100.00
AP
00390375
05/09/2018
MGT OF AMERICA INC
11,250.00
0.00
11,250.00
AP
00390376
05/09/2018
MIDWEST TAPE
93.96
0.00
93.96
AP
00390377
05/09/2018
MIJAC ALARM COMPANY
0.00
233.00
233.00
AP
00390378
05/09/2018
MINUTEMAN PRESS
161.63
0.00
161.63
AP
00390379
05/09/2018
MOUNTAIN VIEW SMALL ENG REPAIR
201.44
0.00
201.44
AP
00390380
05/09/2018
MULTICULTURAL BOOKS & VIDEOS
882.98
0.00
882.98
AP
00390381
05/09/2018
MUSIC THEATRE INTERNATIONAL
750.00
0.00
750.00
AP
00390382
05/09/2018
MUSICSTAR
792.00
0.00
792.00
AP
00390383
05/09/2018
NAPA AUTO PARTS
0.00
12.92
12.92
AP
00390384
05/09/2018
NEOPOST-4715 - FIRST DATA REMITCO
21,200.00
0.00
21,200.00
AP
00390385
05/09/2018
NEWCO DISTRIBUTORS INC
895.61
0.00
895.61
AP
00390386
05/09/2018
NGUYEN, THANH
63.94
0.00
63.94
AP
00390387
05/09/2018
NICHOLS, GARY
416.50
0.00
416.50
AP
00390388
05/09/2018
OC TANNER RECOGNITION COMPANY
119.00
0.00
119.00
AP
00390389
05/09/2018
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTRS OF CA
2,717.00
0.00
2,717.00
AP
00390390
05/09/2018
OCLC INC
55.45
0.00
55.45
AP
00390391
05/09/2018
ONTARIO ICE SKATING CENTER
1,646.40
0.00
1,646.40
AP
00390392
05/09/2018
PERRY, SUSAN
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390393
05/09/2018
PRE -PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC
78.38
0.00
78.38
AP
00390394
05/09/2018
PSA PRINT GROUP
38.79
0.00
38.79
AP
00390395
05/09/2018
R AND R AUTOMOTIVE
2,196.95
0.00
2,196.95
AP
00390396
05/09/2018
RBM LOCK AND KEY SERVICE
18.86
0.00
18.86
AP
00390397
05/09/2018
RICHARD WIGHTMAN CONSTRUCTION INC
5,910.00
0.00
5,910.00
AP
00390398
05/09/2018
RICHARD WIGHTMAN CONSTRUCTION INC
9,900.00
0.00
9,900.00
AP
00390399
05/09/2018
RODMAN, JERII E
330.00
0.00
330.00
AP
00390400
05/09/2018
ROTO ROOTER
0.00
1,184.85
1,184.85
AP
00390401
05/09/2018
SAVANNAH ROSE CARRIAGES
450.00
0.00
450.00
AP
00390402
05/09/2018
SBPEA
1,596.04
0.00
1,596.04
AP
00390403
05/09/2018
SC FUELS
0.00
1,298.14
1,298.14
AP
00390404
05/09/2018
SIGN SHOP, THE
0.00
16.16
16.16
AP
00390405
05/09/2018
SKINNER, TERRI
139.58
0.00
139.58
AP
00390406
05/09/2018
SNIDER, LANCE
0.00
200.00
200.00
AP
00390407
05/09/2018
SOLAR CITY CORPORATION
35,056.15
0.00
35,056.15
AP
00390408
05/09/2018
SOUTH COAST AQMD
0.00
514.44
514.44
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 4
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 20
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390413
05/09/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
21,294.11
1,348.96
22,643.07 ***
AP
00390414
05/09/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
382.46
0.00
382.46
AP
00390415
05/09/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RADIO
2,000.00
0.00
2,000.00
AP
00390416
05/09/2018
SPECIALIZED CARE FOSTER FAMILY AGENCY
250.00
0.00
250.00
AP
00390417
05/09/2018
SPRINT
0.00
112.93
112.93
AP
00390418
05/09/2018
STORAGE CONTAINER.COM
269.50
0.00
269.50
AP
00390419
05/09/2018
SUPERION LLC
427.20
0.00
427.20
AP
00390420
05/09/2018
SYSTEMS SOURCE INC
8,987.07
0.00
8,987.07
AP
00390421
05/09/2018
THE COUNSELING TEAM INTERNATIONAL
0.00
600.00
600.00
AP
00390422
05/09/2018
TOLAR, JILLIAN
81.45
0.00
81.45
AP
00390423
05/09/2018
U S LEGAL SUPPORT INC
277.03
0.00
277.03
AP
00390424
05/09/2018
UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CA INC
212.88
0.00
212.88
AP
00390425
05/09/2018
UNITED WAY
116.00
0.00
116.00
AP
00390426
05/09/2018
VERIZON BUSINESS SERVICES
41.32
0.00
41.32
AP
00390427
05/09/2018
VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
60.12
0.00
60.12
AP
00390428
05/09/2018
VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
101.39
0.00
101.39
AP
00390429
05/09/2018
VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY
5,398.40
0.00
5,398.40
AP
00390430
05/09/2018
VIVERAE INC
1,363.20
0.00
1,363.20
AP
00390431
05/09/2018
VORTEX INDUSTRIES INC
0.00
2,188.31
2,188.31
AP
00390432
05/09/2018
WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO
0.00
3,363.84
3,363.84
AP
00390433
05/09/2018
WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY
0.00
1,880.07
1,880.07
AP
00390434
05/09/2018
WESTERN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE
1,380.00
0.00
1,380.00
AP
00390435
05/09/2018
WIGGINS, ALEX Z.
74.88
0.00
74.88
AP
00390436
05/09/2018
WORLD ELITE GYMNASTICS
487.90
0.00
487.90
AP
00390437
05/09/2018
XEROX FINANCIAL SERVICES
298.38
0.00
298.38
AP
00390438
05/09/2018
ZOETIS US LLC
533.07
0.00
533.07
AP
00390439
05/09/2018
AUSTIN, CYNTHIA
250.00
0.00
250.00
AP
00390440
05/10/2018
ABC LOCKSMITHS
1,170.42
4,752.32
5,922.74 ***
AP
00390441
05/10/2018
CALSENSE
2,419.18
0.00
2,419.18
AP
00390442
05/10/2018
CITRUS MOTORS ONTARIO INC
0.00
2,400.73
2,400.73
AP
00390443
05/10/2018
DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION
565.47
0.00
565.47
AP
00390444
05/10/2018
EMCOR SERVICE
7,809.00
0.00
7,809.00
AP
00390445
05/10/2018
EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS
319.96
0.00
319.96
AP
00390446
05/10/2018
FORD OF UPLAND INC
1,499.37
0.00
1,499.37
AP
00390447
05/10/2018
GRANICUS INC
8,289.92
0.00
8,289.92
AP
00390448
05/10/2018
INTERSTATE BATTERIES
104.07
0.00
104.07
AP
00390449
05/10/2018
LIMS AUTO INC
260.37
0.00
260.37
AP
00390451
05/10/2018
OFFICE DEPOT
2,365.14
204.39
2,569.53 ***
AP
00390452
05/10/2018
ORKIN PEST CONTROL
607.00
564.00
1,171.00 ***
AP
00390453
05/10/2018
OVERDRIVE INC
1,439.57
0.00
1,439.57
AP
00390454
05/10/2018
SUNRISE FORD
228.57
0.00
228.57
AP
00390455
05/10/2018
VISTA PAINT
92.96
0.00
92.96
AP
00390456
05/16/2018
6TH & HERMOSA JP/DF LLC
352,528.00
0.00
352,528.00
AP
00390457
05/16/2018
ABLE BUILDING MAINTENANCE
304.75
0.00
304.75
AP
00390458
05/16/2018
ACEY DECY EQUIPMENT INC.
1,616.09
0.00
1,616.09
AP
00390459
05/16/2018
ADAPT CONSULTING INC
888.13
0.00
888.13
AP
00390460
05/16/2018
ALBERRE, SAMI
2,418.00
0.00
2,418.00
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 5
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 21
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390461
05/16/2018
ALL WELDING
3,606.56
0.00
3,606.56
AP
00390462
05/16/2018
ALLEN, DEBORAH
55.31
0.00
55.31
AP
00390463
05/16/2018
ALLSTAR AUTO CENTER
149.10
0.00
149.10
AP
00390464
05/16/2018
ALSHAMSI, MOHAMMED
257.49
0.00
257.49
AP
00390465
05/16/2018
AMERICAN TRAINING RESOURCES INC
1,076.68
0.00
1,076.68
AP
00390466
05/16/2018
ASSI SECURITY
0.00
41,880.00
41,880.00
AP
00390467
05/16/2018
BARELA, TINA
500.00
0.00
500.00
AP
00390468
05/16/2018
BERN MARIES PROMOTIONAL PRODUCTS
1,028.15
0.00
1,028.15
AP
00390469
05/16/2018
BERNELL HYDRAULICS INC
443.99
0.00
443.99
AP
00390470
05/16/2018
BOOKS, CHRISTOPHER
1,137.50
0.00
1,137.50
AP
00390471
05/16/2018
BORDIN MARTORELL LLP
3,518.80
0.00
3,518.80
AP
00390472
05/16/2018
BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE SERVICES INC.
189,561.31
0.00
189,561.31
AP
00390473
05/16/2018
BUSH, PENELOPE
148.52
0.00
148.52
AP
00390476
05/16/2018
C V W D
42,818.17
73.60
42,891.77 ***
AP
00390477
05/16/2018
CAL POLY POMONA FOUNDATION
4,250.00
0.00
4,250.00
AP
00390478
05/16/2018
CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
234.10
0.00
234.10 ***
AP
00390479
05/16/2018
CFCA OPERATIONS CHIEFS SECTION
0.00
75.00
75.00
AP
00390480
05/16/2018
CINTAS CORPORATION #150
263.32
38.65
301.97 ***
AP
00390481
05/16/2018
CLF WAREHOUSE
0.00
31.59
31.59
AP
00390482
05/16/2018
COAST RECREATION INC
533.80
0.00
533.80
AP
00390483
05/16/2018
CONVERGEONE INC.
15,047.00
0.00
15,047.00
AP
00390484
05/16/2018
CORELOGIC SOLUTIONS LLC
257.50
0.00
257.50
AP
00390485
05/16/2018
CORMIER, JAMES
1,137.50
0.00
1,137.50
AP
00390486
05/16/2018
CPRS DISTRICT 11
70.00
0.00
70.00
AP
00390487
05/16/2018
CUNNINGHAM, MAUREEN B.
1,948.00
0.00
1,948.00
AP
00390488
05/16/2018
DELTA TECH RANCHO
387.37
0.00
387.37
AP
00390489
05/16/2018
DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS
115.00
0.00
115.00
AP
00390490
05/16/2018
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
2,654.00
0.00
2,654.00
AP
00390491
05/16/2018
DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES
36.26
0.00
36.26
AP
00390492
05/16/2018
DUGMORE & DUNCAN INC.
239.85
0.00
239.85
AP
00390493
05/16/2018
DUMBELL MAN FITNESS EQUIPMENT, THE
502.66
0.00
502.66
AP
00390494
05/16/2018
E GROUP, THE
450.00
0.00
450.00
AP
00390495
05/16/2018
ED RUZAK & ASSOCIATES INC.
3,126.00
0.00
3,126.00
AP
00390496
05/16/2018
EIGHTH AVENUE ENTERPRISE LLC
62.50
0.00
62.50
AP
00390497
05/16/2018
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
7,020.00
0.00
7,020.00
AP
00390498
05/16/2018
ENVIRONMENTAL RECOVERY SERVICES INC.
1,750.25
0.00
1,750.25
AP
00390499
05/16/2018
ETIWANDA SCHOOL DISTRICT
196.00
0.00
196.00
AP
00390500
05/16/2018
EXECUTIVE AUTO DETAIL
0.00
900.00
900.00
AP
00390501
05/16/2018
EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY
666.26
0.00
666.26
AP
00390502
05/16/2018
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP
13.76
0.00
13.76
AP
00390503
05/16/2018
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP
27.90
0.00
27.90
AP
00390504
05/16/2018
FLEETCREW
1,254.85
0.00
1,254.85
AP
00390505
05/16/2018
FORDE, MARITZA
22.83
0.00
22.83
AP
00390506
05/16/2018
FORTIN LAW GROUP
12,928.57
0.00
12,928.57
AP
00390507
05/16/2018
FRONTIER COMM
475.45
0.00
475.45
AP
00390508
05/16/2018
GAIL MATERIALS
2,340.76
0.00
2,340.76
AP
00390509
05/16/2018
GEOGRAPHICS
2,153.52
0.00
2,153.52
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 6
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 22
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390510
05/16/2018
GLENN B. DORNING INC.
2,945.03
0.00
2,945.03
AP
00390511
05/16/2018
GOLDEN STATE RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
90,787.00
1,362.00
92,149.00 ***
AP
00390512
05/16/2018
GOLDEN STATE RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
90,849.00
1,362.00
92,211.00 ***
AP
00390513
05/16/2018
GOODMAN, ALINA
734.00
0.00
734.00
AP
00390514
05/16/2018
GRAINGER
416.22
104.84
521.06 ***
AP
00390515
05/16/2018
HAMER, ANN
30.00
0.00
30.00
AP
00390516
05/16/2018
HDL COREN AND CONE
4,200.00
0.00
4,200.00
AP
00390517
05/16/2018
HEARTSAVERS LLC
22.00
0.00
22.00
AP
00390518
05/16/2018
HERITAGE EDUCATION GROUP
810.00
0.00
810.00
AP
00390519
05/16/2018
HMC ARCHITECTS
18,162.50
0.00
18,162.50
AP
00390520
05/16/2018
HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 645
401.87
0.00
401.87
AP
00390521
05/16/2018
HOSE HEAVEN
130.81
0.00
130.81
AP
00390522
05/16/2018
HOYT LUMBER CO., SM
63.81
0.00
63.81
AP
00390523
05/16/2018
HUNTINGTON HARDWARE
496.15
0.00
496.15
AP
00390524
05/16/2018
IMAGEMPORIUM, THE
3,221.73
0.00
3,221.73
AP
00390525
05/16/2018
INDERWIESCHE, MATT
1,569.00
0.00
1,569.00
AP
00390526
05/16/2018
INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO INC
840.45
0.00
840.45
AP
00390527
05/16/2018
INLAND BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CO INC
3,245.00
0.00
3,245.00
AP
00390528
05/16/2018
INTELESYS ONE INC
1,173.76
0.00
1,173.76
AP
00390529
05/16/2018
INTERNATIONAL LINE BUILDERS INC
8,095.52
0.00
8,095.52
AP
00390530
05/16/2018
KINDRED CORPORATION
27,597.86
0.00
27,597.86
AP
00390531
05/16/2018
KIRKWOOD, MARGARET
135.00
0.00
135.00
AP
00390532
05/16/2018
KOGGE, MICHAEL
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390533
05/16/2018
KRIEGER, ED
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390534
05/16/2018
KVCR EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION
500.00
0.00
500.00
AP
00390535
05/16/2018
LIFE ASSIST INC
0.00
5,322.89
5,322.89
AP
00390536
05/16/2018
LIGHTHOUSE, THE
349.04
0.00
349.04
AP
00390537
05/16/2018
LINDO, DANIELLE
500.00
0.00
500.00
AP
00390538
05/16/2018
LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS
2,925.00
0.00
2,925.00
AP
00390539
05/16/2018
LIVE OAK DOG OBEDIENCE
312.00
0.00
312.00
AP
00390540
05/16/2018
LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION
2,363.64
0.00
2,363.64
AP
00390541
05/16/2018
LUNA, AYLEEN
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390542
05/16/2018
MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC
8,753.03
0.00
8,753.03
AP
00390543
05/16/2018
MC AVOY & MARKHAM
60,771.00
0.00
60,771.00
AP
00390544
05/16/2018
MCMASTER CARR SUPPLY COMPANY
586.75
0.00
586.75
AP
00390545
05/16/2018
MEDELLIN, RAMON
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390546
05/16/2018
MIDWEST TAPE
281.91
0.00
281.91
AP
00390547
05/16/2018
MOUNTAIN VIEW SMALL ENG REPAIR
85.82
0.00
85.82
AP
00390548
05/16/2018
MUNOZ, LUIS
54.00
0.00
54.00
AP
00390549
05/16/2018
NAPA AUTO PARTS
7.96
41.77
49.73 ***
AP
00390550
05/16/2018
NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL
645.00
0.00
645.00
AP
00390551
05/16/2018
NEW COLOR SCREEN PRINTING & EMBROIDERY
174.56
0.00
174.56
AP
00390552
05/16/2018
NGUYEN, THANH
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390553
05/16/2018
NIXON EGLI EQUIPMENT CO
2,002.14
0.00
2,002.14
AP
00390554
05/16/2018
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTRS OF CA
705.00
0.00
705.00
AP
00390555
05/16/2018
OCLC INC
55.41
0.00
55.41
AP
00390556
05/16/2018
ONTARIO WINNELSON CO
185.33
0.00
185.33
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 7
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 23
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390557
05/16/2018
OPEN APPS INC
15,421.56
0.00
15,421.56
AP
00390558
05/16/2018
ORTIZ, MADISON
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390559
05/16/2018
PACHECO, ART
1,137.50
0.00
1,137.50
AP
00390560
05/16/2018
PACIFIC UTILITY INSTALLATION INC
225.00
0.00
225.00
AP
00390561
05/16/2018
PAPE GROUP INC, THE
1,046.51
0.00
1,046.51
AP
00390562
05/16/2018
PETES ROAD SERVICE INC
116.54
0.00
116.54
AP
00390563
05/16/2018
PLASCENCIA, ELSA LARA
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390564
05/16/2018
PMW ASSOCIATES
393.00
0.00
393.00
AP
00390565
05/16/2018
POLK, DARRYL
487.62
0.00
487.62
AP
00390566
05/16/2018
RAMIREZ-GALLEGOS, CRYSTAL
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390567
05/16/2018
RANCHO YOGA
429.81
0.00
429.81
AP
00390568
05/16/2018
RDO EQUIPMENT COMPANY
241.19
0.00
241.19
AP
00390569
05/16/2018
REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTOR
473.37
0.00
473.37
AP
00390570
05/16/2018
RIVAS, KRISTINA
45.13
0.00
45.13
AP
00390571
05/16/2018
RJ THOMAS MFG COMPANY INC
3,356.00
0.00
3,356.00
AP
00390572
05/16/2018
RMA GROUP
0.00
3,360.00
3,360.00
AP
00390573
05/16/2018
ROMERO, SARAH
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390574
05/16/2018
ROTO ROOTER
1,629.24
0.00
1,629.24
AP
00390575
05/16/2018
SAFE -ENTRY TECHNICAL INC
0.00
375.00
375.00
AP
00390576
05/16/2018
SAFETY CENTER INC
1,900.00
0.00
1,900.00
AP
00390577
05/16/2018
SAFETY KLEEN SYSTEMS INC
188.56
0.00
188.56
AP
00390578
05/16/2018
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT
2,174.64
0.00
2,174.64
AP
00390579
05/16/2018
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT
23,743.99
0.00
23,743.99
AP
00390580
05/16/2018
SAN BERNARDINO CTY
15,169.78
0.00
15,169.78
AP
00390581
05/16/2018
SECC CORP
2,938.48
0.00
2,938.48
AP
00390582
05/16/2018
SERRATO & ASSOCIATES
70.00
0.00
70.00
AP
00390583
05/16/2018
SERRATO & ASSOCIATES
135.00
0.00
135.00
AP
00390584
05/16/2018
SHRED IT USA LLC
190.95
0.00
190.95
AP
00390585
05/16/2018
SHRED PROS
1,062.00
0.00
1,062.00
AP
00390586
05/16/2018
SIEMENS INDUSTRY INC
41,469.70
0.00
41,469.70
AP
00390587
05/16/2018
SIGN SHOP, THE
0.00
232.95
232.95
AP
00390588
05/16/2018
SILVER & WRIGHT LLP
23,434.35
0.00
23,434.35
AP
00390589
05/16/2018
SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC
577.19
0.00
577.19
AP
00390590
05/16/2018
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
809.60
0.00
809.60
AP
00390591
05/16/2018
SOLAR CITY CORPORATION
120,735.61
0.00
120,735.61
AP
00390595
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
21,389.25
0.00
21,389.25
AP
00390596
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
3,175.86
0.00
3,175.86
AP
00390597
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
14,776.17
0.00
14,776.17
AP
00390598
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
15,241.39
0.00
15,241.39
AP
00390599
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
14,264.00
0.00
14,264.00
AP
00390600
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
18,267.53
0.00
18,267.53
AP
00390601
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
12,742.30
0.00
12,742.30
AP
00390602
05/16/2018
STABILIZER SOLUTIONS INC
1,774.06
0.00
1,774.06
AP
00390603
05/16/2018
STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE
142.83
0.00
142.83
AP
00390604
05/16/2018
STORAGE CONTAINER.COM
200.00
0.00
200.00
AP
00390605
05/16/2018
STOTZ EQUIPMENT
216.86
0.00
216.86
AP
00390606
05/16/2018
STOVER SEED COMPANY
7,984.28
0.00
7,984.28
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 8
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 24
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390607
05/16/2018
THE COUNSELING TEAM INTERNATIONAL
0.00
1,270.00
1,270.00
AP
00390608
05/16/2018
THOMPSON PLUMBING SUPPLY INC
4,841.80
0.00
4,841.80
AP
00390609
05/16/2018
THOMSON REUTERS WEST PUBLISHING CORP
364.93
0.00
364.93
AP
00390610
05/16/2018
TINT CITY WINDOW TINTING
130.00
0.00
130.00
AP
00390611
05/16/2018
UNITED PACIFIC SERVICES INC
120,307.00
0.00
120,307.00
AP
00390612
05/16/2018
UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CA INC
281.34
0.00
281.34
AP
00390613
05/16/2018
UPSCO POWERSAFE SYSTEMS INC
200.00
0.00
200.00
AP
00390614
05/16/2018
UTILIQUEST
1,218.05
0.00
1,218.05
AP
00390615
05/16/2018
VALLEJO, ELSA
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390616
05/16/2018
VERIZON
24.61
0.00
24.61
AP
00390617
05/16/2018
VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
183.09
0.00
183.09
AP
00390618
05/16/2018
VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
4,795.38
0.00
4,795.38
AP
00390619
05/16/2018
VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
108.00
0.00
108.00
AP
00390620
05/16/2018
VISION SERVICE PLAN CA
11,451.93
0.00
11,451.93
AP
00390621
05/16/2018
VOHNE LICHE KENNELS INC
125.00
0.00
125.00
AP
00390622
05/16/2018
VORTEX INDUSTRIES INC
2,895.50
0.00
2,895.50
AP
00390623
05/16/2018
VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY
78.85
0.00
78.85
AP
00390624
05/16/2018
WAINWRIGHT, JANICE RODGERS
1,634.00
0.00
1,634.00
AP
00390625
05/16/2018
WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO
3,307.72
0.00
3,307.72
AP
00390626
05/16/2018
WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY
5,214.45
1,034.70
6,249.15 ***
AP
00390627
05/16/2018
WORD MILL PUBLISHING
800.00
0.00
800.00
AP
00390629
05/16/2018
XEROX CORPORATION
9,268.96
437.07
9,706.03 ***
AP
00390630
05/16/2018
YALE CHASE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES INC
12,699.05
0.00
12,699.05
AP
00390631
05/16/2018
YBANEZ, CAROLE ARLEEN
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390632
05/16/2018
YOUNGERMAN, GEOFFREY
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390633
05/17/2018
AIRGAS USA LLC
3,241.92
0.00
3,241.92
AP
00390634
05/17/2018
EMCOR SERVICE
13,331.00
0.00
13,331.00
AP
00390635
05/17/2018
EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS
979.15
0.00
979.15
AP
00390636
05/17/2018
FORD OF UPLAND INC
1,700.09
0.00
1,700.09
AP
00390637
05/17/2018
GRANICUS INC
8,289.88
0.00
8,289.88
AP
00390639
05/17/2018
OFFICE DEPOT
8,089.00
1,293.59
9,382.59 ***
AP
00390640
05/17/2018
ORKIN PEST CONTROL
490.72
0.00
490.72
AP
00390641
05/17/2018
SUNRISE FORD
4,563.93
0.00
4,563.93
AP
00390642
05/17/2018
TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCTS
9,226.79
0.00
9,226.79
AP
00390643
05/23/2018
CURATALO, JAMES
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00390644
05/23/2018
KIRKPATRICK, WILLIAM
0.00
1,461.55
1,461.55
AP
00390645
05/23/2018
LONCAR, PHILIP
0.00
1,152.40
1,152.40
AP
00390646
05/23/2018
TOWNSEND, JAMES
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00390647
05/23/2018
WALKER, KENNETH
0.00
249.30
249.30
AP
00390648
05/23/2018
A AND R TIRE SERVICE
200.36
0.00
200.36
AP
00390649
05/23/2018
A'JONTUE, ROSE ANN
554.40
0.00
554.40
AP
00390650
05/23/2018
ABLE BUILDING MAINTENANCE
932.65
0.00
932.65
AP
00390651
05/23/2018
ACEY DECY EQUIPMENT INC.
245.55
0.00
245.55
AP
00390652
05/23/2018
ADAPT CONSULTING INC
519.07
0.00
519.07
AP
00390653
05/23/2018
ADVANCED CHEMICAL TRANSPORT
1,439.50
0.00
1,439.50
AP
00390654
05/23/2018
ADVANTAGE SEALING SYSTEMS INC.
210.11
0.00
210.11
AP
00390655
05/23/2018
AFLAC GROUP INSURANCE
40.97
0.00
40.97
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 9
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 25
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390656
05/23/2018
AIR EXCHANGE INC
0.00
5,996.91
5,996.91
AP
00390657
05/23/2018
ALBERT A. WEBB
207.00
0.00
207.00
AP
00390658
05/23/2018
ALCORN, RICHARD
25.00
0.00
25.00
AP
00390659
05/23/2018
ALL CITIES TOOLS
165.07
0.00
165.07
AP
00390660
05/23/2018
ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES INC.
214.00
0.00
214.00
AP
00390661
05/23/2018
ALLIED NETWORK SOLUTIONS INC
5,909.32
0.00
5,909.32
AP
00390662
05/23/2018
ALLSTAR AUTO CENTER
599.73
0.00
599.73
AP
00390663
05/23/2018
AMAN NETWORKS
6,900.00
0.00
6,900.00
AP
00390664
05/23/2018
AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES
514.23
0.00
514.23
AP
00390665
05/23/2018
AQUABIO ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES INC.
1,745.00
0.00
1,745.00
AP
00390666
05/23/2018
AROUND THE CLOCK TRANSPORTATION INC.
292.00
0.00
292.00
AP
00390667
05/23/2018
ARRIAZA, ERICK
113.00
0.00
113.00
AP
00390668
05/23/2018
ART OF LIVING FOUNDATION
54.00
0.00
54.00
AP
00390669
05/23/2018
ASSI SECURITY
450.00
1,470.00
1,920.00 ***
AP
00390670
05/23/2018
AUSTIN, NATHAN
61.00
0.00
61.00
AP
00390671
05/23/2018
AUTO AND RV SPECIALISTS INC.
200.06
0.00
200.06
AP
00390672
05/23/2018
BABCOCK LABORATORIES INC
515.00
0.00
515.00
AP
00390673
05/23/2018
BAILEY-THOMPSON, ANGELA
61.00
0.00
61.00
AP
00390674
05/23/2018
BANKS, AYANNA
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390675
05/23/2018
BATES, WONNE
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390676
05/23/2018
BECK, JEREMIAH
51.00
0.00
51.00
AP
00390677
05/23/2018
BERNELL HYDRAULICS INC
64.48
0.00
64.48
AP
00390678
05/23/2018
BOKELMAN, CHEYANNE
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390679
05/23/2018
BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE SERVICES INC.
22,749.90
0.00
22,749.90
AP
00390680
05/23/2018
BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP
4,500.50
0.00
4,500.50
AP
00390681
05/23/2018
C V W D
287.63
0.00
287.63
AP
00390685
05/23/2018
C V W D
56,388.94
1,589.74
57,978.68 ***
AP
00390686
05/23/2018
CABLE INC.
4,018.50
0.00
4,018.50
AP
00390687
05/23/2018
CALIFORNIA FIRE CHIEFS ASSOC.
0.00
800.00
800.00
AP
00390688
05/23/2018
CALIFORNIA PUMPING AND SANITATION SYSTEM
1,500.00
0.00
1,500.00
AP
00390689
05/23/2018
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
8.44
0.00
8.44
AP
00390690
05/23/2018
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
100.00
0.00
100.00
AP
00390691
05/23/2018
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
1,318.48
0.00
1,318.48
AP
00390692
05/23/2018
CARDENAS, GABRIEL
61.00
0.00
61.00
AP
00390693
05/23/2018
CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
649.25
237.89
887.14 ***
AP
00390694
05/23/2018
CARTY, DIANE
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390695
05/23/2018
CASTILLO, FRANCISCO
648.00
0.00
648.00
AP
00390696
05/23/2018
CCS ORANGE COUNTY JANITORIAL INC.
50,630.89
1,176.42
51,807.31 ***
AP
00390697
05/23/2018
CDW GOVERNMENT INC.
0.00
2,174.48
2,174.48
AP
00390698
05/23/2018
CENTERPOINTE CONTRACTORS
15,000.00
0.00
15,000.00
AP
00390699
05/23/2018
CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES INC.
2,640.00
0.00
2,640.00
AP
00390700
05/23/2018
CINTAS CORPORATION #150
1,472.56
186.32
1,658.88 ***
AP
00390701
05/23/2018
CLARK, KAREN
270.00
0.00
270.00
AP
00390702
05/23/2018
CLARK, ROBERT
164.00
0.00
164.00
AP
00390703
05/23/2018
CLASSE PARTY RENTALS
856.25
0.00
856.25
AP
00390704
05/23/2018
COBB, ANNE M OR BILLY L
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390705
05/23/2018
COMBINED MARTIAL SCIENCE INC
4,812.00
0.00
4,812.00
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 10
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 26
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Cu
Fire
Amount
AP
00390706
05/23/2018
CONNELLY, BRIANNA
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390707
05/23/2018
CONVERGEONE INC.
3,536.25
0.00
3,536.25
AP
00390708
05/23/2018
CORDURA, SOPHIA
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390709
05/23/2018
CORREA, SERGIO
100.00
0.00
100.00
AP
00390710
05/23/2018
COUNTRY ESTATE FENCE CO INC
3,106.59
0.00
3,106.59
AP
00390711
05/23/2018
CREATIVE BRAIN LEARNING
165.00
0.00
165.00
AP
00390712
05/23/2018
CROP PRODUCTION SERVICES INC
1,093.16
0.00
1,093.16
AP
00390713
05/23/2018
CRUZ -MARTINEZ, SALVADOR
61.00
0.00
61.00
AP
00390714
05/23/2018
DADE, EDRIS JEAN
70.00
0.00
70.00
AP
00390715
05/23/2018
DAIMIER TRUST LSR
112.00
0.00
112.00
AP
00390716
05/23/2018
DANCE TERRIFIC
2,990.40
0.00
2,990.40
AP
00390717
05/23/2018
DASHER, WARREN
253.00
0.00
253.00
AP
00390718
05/23/2018
DATA ARC LLC
8,114.22
0.00
8,114.22
AP
00390719
05/23/2018
DAVIS, SAM
102.02
0.00
102.02
AP
00390720
05/23/2018
DAVIS, SONIA
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390721
05/23/2018
DEALER ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS
598.12
0.00
598.12
AP
00390722
05/23/2018
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION
0.00
36,992.25
36,992.25
AP
00390723
05/23/2018
DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES
21.00
0.00
21.00
AP
00390724
05/23/2018
DESERT MOUNTAIN SELPA
1,100.00
0.00
1,100.00
AP
00390725
05/23/2018
DIRECTV
135.53
0.00
135.53
AP
00390726
05/23/2018
DOHONEY, BRENDA L
51.00
0.00
51.00
AP
00390727
05/23/2018
DUGMORE & DUNCAN INC.
1,204.13
0.00
1,204.13
AP
00390728
05/23/2018
DUMBELL MAN FITNESS EQUIPMENT, THE
187.50
0.00
187.50
AP
00390729
05/23/2018
DUNN, ANN MARIE
168.00
0.00
168.00
AP
00390730
05/23/2018
EBS CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
10,000.00
0.00
10,000.00
AP
00390731
05/23/2018
EMBROIDME
68.66
0.00
68.66
AP
00390732
05/23/2018
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
60.00
0.00
60.00
AP
00390733
05/23/2018
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP
22.80
0.00
22.80
AP
00390734
05/23/2018
FENG, YU LIN
100.00
0.00
100.00
AP
00390735
05/23/2018
FIRE ETC.
0.00
4,332.44
4,332.44
AP
00390736
05/23/2018
FIRST CLASS HEATING & AIR
8,350.00
0.00
8,350.00
AP
00390737
05/23/2018
FRONTIER COMM
2,959.40
561.54
3,520.94 ***
AP
00390738
05/23/2018
G AND M BUSINESS INTERIORS
23,379.47
0.00
23,379.47
AP
00390739
05/23/2018
GARCIA, BERENICE
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390740
05/23/2018
GARCIA, CELINA FLEUR
61.00
0.00
61.00
AP
00390741
05/23/2018
GARDNER TRUCKING
71.00
0.00
71.00
AP
00390742
05/23/2018
GARDNER TRUCKING
429.00
0.00
429.00
AP
00390743
05/23/2018
GEOGRAPHICS
1,181.84
0.00
1,181.84
AP
00390744
05/23/2018
GEORGE HILLS COMPANY
962.80
0.00
962.80
AP
00390745
05/23/2018
GIORDANO, MARIANNA
189.00
0.00
189.00
AP
00390746
05/23/2018
GOMEZ, DENISE
12.50
0.00
12.50
AP
00390747
05/23/2018
GOMEZ-PRESTON, CHERYL
156.63
0.00
156.63
AP
00390748
05/23/2018
GONZALEZ, CATHY
126.00
0.00
126.00
AP
00390749
05/23/2018
GRAINGER
0.00
72.19
72.19
AP
00390750
05/23/2018
GRANADOS, KOINTA C OR SALVADOR JUAREZ
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390751
05/23/2018
GRAPHICS FACTORY INC.
156.24
0.00
156.24
AP
00390752
05/23/2018
GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT
266.65
0.00
266.65
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 11
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 27
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390753
05/23/2018
GUGLIELMO, TONY
32.74
0.00
32.74
AP
00390754
05/23/2018
HARDEEP, SINGH
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390755
05/23/2018
HATTEMER, RALF
71.00
0.00
71.00
AP
00390756
05/23/2018
HERC RENTALS INC.
8,304.84
0.00
8,304.84
AP
00390757
05/23/2018
HI WAY SAFETY INC
887.31
0.00
887.31
AP
00390758
05/23/2018
HILTI INC
455.29
0.00
455.29
AP
00390759
05/23/2018
HMC ARCHITECTS
1,162.50
67,995.90
69,158.40 ***
AP
00390760
05/23/2018
HOSE MAN INC
0.00
102.80
102.80
AP
00390761
05/23/2018
HOTTINGER, HEATHER
675.00
0.00
675.00
AP
00390762
05/23/2018
ICE DATA PRICING AND REFERENCE DATA LLC
133.85
0.00
133.85
AP
00390763
05/23/2018
IDEXX DISTRIBUTION INC
3,512.80
0.00
3,512.80
AP
00390764
05/23/2018
INLAND PRESORT & MAILING SERVICES
71.24
0.00
71.24
AP
00390765
05/23/2018
INLAND VALLEY COUNCIL OF CHURCHES
8,974.10
0.00
8,974.10
AP
00390766
05/23/2018
INLAND VALLEY DANCE ACADEMY
3,723.00
0.00
3,723.00
AP
00390767
05/23/2018
INTELESYS ONE INC
1,118.86
0.00
1,118.86
AP
00390768
05/23/2018
INTERNATIONAL LINE BUILDERS INC
270,728.91
180,485.95
451,214.86 ***
AP
00390769
05/23/2018
JOHNNY ALLEN TENNIS ACADEMY
1,642.20
0.00
1,642.20
AP
00390770
05/23/2018
JONES, NANCY
250.00
0.00
250.00
AP
00390771
05/23/2018
JTB SUPPLY COMPANY
4,848.75
0.00
4,848.75
AP
00390772
05/23/2018
K -K WOODWORKING
64.59
0.00
64.59
AP
00390773
05/23/2018
KB HOME
7,602.00
0.00
7,602.00
AP
00390774
05/23/2018
KEITH, JORRY
582.00
0.00
582.00
AP
00390775
05/23/2018
KVAC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC
0.00
125.00
125.00
AP
00390776
05/23/2018
LANTAI, KRIS
400.00
0.00
400.00
AP
00390777
05/23/2018
LEE, VAUGHN
15.56
0.00
15.56
AP
00390778
05/23/2018
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS LLC
5,291.57
0.00
5,291.57
AP
00390779
05/23/2018
LEVERAGE INFORMATION SYSTEMS INC
535.00
0.00
535.00
AP
00390780
05/23/2018
LIGHTHOUSE, THE
624.05
0.00
624.05
AP
00390781
05/23/2018
LIU, NAN
12.05
0.00
12.05
AP
00390782
05/23/2018
LIVE OAK DOG OBEDIENCE
936.00
0.00
936.00
AP
00390783
05/23/2018
LONG, QUISHAWA
285.32
0.00
285.32
AP
00390784
05/23/2018
LOUIE'S NURSERY
1,126.88
0.00
1,126.88
AP
00390785
05/23/2018
MADRIGAL, CECILIA
114.00
0.00
114.00
AP
00390786
05/23/2018
MALEA, NICHOLAS
61.00
0.00
61.00
AP
00390787
05/23/2018
MARK CHRISTOPHER INC
0.00
796.02
796.02
AP
00390788
05/23/2018
MARSHALL, SYLVIA
1,656.00
0.00
1,656.00
AP
00390789
05/23/2018
MARTINEZ, STEVE
51.00
0.00
51.00
AP
00390790
05/23/2018
MAXWELL, ANTHONY
9.00
0.00
9.00
AP
00390791
05/23/2018
MCGEE, KELLIE R
100.00
0.00
100.00
AP
00390792
05/23/2018
MOFFATT & NICHOL
18,017.00
0.00
18,017.00
AP
00390793
05/23/2018
MONDRAGON, FABIOLA
147.00
0.00
147.00
AP
00390794
05/23/2018
MORRIS, RICHARD
120.00
0.00
120.00
AP
00390795
05/23/2018
MORRISON SPORTS LLC
9,865.96
0.00
9,865.96
AP
00390796
05/23/2018
MOUNTAIN VIEW GLASS AND MIRROR INC
46.06
0.00
46.06
AP
00390797
05/23/2018
MOUNTAIN VIEW SMALL ENG REPAIR
1,739.85
0.00
1,739.85
AP
00390798
05/23/2018
MUSICSTAR
330.00
0.00
330.00
AP
00390799
05/23/2018
MUTUAL PROPANE
0.00
1,886.48
1,886.48
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 12
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 28
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390800
05/23/2018
NAPA AUTO PARTS
0.00
37.58
37.58
AP
00390801
05/23/2018
NAVARRO, JESSICA
12.50
0.00
12.50
AP
00390802
05/23/2018
NBS
9,593.75
0.00
9,593.75
AP
00390803
05/23/2018
NEIUBER, ROBERT
318.50
0.00
318.50
AP
00390804
05/23/2018
NEW COLOR SCREEN PRINTING & EMBROIDERY
145.46
0.00
145.46
AP
00390805
05/23/2018
OGBONNA, CHARLES
353.95
0.00
353.95
AP
00390806
05/23/2018
OLS SERVICE INC.
1,271.09
0.00
1,271.09
AP
00390807
05/23/2018
ONTRAC
73.20
0.00
73.20
AP
00390808
05/23/2018
OWEN ELECTRIC INC
92.93
0.00
92.93
AP
00390809
05/23/2018
PACIFIC YOUTH SPORTS
1,785.00
0.00
1,785.00
AP
00390810
05/23/2018
PASMA
99.00
0.00
99.00
AP
00390811
05/23/2018
PETES ROAD SERVICE INC
1,460.97
0.00
1,460.97
AP
00390812
05/23/2018
PRE -PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC
78.38
0.00
78.38
AP
00390813
05/23/2018
PRECISION GYMNASTICS
2,184.70
0.00
2,184.70
AP
00390814
05/23/2018
PRO -LINE INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS INC
637.45
0.00
637.45
AP
00390815
05/23/2018
PSA PRINT GROUP
127.15
0.00
127.15
AP
00390816
05/23/2018
QUICK CRETE PRODUCTS
1,385.67
0.00
1,385.67
AP
00390817
05/23/2018
RASCON, ERIC
112.00
0.00
112.00
AP
00390818
05/23/2018
RBM LOCK AND KEY SERVICE
275.99
0.00
275.99
AP
00390819
05/23/2018
RF WHITE CO INC
2,747.47
0.00
2,747.47
AP
00390820
05/23/2018
RICHARD WIGHTMAN CONSTRUCTION INC
110.00
0.00
110.00
AP
00390821
05/23/2018
RICHARD WIGHTMAN CONSTRUCTION INC
3,000.00
0.00
3,000.00
AP
00390822
05/23/2018
RICHARD WIGHTMAN CONSTRUCTION INC
2,200.00
0.00
2,200.00
AP
00390823
05/23/2018
ROADWAY ENGINEERING & CONTRACTING INC
5,883.87
0.00
5,883.87
AP
00390824
05/23/2018
RODRIGUEZ, VERONICA
12.50
0.00
12.50
AP
00390825
05/23/2018
ROUTE 66 INLAND EMPIRE
500.00
0.00
500.00
AP
00390826
05/23/2018
RYDER TRUCK RENTAL INC
250.00
0.00
250.00
AP
00390827
05/23/2018
SAMS CLUB/SYNCHRONY BANK
12.36
0.00
12.36
AP
00390828
05/23/2018
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT
434.00
0.00
434.00
AP
00390829
05/23/2018
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT
2,118.88
0.00
2,118.88
AP
00390830
05/23/2018
SAN MARINO ROOF CO INC
1,314.40
0.00
1,314.40
AP
00390831
05/23/2018
SANTA MONICA-UCLA MEDICAL CENTER
730.00
0.00
730.00
AP
00390832
05/23/2018
SASSOON, LORI
56.96
0.00
56.96
AP
00390833
05/23/2018
SBPEA
1,592.12
0.00
1,592.12
AP
00390834
05/23/2018
SC FUELS
25,857.46
0.00
25,857.46
AP
00390835
05/23/2018
SC FUELS
3,107.64
0.00
3,107.64
AP
00390836
05/23/2018
SCHOLASTIC BOOK FAIRS
468.77
0.00
468.77
AP
00390837
05/23/2018
SCOTT, MICHAEL
1,639.85
0.00
1,639.85
AP
00390838
05/23/2018
SERRATOS, STEVE
10.00
0.00
10.00
AP
00390839
05/23/2018
SHARANJIT, SINGH
166.00
0.00
166.00
AP
00390840
05/23/2018
SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC
2,637.09
0.00
2,637.09
AP
00390841
05/23/2018
SMITH, ALLYSON
12.50
0.00
12.50
AP
00390842
05/23/2018
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
16.82
296.36
313.18 ***
AP
00390843
05/23/2018
SOLAR CITY CORPORATION
0.00
17,939.95
17,939.95
AP
00390844
05/23/2018
SORACCO, LUISA
12.50
0.00
12.50
AP
00390845
05/23/2018
SOUTH COAST AQMD
0.00
128.61
128.61
AP
00390853
05/23/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
19,545.23
2,293.11
21,838.34 ***
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 13
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 29
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390854
05/23/2018
STABILIZER SOLUTIONS INC
685.00
0.00
685.00
AP
00390855
05/23/2018
STATER BROS MARKETS
15,000.00
0.00
15,000.00
AP
00390856
05/23/2018
STATEWIDE TRAFFIC SAFETY & SIGNS INC
2,097.24
0.00
2,097.24
AP
00390857
05/23/2018
STOTZ EQUIPMENT
15.66
0.00
15.66
AP
00390858
05/23/2018
STRESS LESS EXPRESS LLC
175.00
0.00
175.00
AP
00390859
05/23/2018
STURM RUGER & CO INC
161.12
0.00
161.12
AP
00390860
05/23/2018
SUPERION LLC
790.00
0.00
790.00
AP
00390861
05/23/2018
SWEET DOUGH CAFE
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390862
05/23/2018
SYSCO LOS ANGELES INC
878.13
0.00
878.13
AP
00390863
05/23/2018
TALLY, JEFFERY
39.18
0.00
39.18
AP
00390864
05/23/2018
THEATREBAM CHICAGO
1,200.00
0.00
1,200.00
AP
00390865
05/23/2018
TK SYSTEMS INC
719.24
0.00
719.24
AP
00390866
05/23/2018
TOXGUARD FLUID TECHNOLOGIES INC
696.64
0.00
696.64
AP
00390867
05/23/2018
TRI -CITY TOWING INC
50.00
0.00
50.00
AP
00390868
05/23/2018
DAIMER TRUST
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390869
05/23/2018
U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500
6,605.00
0.00
6,605.00
AP
00390870
05/23/2018
U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500
18,045.77
0.00
18,045.77
AP
00390871
05/23/2018
U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500
1,497.13
0.00
1,497.13
AP
00390872
05/23/2018
UNDERGROUND SVC ALERT OF SO CAL
321.85
0.00
321.85
AP
00390873
05/23/2018
UNITED WAY
116.00
0.00
116.00
AP
00390874
05/23/2018
UNIVERSAL MARTIAL ARTS CENTERS
882.00
0.00
882.00
AP
00390875
05/23/2018
UPS
125.96
0.00
125.96
AP
00390876
05/23/2018
VERIZON BUSINESS SERVICES
36.81
0.00
36.81
AP
00390877
05/23/2018
VERIZON BUSINESS SERVICES
41.92
0.00
41.92
AP
00390882
05/23/2018
VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
5,778.06
0.00
5,778.06
AP
00390883
05/23/2018
VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY
1,814.13
0.00
1,814.13
AP
00390884
05/23/2018
VO, VUONG
125.55
0.00
125.55
AP
00390885
05/23/2018
VORTEX INDUSTRIES INC
0.00
245.00
245.00
AP
00390886
05/23/2018
WANG, WULIN
12.50
0.00
12.50
AP
00390887
05/23/2018
WESTERN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE
705.00
0.00
705.00
AP
00390888
05/23/2018
WESTERN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE
350.00
0.00
350.00
AP
00390889
05/23/2018
WHITE CAP CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY
308.66
0.00
308.66
AP
00390890
05/23/2018
WHITE HOUSE PHOTO INC
350.00
0.00
350.00
AP
00390891
05/23/2018
WILSON ESTATES LLC
5,250.00
0.00
5,250.00
AP
00390892
05/23/2018
WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY INC
15,000.00
0.00
15,000.00
AP
00390893
05/23/2018
YOUNG REMBRANDTS
277.20
0.00
277.20
AP
00390894
05/23/2018
ZOETIS US LLC
1,966.56
0.00
1,966.56
AP
00390895
05/24/2018
AIRGAS USA LLC
0.00
284.50
284.50
AP
00390896
05/24/2018
EMCOR SERVICE
0.00
1,224.84
1,224.84
AP
00390897
05/24/2018
INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN
940.00
0.00
940.00
AP
00390898
05/24/2018
INTERSTATE BATTERIES
312.20
655.29
967.49 ***
AP
00390899
05/24/2018
KME FIRE APPARATUS
0.00
2,863.48
2,863.48
AP
00390900
05/24/2018
LN CURTIS AND SONS
0.00
62,742.62
62,742.62
AP
00390901
05/24/2018
OFFICE DEPOT
3,999.94
0.00
3,999.94
AP
00390902
05/24/2018
VISTA PAINT
557.74
0.00
557.74
AP
00390903
05/24/2018
ALTA VISTA MOBILE HOME PARK
500.00
0.00
500.00
AP
00390904
05/24/2018
CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STATE OF
1,726.49
287.94
2,014.43 ***
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 14
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 30
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Citv Fire Amount
Total City: $3,325,338.00
Total Fire: $959,803.90
Grand Total: $4,285, tTT-.90
Note:
*** Check Number includes both City and Fire District expenditures
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 15 Current Date: 05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 07:05:21
Page 31
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Electronic Debit Register
April 1, 2018 - April 30, 2018
DATE
DESCRIPTION
CITY
FIRE
AMOUNT
4/2
WIRE TRANSFER - To California ISO
559.56
559.56
4/2
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
849.18
849.18
4/2
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
2,896.55
2,896.55
4/3
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
1,902.86
1,902.86
4/3
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
2,199.79
2,199.79
4/3
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
4,969.45
4,969.45
4/3
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
7,756.15
7,756.15
4/3
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
10,557.70
10,557.70
4/3
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
105,630.11
105,630.11
4/3
U.S. BANK - Purchasing Card Payment - March 2018
39,816.07
10,245.72
50,061.79
4/3
U.S. BANK - Corporate Card Payment - March 2018
68,036.11
15,595.56
83,631.67
4/3
U.S. BANK - COSTO Card Payment - March 2018
1,635.88
293.77
1,929.65
4/3
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
17,289.22
17,289.22
4/4
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
1,432.60
1,432.60
4/4
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
234.67
234.67
4/5
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
390.00
390.00
4/5
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
390.00
390.00
4/6
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
268.73
268.73
4/9
WIRE TRANSFER - To California ISO
73,240.55
73,240.55
4/9
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
1,360.96
1,360.96
4/10
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
190.00
190.00
4/10
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
2,648.80
2,648.80
4/11
CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit
3,981.69
3,981.69
4/11
CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit
192,820.00
192,820.00
4/11
CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit
37,376.11
37,376.11
4/11
CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit
127,679.67
127,679.67
4/11
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
2,099.26
2,099.26
4/11
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
2,179.46
2,179.46
4/11
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
4,969.45
4,969.45
4/11
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
7,756.15
7,756.15
4/11
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
10,667.55
10,667.55
4/11
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
103,158.23
103,158.23
4/11
STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments
2,424.58
2,424.58
4/11
STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments
5,472.69
5,472.69
4/11
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
976.89
976.89
4/11
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
840.80
840.80
4/12
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
3,163.48
3,163.48
4/12
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
327.57
327.57
4/13
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
3,567.77
3,567.77
4/13
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
335.40
335.40
4/16
WIRE TRANSFER - To California ISO
645.88
645.88
4/16
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
6,997.40
6,997.40
4/16
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
861.80
861.80
4/18
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
630.06
630.06
4/18
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
1,160.00
1,160.00
4/19
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
2,210.44
2,210.44
4/19
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
196.92
196.92
4/20
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
12.00
12.00
4/20
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
162.94
162.94
4/24
WIRE TRANSFER - To California ISO
9,497.11
9,497.11
4/24
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
498.79
498.79
4/25
BANK FEE - MARCH 2018
37,055.69
37,055.69
4/25
STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments
2,424.58
2,424.58
4/25
STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments
5,299.96
5,299.96
4/25
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
554.28
554.28
4/25
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
160.56
160.56
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
141,833.79
141,833.79
4/26
CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit
31,697.75
31,697.75
4/26
CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit
127,110.36
127,110.36
Page 32
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Electronic Debit Register
April 1, 2018 - April 30, 2018
DATE
DESCRIPTION
CITY
FIRE
AMOUNT
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
1,554.88
1,554.88
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
2,185.06
2,185.06
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
4,969.44
4,969.44
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
7,781.99
7,781.99
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
10,766.09
10,766.09
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
103,181.69
103,181.69
4/26
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
1,846.12
1,846.12
4/26
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
147.20
147.20
4/27
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
286.18
286.18
4/30
WIRE TRANSFER - To California ISO
3,171.08
3,171.08
4/30
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
578.36
578.36
4/30
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
919.67
919.67
TOTAL CITY
800,914.17
TOTAL FIRE
585,670.64
GRAND TOTAL
1,386,584.81
Page 33
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: President and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM: John Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Ivan Rojer, Fire Chief
Eric Noreen, Deputy Fire Chief
Michelle Cowles, Management Aide
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ANNUAL LOCAL
RESPONSIBILITY AREA WILDLAND PROTECTION AGREEMENT WITH
THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRYAND FIRE PROTECTION
IN THE AMOUNT OF $39,492.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Fire Board adopt a Resolution approving the annual renewal of Local
Responsibility Area (LRA) Wildland Protection Agreement No. 3CA03935 with the California Department
of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal FIRE) for $39,492.
BACKGROUND:
On October 1, 2015, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (District) entered into an agreement with
Cal FIRE to provide supplemental wildland fire protection of 1206.06 acres of wildlands within the District.
The Fire Board approves the renewal of the Cal FIRE agreement annually.
The wildland/urban interface area of Rancho Cucamonga is prone to wildfire. The magnitude of these
wildfires, as witnessed in the October 2013 Grand Prix Fire and the April 2014 Etiwanda Fire, in terms of
suppression efforts and response, exceeds the capabilities of any fire department or fire district in San
Bernardino County. Local fire departments and districts routinely rely on mutual aid to assist each other in
large-scale incidents. Mutual aid is a like -for -like provision of resources without cost to the receiving
agency. The suppression of large-scale wildfires is an even more challenging scenario, where containment
and suppression are greatly enhanced by utilizing water and retardant dropping aircraft, hand crews,
dozers, and various overhead management positions. These specialized resources are critical for the
initial suppression of a wildland fire. The District does not have these specialized resources or enough
overhead to fill all the needed positions on a complex local mutual threat zone wildfire, nor does any other
department or district in the area. The State of California realizes that fires in the Rancho Cucamonga
wildland/urban interface are a mutual threat to State Responsibility Areas (SRA) and formulates available
agreements with local agencies on a per acre fee, to allow access to the variety and depth of resources
only available to a statewide agency such as Cal Fire.
ANALYSIS:
Through this agreement, Cal FI RE would assume the primary fiscal responsibility for suppressing wildland
fires in the contract area. Our LRA, which is City incorporated land, would be supported with resources
and a level of service that are provided on the adjacent SRA land without the burden of a significant
Page 34
unfunded liability.
In the event of a significant wildfire in the contract area, fire suppression costs would likely exceed the
costs of the proposed contract. If the Fire Board chooses not to renew the LRA Wildland Protection
Agreement, the actual cost of retardant dropping aircraft, hand crews, dozers, and various overhead
management positions utilized to suppress wildland fires in our LRA will be the responsibility of the Fire
District.
Annual amendments to the Agreement are required to reflect any changes in Cal FIRE's costs for
providing this service.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The FY2018-19 LRA Wildland Protection Agreement rate is $32.73 per acre. The total cost is $39,492,
which includes a 12.01 % administrative fee. In anticipation of this agreement, the District budgeted funds
from Fire Suppression/Contract Services, Account Number 3281508-5300.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This agreement will enhance public safety and reduce the threat of wildfire to our community by providing state
firefighting resources to the designated wildfire prone lands protecting lives, property, and natural habitat.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
ATTACHMENT 1 - Resolution No. FD 18-xxx
Page 35
ATTACHMENT
RESOLUTION NO. FD 18-xxx
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY AREA WILDLAND
PROTECTION AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
AND FIRE PROTECTION (Cal FIRE) FOR SERVICES FROM JULY 1, 2018 TO JUNE 30,
2019
WHEREAS, the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) is a public agency and California fire
protection district is located in the County of San Bernardino, State of California; and
WHEREAS, the wildland/urban interface area of the RCFPD and the City of Rancho Cucamonga is prone to
wildfire and the magnitude of these wildfires, in terms of suppression efforts and response, far exceeds the
capabilities of RCFPD on -duty crews; and
WHEREAS, the suppression of large-scale wildfires is enhanced by utilizing water and retardant dropping
aircraft, hand crews, dozers, and various overhead management positions; and
WHEREAS, RCFPD does not have the capacity to provide firefighting aircraft, hand crews, dozers, and
enough overhead management to respond to large wildland fires on a mutual aid basis; therefore, RCFPD must
contract for these services; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 4142, et seq., the California Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal FIRE) may, with the approval of the Department of General Services, enter into a
cooperative agreement upon such terms and under such conditions it deems wise, for preventing and suppressing
forest fires or other fires in any lands within any county, city, or district which makes an appropriation for such
purpose; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of an operating plan is to increase and/or enhance the fire ground operations
within the Cal FIRE San Bernardino -- Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Wildland Contract Area,
including mutual threat zones. This plan would allow responding agencies to pre -designate the Unified Ordering
point, VHF Radio Frequencies, establishment of a Unified Command structure for wild land fires in the contract area;
and
WHEREAS, the Fiscal Year 2018-19 cost for 1,206.6 acres is $32.73 per acre fora total cost of $39,491.20,
which includes a 12.01% administrative fee.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PRESIDENT OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION
DISTRICT HEREBY RESOLVES, as follows:
1. The facts set forth in the Recitals, above are true and correct.
2. The Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District hereby approves the Local
Responsibility Area Wildland Protection Agreement with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
(Cal FIRE) dated June 1, 2018, in the total amount of $39,491.20, for the period of July 1, 2018 through June 30,
2019.
3. The Secretary of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the President of said Board be and hereby is authorized to sign and
execute said agreement on behalf of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
Page 36
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 37
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: President and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM: John Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Darryl Polk, DoIT Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION FOR THE APPROVAL OF A FOUR YEAR AGREEMENT
FOR MAINTENANCE, SUPPORT AND CLOUD -HOSTING OF THE CITY'S
LAND MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE PLATFORM WITH ACCELA, INC. IN
THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $784,157; FUNDED IN THE AMOUNT OF $588,118
FROM THE CITY GENERAL FUND AND $196,039 FROM THE FIRE
DISTRICT FIRE FUND; AND AUTHORIZE AN ADDITIONAL
APPROPRIATION TO PAY FOR THE FIRST YEAR OF THE AGREEMENT.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Fire Board approve a four year agreement with Accela, Inc. for annual
maintenance, support and cloud hosting services of the City's land management software in the total
amount of $784,157, with costs shared between the City and the Fire District in the amounts of $588,118
from the City General Fund and $196,039 from the Fire District Fund; and authorize an appropriation to
pay for a portion of the first year of the agreement.
BACKGROUND:
On December 15, 2012, the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Accela, Inc. entered into a lease -purchase
agreement for five years covering the initial build and configuration of the City's land management
information system as well as five years of maintenance, support and cloud -hosting services. Accela
replaced the aged Tidemark Advantage Permitting System with a web -based record keeping system for
development and construction projects as well as follow up inspection reports from across
disciplines. This platform, which is hosted in the Accela Cloud, uses an open architecture and a centralized
database, allowing information to be shared across departments, improving communication between City
staff, business partners and residents. The system provides official record keeping for the Planning,
Building and Safety, Engineering and Fire Departments.
At the conclusion of the lease agreement in December 2017, the City entered into maintenance and
support with Accela, Inc. which includes cloud hosting services, security patching, version updates and
troubleshooting assistance.
ANALYSIS:
Maintaining annual maintenance and support for mission critical platforms, such as Accela Automation, is
important for the City and for the Department of Innovation and Technology. Maintenance and support
provides assistance with issues as well as the latest updates and enhancements. Hosting this software
service in the Accela cloud environment also reduces the capital costs and effort to maintain a physical
Page 38
server and database environment in the City's datacenter.
The lease for Accela Automation expired on December 15, 2017, automatically transitioning the City into
maintenance and support. Staff has negotiated an 8% discount on the initial year pricing and limited the
inflationary increase to 3% annually over a four-year term with the following pricing:
Total Cost
General Fund
RCFD
Fiscal Year 2017/18: $187,366
$140,525
$46,841
Fiscal Year 2018/19: $193,113
$144,835
$48,278
Fiscal Year 2019/20: $198,806
$149,105
$49,701
Fiscal Year 2020/21: $204,872
$153,654
$51,218
Copies of the agreement with Accela are on file with the City Clerk's Office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total cost to the City over the life of the four-year agreement is $784,157, which includes all hosting,
support and maintenance costs associated with the Accela land management platform. The graduated
annualized pricing of the negotiated terms allows the City to gradually absorb the maintenance costs while
maintaining the performance and integrity of the land management platform. Staff recommends sharing the
cost of the platform with the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District at a rate of 25% of the total
hosting, maintenance and support costs.
The Fire District is requesting an appropriation of $46,842 into account No. 3281501-5300 (Contract
Services) to fund the first year of the agreement. Sufficient funds are available in the City General Fund
budget to cover the City portion of the first year of the agreement (Account No. 1001209-5300 - Contract
Services).
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Entering into a four-year agreement with pre -negotiated pricing supports Council's goals for mid-range and
long-term planning by creating a fixed cost structure for future budget planning.
Page 39
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Tamara Layne, Finance Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE BI -WEEKLY PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT
OF $2,270,070.51 AND WEEKLY CHECK REGISTERS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$3,325,338.00 DATED MAY 08, 2018 THROUGH MAY 28, 2018 AND
ELECTRONIC DEBIT REGISTER FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 2018 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $800,914.17.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends City Council approve payment of demands as presented.
BACKGROUND:
N/A
ANALYSIS:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adequate budgeted funds are available for the payment of demands per the attached listing.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 Check Register
Attachment 1 Electronic Register
Page 40
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00007962
05/09/2018
ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC.
19,231.14
0.00
19,231.14
AP
00007963
05/09/2018
CALIF GOVERNMENT VEBA/RANCHO CUCAMONGA
13,390.00
0.00
13,390.00
AP
00007964
05/09/2018
NORMAN A TRAUB ASSOCIATES
4,777.50
0.00
4,777.50
AP
00007965
05/09/2018
POWEREX CORP
39,489.80
0.00
39,489.80
AP
00007966
05/09/2018
RCCEA
1,888.50
0.00
1,888.50
AP
00007967
05/09/2018
RCPFA
11,512.57
0.00
11,512.57
AP
00007968
05/09/2018
RIVERSIDE, CITY OF
6,909.00
0.00
6,909.00
AP
00007969
05/09/2018
SHELL ENERGY NORTH AMERICA
203,593.75
0.00
203,593.75
AP
00007970
05/09/2018
US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
12,618.65
0.00
12,618.65
AP
00007971
05/16/2018
RE ASTORIA 2 LLC
114,165.99
0.00
114,165.99
AP
00007972
05/16/2018
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
126.00
0.00
126.00
AP
00007973
05/16/2018
WESTERN RENEWABLE ENERGY GENERATION INFO
133.04
0.00
133.04
AP
00007974
05/23/2018
AHUMADA, ALEXANDER R
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00007975
05/23/2018
ALMAND, LLOYD
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00007976
05/23/2018
BANTAU, VICTORIA
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00007977
05/23/2018
BAZAL, SUSAN
0.00
585.98
585.98
AP
00007978
05/23/2018
BELL, MICHAEL L.
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00007979
05/23/2018
BERRY, DAVID
0.00
1,152.40
1,152.40
AP
00007980
05/23/2018
BROCK, ROBIN
0.00
923.03
923.03
AP
00007981
05/23/2018
CAMPBELL, GERALD
0.00
826.04
826.04
AP
00007982
05/23/2018
CAMPBELL, STEVEN
0.00
1,327.27
1,327.27
AP
00007983
05/23/2018
CARNES, KENNETH
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00007984
05/23/2018
CLABBY, RICHARD
0.00
1,152.40
1,152.40
AP
00007985
05/23/2018
CLOUGHESY, DONALD R
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00007986
05/23/2018
CORCORAN, ROBERT
0.00
540.73
540.73
AP
00007987
05/23/2018
COSTELLO, DENNIS M
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00007988
05/23/2018
COX, KARL
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00007989
05/23/2018
CRANE, RALPH
0.00
968.28
968.28
AP
00007990
05/23/2018
CROSSLAND, WILBUR
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00007991
05/23/2018
DAGUE, JAMES
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00007992
05/23/2018
DE ANTONIO, SUSAN
0.00
540.73
540.73
AP
00007993
05/23/2018
DEANS, JACKIE
0.00
585.98
585.98
AP
00007994
05/23/2018
DOMINICK, SAMUEL A.
0.00
923.03
923.03
AP
00007995
05/23/2018
EAGLESON, MICHAEL
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00007996
05/23/2018
EGGERS, BOB
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00007997
05/23/2018
FRITCHEY, JOHN D.
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00007998
05/23/2018
HEYDE, DONALD
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00007999
05/23/2018
INTERLICCHIA, ROSALYN
0.00
249.30
249.30
AP
00008000
05/23/2018
KILMER, STEPHEN
0.00
1,152.40
1,152.40
AP
00008001
05/23/2018
LANE, WILLIAM
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00008002
05/23/2018
LARKIN, DAVID W
0.00
1,538.02
1,538.02
AP
00008003
05/23/2018
LEE, ALLAN J.
0.00
1,264.92
1,264.92
AP
00008004
05/23/2018
LENZE, PAUL E
0.00
1,093.58
1,093.58
AP
00008005
05/23/2018
LONGO, JOE
0.00
183.34
183.34
AP
00008006
05/23/2018
LUTTRULL, DARRELL
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00008007
05/23/2018
MACKALL, BEVERLY
0.00
509.70
509.70
AP
00008008
05/23/2018
MAYFIELD, RON
0.00
1,304.96
1,304.96
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 1
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 41
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00008009
05/23/2018
MCKEE, JOHN
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00008010
05/23/2018
MCNEIL, KENNETH
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00008011
05/23/2018
MICHAEL, L. DENNIS
0.00
923.03
923.03
AP
00008012
05/23/2018
MORGAN, BYRON
0.00
1,714.62
1,714.62
AP
00008013
05/23/2018
MYSKOW, DENNIS
0.00
1,152.40
1,152.40
AP
00008014
05/23/2018
NAUMAN, MICHAEL
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00008015
05/23/2018
NEE, RON
0.00
585.98
585.98
AP
00008016
05/23/2018
NELSON, MARY JANE
0.00
183.34
183.34
AP
00008017
05/23/2018
O'BRIEN, TOM
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00008018
05/23/2018
PLOUNG, MICHAEL J
0.00
558.94
558.94
AP
00008019
05/23/2018
POST, MICHAEL R
0.00
1,586.77
1,586.77
AP
00008020
05/23/2018
PROULX, PATRICK
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00008021
05/23/2018
REDMOND, MIKE
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00008022
05/23/2018
ROEDER, JEFF
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00008023
05/23/2018
SALISBURY, THOMAS
0.00
631.60
631.60
AP
00008024
05/23/2018
SMITH, RONALD
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00008025
05/23/2018
SORENSEN, SCOTT D
0.00
1,736.35
1,736.35
AP
00008026
05/23/2018
SPAGNOLO, SAM
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00008027
05/23/2018
SPAIN, WILLIAM
0.00
826.04
826.04
AP
00008028
05/23/2018
SULLIVAN, JAMES
0.00
499.68
499.68
AP
00008029
05/23/2018
TAYLOR, STEVE
0.00
1,461.55
1,461.55
AP
00008030
05/23/2018
TULEY, TERRY
0.00
1,214.46
1,214.46
AP
00008031
05/23/2018
VANDERKALLEN, FRANCIS
0.00
982.80
982.80
AP
00008032
05/23/2018
VARNEY, ANTHONY
0.00
923.03
923.03
AP
00008033
05/23/2018
WALTON, KEVIN
0.00
1,538.02
1,538.02
AP
00008034
05/23/2018
YOWELL, TIMOTHY A
0.00
1,304.96
1,304.96
AP
00008035
05/23/2018
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
873.07
0.00
873.07
AP
00008036
05/23/2018
CALIF GOVERNMENT VEBA/RANCHO CUCAMONGA
17,649.97
0.00
17,649.97
AP
00008037
05/23/2018
NORMAN A TRAUB ASSOCIATES
3,675.00
0.00
3,675.00
AP
00008038
05/23/2018
RCCEA
1,924.00
0.00
1,924.00
AP
00008039
05/23/2018
RCPFA
11,512.57
0.00
11,512.57
AP
00008040
05/23/2018
SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT
11,181.95
0.00
11,181.95
AP
00390297
05/09/2018
49ER COMMUNICATIONS
0.00
1,330.00
1,330.00
AP
00390298
05/09/2018
A AND R TIRE SERVICE
209.00
0.00
209.00
AP
00390299
05/09/2018
ADAME, LORI
29.82
0.00
29.82
AP
00390300
05/09/2018
AFLAC GROUP INSURANCE
40.97
0.00
40.97
AP
00390301
05/09/2018
AFLAC GROUP INSURANCE
9,287.34
0.00
9,287.34
AP
00390302
05/09/2018
AIR EXCHANGE INC
0.00
4,152.08
4,152.08
AP
00390303
05/09/2018
ALBERT GROVER & ASSOCIATES
263.00
0.00
263.00
AP
00390304
05/09/2018
ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT
43,892.23
0.00
43,892.23
AP
00390305
05/09/2018
ALL CITIES TOOLS
0.00
63.75
63.75
AP
00390306
05/09/2018
ALL STATE POLICE EQUIPMENT CO. INC.
475.18
0.00
475.18
AP
00390307
05/09/2018
ALLIED NETWORK SOLUTIONS INC
8,520.45
0.00
8,520.45
AP
00390308
05/09/2018
ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT INC
0.00
1,213.80
1,213.80
AP
00390309
05/09/2018
ALPHAGRAPHICS
0.00
282.79
282.79
AP
00390310
05/09/2018
ALTA LOMA ENTERPRISES LLC
289.00
0.00
289.00
AP
00390311
05/09/2018
AMERON POLE PRODUCTS LLC
366.59
0.00
366.59
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 2
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 42
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390312
05/09/2018
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP
0.00
11,090.00
11,090.00
AP
00390313
05/09/2018
AUFBAU CORPORATION
4,150.00
0.00
4,150.00
AP
00390314
05/09/2018
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, THE
1,750.00
0.00
1,750.00
AP
00390315
05/09/2018
BARTEL ASSOCIATES LLC
0.00
2,050.00
2,050.00
AP
00390316
05/09/2018
BELTRAN, OSBALDO ALVARADO
515.89
0.00
515.89
AP
00390317
05/09/2018
BUREAU VERITAS NORTH AMERICA INC
10,498.70
0.00
10,498.70
AP
00390318
05/09/2018
C V W D
201.18
0.00
201.18
AP
00390320
05/09/2018
C V W D
19,913.34
934.26
20,847.60 ***
AP
00390321
05/09/2018
CAGLES APPLIANCE
0.00
590.79
590.79
AP
00390322
05/09/2018
CAL PERS LONG TERM CARE
254.14
0.00
254.14
AP
00390323
05/09/2018
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
100.00
0.00
100.00
AP
00390324
05/09/2018
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
8.44
0.00
8.44
AP
00390325
05/09/2018
CINTAS CORPORATION #150
0.00
248.87
248.87
AP
00390326
05/09/2018
COMMUNITY BANK
2,310.12
0.00
2,310.12
AP
00390327
05/09/2018
COOK, JANA
126.53
0.00
126.53
AP
00390328
05/09/2018
CREATIVE BRAIN LEARNING
1,861.20
0.00
1,861.20
AP
00390329
05/09/2018
CUEVAS, AYLA
16.91
0.00
16.91
AP
00390330
05/09/2018
DELTA DENTAL
1,497.10
0.00
1,497.10
AP
00390331
05/09/2018
DELTA DENTAL
42,058.81
0.00
42,058.81
AP
00390332
05/09/2018
DEVANE, JAMES
4.53
0.00
4.53
AP
00390333
05/09/2018
DOMINGUEZ, DESTINIE
216.00
0.00
216.00
AP
00390334
05/09/2018
ELITE CUSTOMS CONSTRUCTION
2,340.00
0.00
2,340.00
AP
00390335
05/09/2018
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
60.00
0.00
60.00
AP
00390336
05/09/2018
ERICKSON HALL CONSTRUCTION
0.00
77,937.00
77,937.00
AP
00390337
05/09/2018
ESKENAZI, MOISES
125.00
0.00
125.00
AP
00390338
05/09/2018
ESTRENO CATERING
1,550.00
0.00
1,550.00
AP
00390339
05/09/2018
EXECUTIVE AUTO DETAIL
1,020.00
0.00
1,020.00
AP
00390340
05/09/2018
FLEET SERVICES INC.
0.00
33.33
33.33
AP
00390341
05/09/2018
FONTANA RADIATOR SERVICE
0.00
960.00
960.00
AP
00390342
05/09/2018
FRONTIER COMM
643.54
290.41
933.95 ***
AP
00390343
05/09/2018
GJOKA, KLODIAN
262.00
0.00
262.00
AP
00390344
05/09/2018
GRAINGER
0.00
14.03
14.03
AP
00390345
05/09/2018
HEARTSAVERS LLC
176.00
0.00
176.00
AP
00390346
05/09/2018
HI WAY SAFETY INC
2,568.69
0.00
2,568.69
AP
00390347
05/09/2018
HILLS PET NUTRITION SALES INC
271.69
0.00
271.69
AP
00390348
05/09/2018
HOLTZ, LUKE
0.00
301.69
301.69
AP
00390349
05/09/2018
HORIZONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INTERNATIONAL
0.00
309,558.88
309,558.88
AP
00390350
05/09/2018
HOSE MAN INC
36.38
0.00
36.38
AP
00390351
05/09/2018
HOYT LUMBER CO., SM
19.16
91.10
110.26 ***
AP
00390352
05/09/2018
I A A P CALIFORNIA DIVISION
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390353
05/09/2018
INSTITUTE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
3,500.00
0.00
3,500.00
AP
00390354
05/09/2018
INTELESYS ONE INC
803.84
2,612.36
3,416.20 ***
AP
00390355
05/09/2018
INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP INC
7,096.85
0.00
7,096.85
AP
00390356
05/09/2018
J AND S STRIPING CO INC
54,615.79
0.00
54,615.79
AP
00390357
05/09/2018
JOHNNY ALLEN TENNIS ACADEMY
5,356.20
0.00
5,356.20
AP
00390358
05/09/2018
JOSEPH T CHENG DDS INC
131.00
0.00
131.00
AP
00390359
05/09/2018
KVAC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC
0.00
3,692.65
3,692.65
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 3
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 43
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390360
05/09/2018
LANCE SOLL AND LUNGHARD
475.00
0.00
475.00
AP
00390361
05/09/2018
LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS
4,750.00
0.00
4,750.00
AP
00390364
05/09/2018
LOWES COMPANIES INC.
8,955.18
2,225.28
11,180.46 ***
AP
00390365
05/09/2018
M&C CORPORATION
670.20
0.00
670.20
AP
00390366
05/09/2018
MACIAS, DAVID
118.86
0.00
118.86
AP
00390367
05/09/2018
MAGELLAN ADVISORS LLC
21,477.27
0.00
21,477.27
AP
00390368
05/09/2018
MAIN STREET SIGNS
150.00
0.00
150.00
AP
00390369
05/09/2018
MAM-A INC
6,351.52
0.00
6,351.52
AP
00390370
05/09/2018
MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC
1,366.92
0.00
1,366.92
AP
00390371
05/09/2018
MARLINK SA INC
0.00
164.90
164.90
AP
00390372
05/09/2018
MATANGA, JULIE EDWARD
331.50
0.00
331.50
AP
00390373
05/09/2018
MC AVOY & MARKHAM
1,113.75
0.00
1,113.75
AP
00390374
05/09/2018
MEDIA CONTROL SYSTEMS
2,100.00
0.00
2,100.00
AP
00390375
05/09/2018
MGT OF AMERICA INC
11,250.00
0.00
11,250.00
AP
00390376
05/09/2018
MIDWEST TAPE
93.96
0.00
93.96
AP
00390377
05/09/2018
MIJAC ALARM COMPANY
0.00
233.00
233.00
AP
00390378
05/09/2018
MINUTEMAN PRESS
161.63
0.00
161.63
AP
00390379
05/09/2018
MOUNTAIN VIEW SMALL ENG REPAIR
201.44
0.00
201.44
AP
00390380
05/09/2018
MULTICULTURAL BOOKS & VIDEOS
882.98
0.00
882.98
AP
00390381
05/09/2018
MUSIC THEATRE INTERNATIONAL
750.00
0.00
750.00
AP
00390382
05/09/2018
MUSICSTAR
792.00
0.00
792.00
AP
00390383
05/09/2018
NAPA AUTO PARTS
0.00
12.92
12.92
AP
00390384
05/09/2018
NEOPOST-4715 - FIRST DATA REMITCO
21,200.00
0.00
21,200.00
AP
00390385
05/09/2018
NEWCO DISTRIBUTORS INC
895.61
0.00
895.61
AP
00390386
05/09/2018
NGUYEN, THANH
63.94
0.00
63.94
AP
00390387
05/09/2018
NICHOLS, GARY
416.50
0.00
416.50
AP
00390388
05/09/2018
OC TANNER RECOGNITION COMPANY
119.00
0.00
119.00
AP
00390389
05/09/2018
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTRS OF CA
2,717.00
0.00
2,717.00
AP
00390390
05/09/2018
OCLC INC
55.45
0.00
55.45
AP
00390391
05/09/2018
ONTARIO ICE SKATING CENTER
1,646.40
0.00
1,646.40
AP
00390392
05/09/2018
PERRY, SUSAN
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390393
05/09/2018
PRE -PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC
78.38
0.00
78.38
AP
00390394
05/09/2018
PSA PRINT GROUP
38.79
0.00
38.79
AP
00390395
05/09/2018
R AND R AUTOMOTIVE
2,196.95
0.00
2,196.95
AP
00390396
05/09/2018
RBM LOCK AND KEY SERVICE
18.86
0.00
18.86
AP
00390397
05/09/2018
RICHARD WIGHTMAN CONSTRUCTION INC
5,910.00
0.00
5,910.00
AP
00390398
05/09/2018
RICHARD WIGHTMAN CONSTRUCTION INC
9,900.00
0.00
9,900.00
AP
00390399
05/09/2018
RODMAN, JERII E
330.00
0.00
330.00
AP
00390400
05/09/2018
ROTO ROOTER
0.00
1,184.85
1,184.85
AP
00390401
05/09/2018
SAVANNAH ROSE CARRIAGES
450.00
0.00
450.00
AP
00390402
05/09/2018
SBPEA
1,596.04
0.00
1,596.04
AP
00390403
05/09/2018
SC FUELS
0.00
1,298.14
1,298.14
AP
00390404
05/09/2018
SIGN SHOP, THE
0.00
16.16
16.16
AP
00390405
05/09/2018
SKINNER, TERRI
139.58
0.00
139.58
AP
00390406
05/09/2018
SNIDER, LANCE
0.00
200.00
200.00
AP
00390407
05/09/2018
SOLAR CITY CORPORATION
35,056.15
0.00
35,056.15
AP
00390408
05/09/2018
SOUTH COAST AQMD
0.00
514.44
514.44
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 4
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 44
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390413
05/09/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
21,294.11
1,348.96
22,643.07 ***
AP
00390414
05/09/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
382.46
0.00
382.46
AP
00390415
05/09/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RADIO
2,000.00
0.00
2,000.00
AP
00390416
05/09/2018
SPECIALIZED CARE FOSTER FAMILY AGENCY
250.00
0.00
250.00
AP
00390417
05/09/2018
SPRINT
0.00
112.93
112.93
AP
00390418
05/09/2018
STORAGE CONTAINER.COM
269.50
0.00
269.50
AP
00390419
05/09/2018
SUPERION LLC
427.20
0.00
427.20
AP
00390420
05/09/2018
SYSTEMS SOURCE INC
8,987.07
0.00
8,987.07
AP
00390421
05/09/2018
THE COUNSELING TEAM INTERNATIONAL
0.00
600.00
600.00
AP
00390422
05/09/2018
TOLAR, JILLIAN
81.45
0.00
81.45
AP
00390423
05/09/2018
U S LEGAL SUPPORT INC
277.03
0.00
277.03
AP
00390424
05/09/2018
UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CA INC
212.88
0.00
212.88
AP
00390425
05/09/2018
UNITED WAY
116.00
0.00
116.00
AP
00390426
05/09/2018
VERIZON BUSINESS SERVICES
41.32
0.00
41.32
AP
00390427
05/09/2018
VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
60.12
0.00
60.12
AP
00390428
05/09/2018
VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
101.39
0.00
101.39
AP
00390429
05/09/2018
VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY
5,398.40
0.00
5,398.40
AP
00390430
05/09/2018
VIVERAE INC
1,363.20
0.00
1,363.20
AP
00390431
05/09/2018
VORTEX INDUSTRIES INC
0.00
2,188.31
2,188.31
AP
00390432
05/09/2018
WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO
0.00
3,363.84
3,363.84
AP
00390433
05/09/2018
WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY
0.00
1,880.07
1,880.07
AP
00390434
05/09/2018
WESTERN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE
1,380.00
0.00
1,380.00
AP
00390435
05/09/2018
WIGGINS, ALEX Z.
74.88
0.00
74.88
AP
00390436
05/09/2018
WORLD ELITE GYMNASTICS
487.90
0.00
487.90
AP
00390437
05/09/2018
XEROX FINANCIAL SERVICES
298.38
0.00
298.38
AP
00390438
05/09/2018
ZOETIS US LLC
533.07
0.00
533.07
AP
00390439
05/09/2018
AUSTIN, CYNTHIA
250.00
0.00
250.00
AP
00390440
05/10/2018
ABC LOCKSMITHS
1,170.42
4,752.32
5,922.74 ***
AP
00390441
05/10/2018
CALSENSE
2,419.18
0.00
2,419.18
AP
00390442
05/10/2018
CITRUS MOTORS ONTARIO INC
0.00
2,400.73
2,400.73
AP
00390443
05/10/2018
DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION
565.47
0.00
565.47
AP
00390444
05/10/2018
EMCOR SERVICE
7,809.00
0.00
7,809.00
AP
00390445
05/10/2018
EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS
319.96
0.00
319.96
AP
00390446
05/10/2018
FORD OF UPLAND INC
1,499.37
0.00
1,499.37
AP
00390447
05/10/2018
GRANICUS INC
8,289.92
0.00
8,289.92
AP
00390448
05/10/2018
INTERSTATE BATTERIES
104.07
0.00
104.07
AP
00390449
05/10/2018
LIMS AUTO INC
260.37
0.00
260.37
AP
00390451
05/10/2018
OFFICE DEPOT
2,365.14
204.39
2,569.53 ***
AP
00390452
05/10/2018
ORKIN PEST CONTROL
607.00
564.00
1,171.00 ***
AP
00390453
05/10/2018
OVERDRIVE INC
1,439.57
0.00
1,439.57
AP
00390454
05/10/2018
SUNRISE FORD
228.57
0.00
228.57
AP
00390455
05/10/2018
VISTA PAINT
92.96
0.00
92.96
AP
00390456
05/16/2018
6TH & HERMOSA JP/DF LLC
352,528.00
0.00
352,528.00
AP
00390457
05/16/2018
ABLE BUILDING MAINTENANCE
304.75
0.00
304.75
AP
00390458
05/16/2018
ACEY DECY EQUIPMENT INC.
1,616.09
0.00
1,616.09
AP
00390459
05/16/2018
ADAPT CONSULTING INC
888.13
0.00
888.13
AP
00390460
05/16/2018
ALBERRE, SAMI
2,418.00
0.00
2,418.00
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 5
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 45
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390461
05/16/2018
ALL WELDING
3,606.56
0.00
3,606.56
AP
00390462
05/16/2018
ALLEN, DEBORAH
55.31
0.00
55.31
AP
00390463
05/16/2018
ALLSTAR AUTO CENTER
149.10
0.00
149.10
AP
00390464
05/16/2018
ALSHAMSI, MOHAMMED
257.49
0.00
257.49
AP
00390465
05/16/2018
AMERICAN TRAINING RESOURCES INC
1,076.68
0.00
1,076.68
AP
00390466
05/16/2018
ASSI SECURITY
0.00
41,880.00
41,880.00
AP
00390467
05/16/2018
BARELA, TINA
500.00
0.00
500.00
AP
00390468
05/16/2018
BERN MARIES PROMOTIONAL PRODUCTS
1,028.15
0.00
1,028.15
AP
00390469
05/16/2018
BERNELL HYDRAULICS INC
443.99
0.00
443.99
AP
00390470
05/16/2018
BOOKS, CHRISTOPHER
1,137.50
0.00
1,137.50
AP
00390471
05/16/2018
BORDIN MARTORELL LLP
3,518.80
0.00
3,518.80
AP
00390472
05/16/2018
BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE SERVICES INC.
189,561.31
0.00
189,561.31
AP
00390473
05/16/2018
BUSH, PENELOPE
148.52
0.00
148.52
AP
00390476
05/16/2018
C V W D
42,818.17
73.60
42,891.77 ***
AP
00390477
05/16/2018
CAL POLY POMONA FOUNDATION
4,250.00
0.00
4,250.00
AP
00390478
05/16/2018
CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
234.10
0.00
234.10 ***
AP
00390479
05/16/2018
CFCA OPERATIONS CHIEFS SECTION
0.00
75.00
75.00
AP
00390480
05/16/2018
CINTAS CORPORATION #150
263.32
38.65
301.97 ***
AP
00390481
05/16/2018
CLF WAREHOUSE
0.00
31.59
31.59
AP
00390482
05/16/2018
COAST RECREATION INC
533.80
0.00
533.80
AP
00390483
05/16/2018
CONVERGEONE INC.
15,047.00
0.00
15,047.00
AP
00390484
05/16/2018
CORELOGIC SOLUTIONS LLC
257.50
0.00
257.50
AP
00390485
05/16/2018
CORMIER, JAMES
1,137.50
0.00
1,137.50
AP
00390486
05/16/2018
CPRS DISTRICT 11
70.00
0.00
70.00
AP
00390487
05/16/2018
CUNNINGHAM, MAUREEN B.
1,948.00
0.00
1,948.00
AP
00390488
05/16/2018
DELTA TECH RANCHO
387.37
0.00
387.37
AP
00390489
05/16/2018
DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS
115.00
0.00
115.00
AP
00390490
05/16/2018
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
2,654.00
0.00
2,654.00
AP
00390491
05/16/2018
DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES
36.26
0.00
36.26
AP
00390492
05/16/2018
DUGMORE & DUNCAN INC.
239.85
0.00
239.85
AP
00390493
05/16/2018
DUMBELL MAN FITNESS EQUIPMENT, THE
502.66
0.00
502.66
AP
00390494
05/16/2018
E GROUP, THE
450.00
0.00
450.00
AP
00390495
05/16/2018
ED RUZAK & ASSOCIATES INC.
3,126.00
0.00
3,126.00
AP
00390496
05/16/2018
EIGHTH AVENUE ENTERPRISE LLC
62.50
0.00
62.50
AP
00390497
05/16/2018
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
7,020.00
0.00
7,020.00
AP
00390498
05/16/2018
ENVIRONMENTAL RECOVERY SERVICES INC.
1,750.25
0.00
1,750.25
AP
00390499
05/16/2018
ETIWANDA SCHOOL DISTRICT
196.00
0.00
196.00
AP
00390500
05/16/2018
EXECUTIVE AUTO DETAIL
0.00
900.00
900.00
AP
00390501
05/16/2018
EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY
666.26
0.00
666.26
AP
00390502
05/16/2018
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP
13.76
0.00
13.76
AP
00390503
05/16/2018
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP
27.90
0.00
27.90
AP
00390504
05/16/2018
FLEETCREW
1,254.85
0.00
1,254.85
AP
00390505
05/16/2018
FORDE, MARITZA
22.83
0.00
22.83
AP
00390506
05/16/2018
FORTIN LAW GROUP
12,928.57
0.00
12,928.57
AP
00390507
05/16/2018
FRONTIER COMM
475.45
0.00
475.45
AP
00390508
05/16/2018
GAIL MATERIALS
2,340.76
0.00
2,340.76
AP
00390509
05/16/2018
GEOGRAPHICS
2,153.52
0.00
2,153.52
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 6
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 46
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390510
05/16/2018
GLENN B. DORNING INC.
2,945.03
0.00
2,945.03
AP
00390511
05/16/2018
GOLDEN STATE RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
90,787.00
1,362.00
92,149.00 ***
AP
00390512
05/16/2018
GOLDEN STATE RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
90,849.00
1,362.00
92,211.00 ***
AP
00390513
05/16/2018
GOODMAN, ALINA
734.00
0.00
734.00
AP
00390514
05/16/2018
GRAINGER
416.22
104.84
521.06 ***
AP
00390515
05/16/2018
HAMER, ANN
30.00
0.00
30.00
AP
00390516
05/16/2018
HDL COREN AND CONE
4,200.00
0.00
4,200.00
AP
00390517
05/16/2018
HEARTSAVERS LLC
22.00
0.00
22.00
AP
00390518
05/16/2018
HERITAGE EDUCATION GROUP
810.00
0.00
810.00
AP
00390519
05/16/2018
HMC ARCHITECTS
18,162.50
0.00
18,162.50
AP
00390520
05/16/2018
HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 645
401.87
0.00
401.87
AP
00390521
05/16/2018
HOSE HEAVEN
130.81
0.00
130.81
AP
00390522
05/16/2018
HOYT LUMBER CO., SM
63.81
0.00
63.81
AP
00390523
05/16/2018
HUNTINGTON HARDWARE
496.15
0.00
496.15
AP
00390524
05/16/2018
IMAGEMPORIUM, THE
3,221.73
0.00
3,221.73
AP
00390525
05/16/2018
INDERWIESCHE, MATT
1,569.00
0.00
1,569.00
AP
00390526
05/16/2018
INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO INC
840.45
0.00
840.45
AP
00390527
05/16/2018
INLAND BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CO INC
3,245.00
0.00
3,245.00
AP
00390528
05/16/2018
INTELESYS ONE INC
1,173.76
0.00
1,173.76
AP
00390529
05/16/2018
INTERNATIONAL LINE BUILDERS INC
8,095.52
0.00
8,095.52
AP
00390530
05/16/2018
KINDRED CORPORATION
27,597.86
0.00
27,597.86
AP
00390531
05/16/2018
KIRKWOOD, MARGARET
135.00
0.00
135.00
AP
00390532
05/16/2018
KOGGE, MICHAEL
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390533
05/16/2018
KRIEGER, ED
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390534
05/16/2018
KVCR EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION
500.00
0.00
500.00
AP
00390535
05/16/2018
LIFE ASSIST INC
0.00
5,322.89
5,322.89
AP
00390536
05/16/2018
LIGHTHOUSE, THE
349.04
0.00
349.04
AP
00390537
05/16/2018
LINDO, DANIELLE
500.00
0.00
500.00
AP
00390538
05/16/2018
LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS
2,925.00
0.00
2,925.00
AP
00390539
05/16/2018
LIVE OAK DOG OBEDIENCE
312.00
0.00
312.00
AP
00390540
05/16/2018
LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION
2,363.64
0.00
2,363.64
AP
00390541
05/16/2018
LUNA, AYLEEN
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390542
05/16/2018
MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC
8,753.03
0.00
8,753.03
AP
00390543
05/16/2018
MC AVOY & MARKHAM
60,771.00
0.00
60,771.00
AP
00390544
05/16/2018
MCMASTER CARR SUPPLY COMPANY
586.75
0.00
586.75
AP
00390545
05/16/2018
MEDELLIN, RAMON
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390546
05/16/2018
MIDWEST TAPE
281.91
0.00
281.91
AP
00390547
05/16/2018
MOUNTAIN VIEW SMALL ENG REPAIR
85.82
0.00
85.82
AP
00390548
05/16/2018
MUNOZ, LUIS
54.00
0.00
54.00
AP
00390549
05/16/2018
NAPA AUTO PARTS
7.96
41.77
49.73 ***
AP
00390550
05/16/2018
NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL
645.00
0.00
645.00
AP
00390551
05/16/2018
NEW COLOR SCREEN PRINTING & EMBROIDERY
174.56
0.00
174.56
AP
00390552
05/16/2018
NGUYEN, THANH
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390553
05/16/2018
NIXON EGLI EQUIPMENT CO
2,002.14
0.00
2,002.14
AP
00390554
05/16/2018
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTRS OF CA
705.00
0.00
705.00
AP
00390555
05/16/2018
OCLC INC
55.41
0.00
55.41
AP
00390556
05/16/2018
ONTARIO WINNELSON CO
185.33
0.00
185.33
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 7
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 47
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390557
05/16/2018
OPEN APPS INC
15,421.56
0.00
15,421.56
AP
00390558
05/16/2018
ORTIZ, MADISON
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390559
05/16/2018
PACHECO, ART
1,137.50
0.00
1,137.50
AP
00390560
05/16/2018
PACIFIC UTILITY INSTALLATION INC
225.00
0.00
225.00
AP
00390561
05/16/2018
PAPE GROUP INC, THE
1,046.51
0.00
1,046.51
AP
00390562
05/16/2018
PETES ROAD SERVICE INC
116.54
0.00
116.54
AP
00390563
05/16/2018
PLASCENCIA, ELSA LARA
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390564
05/16/2018
PMW ASSOCIATES
393.00
0.00
393.00
AP
00390565
05/16/2018
POLK, DARRYL
487.62
0.00
487.62
AP
00390566
05/16/2018
RAMIREZ-GALLEGOS, CRYSTAL
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390567
05/16/2018
RANCHO YOGA
429.81
0.00
429.81
AP
00390568
05/16/2018
RDO EQUIPMENT COMPANY
241.19
0.00
241.19
AP
00390569
05/16/2018
REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTOR
473.37
0.00
473.37
AP
00390570
05/16/2018
RIVAS, KRISTINA
45.13
0.00
45.13
AP
00390571
05/16/2018
RJ THOMAS MFG COMPANY INC
3,356.00
0.00
3,356.00
AP
00390572
05/16/2018
RMA GROUP
0.00
3,360.00
3,360.00
AP
00390573
05/16/2018
ROMERO, SARAH
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390574
05/16/2018
ROTO ROOTER
1,629.24
0.00
1,629.24
AP
00390575
05/16/2018
SAFE -ENTRY TECHNICAL INC
0.00
375.00
375.00
AP
00390576
05/16/2018
SAFETY CENTER INC
1,900.00
0.00
1,900.00
AP
00390577
05/16/2018
SAFETY KLEEN SYSTEMS INC
188.56
0.00
188.56
AP
00390578
05/16/2018
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT
2,174.64
0.00
2,174.64
AP
00390579
05/16/2018
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT
23,743.99
0.00
23,743.99
AP
00390580
05/16/2018
SAN BERNARDINO CTY
15,169.78
0.00
15,169.78
AP
00390581
05/16/2018
SECC CORP
2,938.48
0.00
2,938.48
AP
00390582
05/16/2018
SERRATO & ASSOCIATES
70.00
0.00
70.00
AP
00390583
05/16/2018
SERRATO & ASSOCIATES
135.00
0.00
135.00
AP
00390584
05/16/2018
SHRED IT USA LLC
190.95
0.00
190.95
AP
00390585
05/16/2018
SHRED PROS
1,062.00
0.00
1,062.00
AP
00390586
05/16/2018
SIEMENS INDUSTRY INC
41,469.70
0.00
41,469.70
AP
00390587
05/16/2018
SIGN SHOP, THE
0.00
232.95
232.95
AP
00390588
05/16/2018
SILVER & WRIGHT LLP
23,434.35
0.00
23,434.35
AP
00390589
05/16/2018
SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC
577.19
0.00
577.19
AP
00390590
05/16/2018
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
809.60
0.00
809.60
AP
00390591
05/16/2018
SOLAR CITY CORPORATION
120,735.61
0.00
120,735.61
AP
00390595
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
21,389.25
0.00
21,389.25
AP
00390596
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
3,175.86
0.00
3,175.86
AP
00390597
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
14,776.17
0.00
14,776.17
AP
00390598
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
15,241.39
0.00
15,241.39
AP
00390599
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
14,264.00
0.00
14,264.00
AP
00390600
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
18,267.53
0.00
18,267.53
AP
00390601
05/16/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
12,742.30
0.00
12,742.30
AP
00390602
05/16/2018
STABILIZER SOLUTIONS INC
1,774.06
0.00
1,774.06
AP
00390603
05/16/2018
STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE
142.83
0.00
142.83
AP
00390604
05/16/2018
STORAGE CONTAINER.COM
200.00
0.00
200.00
AP
00390605
05/16/2018
STOTZ EQUIPMENT
216.86
0.00
216.86
AP
00390606
05/16/2018
STOVER SEED COMPANY
7,984.28
0.00
7,984.28
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 8
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 48
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390607
05/16/2018
THE COUNSELING TEAM INTERNATIONAL
0.00
1,270.00
1,270.00
AP
00390608
05/16/2018
THOMPSON PLUMBING SUPPLY INC
4,841.80
0.00
4,841.80
AP
00390609
05/16/2018
THOMSON REUTERS WEST PUBLISHING CORP
364.93
0.00
364.93
AP
00390610
05/16/2018
TINT CITY WINDOW TINTING
130.00
0.00
130.00
AP
00390611
05/16/2018
UNITED PACIFIC SERVICES INC
120,307.00
0.00
120,307.00
AP
00390612
05/16/2018
UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CA INC
281.34
0.00
281.34
AP
00390613
05/16/2018
UPSCO POWERSAFE SYSTEMS INC
200.00
0.00
200.00
AP
00390614
05/16/2018
UTILIQUEST
1,218.05
0.00
1,218.05
AP
00390615
05/16/2018
VALLEJO, ELSA
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390616
05/16/2018
VERIZON
24.61
0.00
24.61
AP
00390617
05/16/2018
VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
183.09
0.00
183.09
AP
00390618
05/16/2018
VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
4,795.38
0.00
4,795.38
AP
00390619
05/16/2018
VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
108.00
0.00
108.00
AP
00390620
05/16/2018
VISION SERVICE PLAN CA
11,451.93
0.00
11,451.93
AP
00390621
05/16/2018
VOHNE LICHE KENNELS INC
125.00
0.00
125.00
AP
00390622
05/16/2018
VORTEX INDUSTRIES INC
2,895.50
0.00
2,895.50
AP
00390623
05/16/2018
VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY
78.85
0.00
78.85
AP
00390624
05/16/2018
WAINWRIGHT, JANICE RODGERS
1,634.00
0.00
1,634.00
AP
00390625
05/16/2018
WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO
3,307.72
0.00
3,307.72
AP
00390626
05/16/2018
WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY
5,214.45
1,034.70
6,249.15 ***
AP
00390627
05/16/2018
WORD MILL PUBLISHING
800.00
0.00
800.00
AP
00390629
05/16/2018
XEROX CORPORATION
9,268.96
437.07
9,706.03 ***
AP
00390630
05/16/2018
YALE CHASE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES INC
12,699.05
0.00
12,699.05
AP
00390631
05/16/2018
YBANEZ, CAROLE ARLEEN
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390632
05/16/2018
YOUNGERMAN, GEOFFREY
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390633
05/17/2018
AIRGAS USA LLC
3,241.92
0.00
3,241.92
AP
00390634
05/17/2018
EMCOR SERVICE
13,331.00
0.00
13,331.00
AP
00390635
05/17/2018
EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS
979.15
0.00
979.15
AP
00390636
05/17/2018
FORD OF UPLAND INC
1,700.09
0.00
1,700.09
AP
00390637
05/17/2018
GRANICUS INC
8,289.88
0.00
8,289.88
AP
00390639
05/17/2018
OFFICE DEPOT
8,089.00
1,293.59
9,382.59 ***
AP
00390640
05/17/2018
ORKIN PEST CONTROL
490.72
0.00
490.72
AP
00390641
05/17/2018
SUNRISE FORD
4,563.93
0.00
4,563.93
AP
00390642
05/17/2018
TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCTS
9,226.79
0.00
9,226.79
AP
00390643
05/23/2018
CURATALO, JAMES
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00390644
05/23/2018
KIRKPATRICK, WILLIAM
0.00
1,461.55
1,461.55
AP
00390645
05/23/2018
LONCAR, PHILIP
0.00
1,152.40
1,152.40
AP
00390646
05/23/2018
TOWNSEND, JAMES
0.00
1,618.70
1,618.70
AP
00390647
05/23/2018
WALKER, KENNETH
0.00
249.30
249.30
AP
00390648
05/23/2018
A AND R TIRE SERVICE
200.36
0.00
200.36
AP
00390649
05/23/2018
A'JONTUE, ROSE ANN
554.40
0.00
554.40
AP
00390650
05/23/2018
ABLE BUILDING MAINTENANCE
932.65
0.00
932.65
AP
00390651
05/23/2018
ACEY DECY EQUIPMENT INC.
245.55
0.00
245.55
AP
00390652
05/23/2018
ADAPT CONSULTING INC
519.07
0.00
519.07
AP
00390653
05/23/2018
ADVANCED CHEMICAL TRANSPORT
1,439.50
0.00
1,439.50
AP
00390654
05/23/2018
ADVANTAGE SEALING SYSTEMS INC.
210.11
0.00
210.11
AP
00390655
05/23/2018
AFLAC GROUP INSURANCE
40.97
0.00
40.97
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 9
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 49
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390656
05/23/2018
AIR EXCHANGE INC
0.00
5,996.91
5,996.91
AP
00390657
05/23/2018
ALBERT A. WEBB
207.00
0.00
207.00
AP
00390658
05/23/2018
ALCORN, RICHARD
25.00
0.00
25.00
AP
00390659
05/23/2018
ALL CITIES TOOLS
165.07
0.00
165.07
AP
00390660
05/23/2018
ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES INC.
214.00
0.00
214.00
AP
00390661
05/23/2018
ALLIED NETWORK SOLUTIONS INC
5,909.32
0.00
5,909.32
AP
00390662
05/23/2018
ALLSTAR AUTO CENTER
599.73
0.00
599.73
AP
00390663
05/23/2018
AMAN NETWORKS
6,900.00
0.00
6,900.00
AP
00390664
05/23/2018
AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES
514.23
0.00
514.23
AP
00390665
05/23/2018
AQUABIO ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES INC.
1,745.00
0.00
1,745.00
AP
00390666
05/23/2018
AROUND THE CLOCK TRANSPORTATION INC.
292.00
0.00
292.00
AP
00390667
05/23/2018
ARRIAZA, ERICK
113.00
0.00
113.00
AP
00390668
05/23/2018
ART OF LIVING FOUNDATION
54.00
0.00
54.00
AP
00390669
05/23/2018
ASSI SECURITY
450.00
1,470.00
1,920.00 ***
AP
00390670
05/23/2018
AUSTIN, NATHAN
61.00
0.00
61.00
AP
00390671
05/23/2018
AUTO AND RV SPECIALISTS INC.
200.06
0.00
200.06
AP
00390672
05/23/2018
BABCOCK LABORATORIES INC
515.00
0.00
515.00
AP
00390673
05/23/2018
BAILEY-THOMPSON, ANGELA
61.00
0.00
61.00
AP
00390674
05/23/2018
BANKS, AYANNA
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390675
05/23/2018
BATES, WONNE
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390676
05/23/2018
BECK, JEREMIAH
51.00
0.00
51.00
AP
00390677
05/23/2018
BERNELL HYDRAULICS INC
64.48
0.00
64.48
AP
00390678
05/23/2018
BOKELMAN, CHEYANNE
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390679
05/23/2018
BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE SERVICES INC.
22,749.90
0.00
22,749.90
AP
00390680
05/23/2018
BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP
4,500.50
0.00
4,500.50
AP
00390681
05/23/2018
C V W D
287.63
0.00
287.63
AP
00390685
05/23/2018
C V W D
56,388.94
1,589.74
57,978.68 ***
AP
00390686
05/23/2018
CABLE INC.
4,018.50
0.00
4,018.50
AP
00390687
05/23/2018
CALIFORNIA FIRE CHIEFS ASSOC.
0.00
800.00
800.00
AP
00390688
05/23/2018
CALIFORNIA PUMPING AND SANITATION SYSTEM
1,500.00
0.00
1,500.00
AP
00390689
05/23/2018
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
8.44
0.00
8.44
AP
00390690
05/23/2018
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
100.00
0.00
100.00
AP
00390691
05/23/2018
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
1,318.48
0.00
1,318.48
AP
00390692
05/23/2018
CARDENAS, GABRIEL
61.00
0.00
61.00
AP
00390693
05/23/2018
CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
649.25
237.89
887.14 ***
AP
00390694
05/23/2018
CARTY, DIANE
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390695
05/23/2018
CASTILLO, FRANCISCO
648.00
0.00
648.00
AP
00390696
05/23/2018
CCS ORANGE COUNTY JANITORIAL INC.
50,630.89
1,176.42
51,807.31 ***
AP
00390697
05/23/2018
CDW GOVERNMENT INC.
0.00
2,174.48
2,174.48
AP
00390698
05/23/2018
CENTERPOINTE CONTRACTORS
15,000.00
0.00
15,000.00
AP
00390699
05/23/2018
CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES INC.
2,640.00
0.00
2,640.00
AP
00390700
05/23/2018
CINTAS CORPORATION #150
1,472.56
186.32
1,658.88 ***
AP
00390701
05/23/2018
CLARK, KAREN
270.00
0.00
270.00
AP
00390702
05/23/2018
CLARK, ROBERT
164.00
0.00
164.00
AP
00390703
05/23/2018
CLASSE PARTY RENTALS
856.25
0.00
856.25
AP
00390704
05/23/2018
COBB, ANNE M OR BILLY L
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390705
05/23/2018
COMBINED MARTIAL SCIENCE INC
4,812.00
0.00
4,812.00
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 10
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 50
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Cu
Fire
Amount
AP
00390706
05/23/2018
CONNELLY, BRIANNA
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390707
05/23/2018
CONVERGEONE INC.
3,536.25
0.00
3,536.25
AP
00390708
05/23/2018
CORDURA, SOPHIA
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390709
05/23/2018
CORREA, SERGIO
100.00
0.00
100.00
AP
00390710
05/23/2018
COUNTRY ESTATE FENCE CO INC
3,106.59
0.00
3,106.59
AP
00390711
05/23/2018
CREATIVE BRAIN LEARNING
165.00
0.00
165.00
AP
00390712
05/23/2018
CROP PRODUCTION SERVICES INC
1,093.16
0.00
1,093.16
AP
00390713
05/23/2018
CRUZ -MARTINEZ, SALVADOR
61.00
0.00
61.00
AP
00390714
05/23/2018
DADE, EDRIS JEAN
70.00
0.00
70.00
AP
00390715
05/23/2018
DAIMIER TRUST LSR
112.00
0.00
112.00
AP
00390716
05/23/2018
DANCE TERRIFIC
2,990.40
0.00
2,990.40
AP
00390717
05/23/2018
DASHER, WARREN
253.00
0.00
253.00
AP
00390718
05/23/2018
DATA ARC LLC
8,114.22
0.00
8,114.22
AP
00390719
05/23/2018
DAVIS, SAM
102.02
0.00
102.02
AP
00390720
05/23/2018
DAVIS, SONIA
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390721
05/23/2018
DEALER ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS
598.12
0.00
598.12
AP
00390722
05/23/2018
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION
0.00
36,992.25
36,992.25
AP
00390723
05/23/2018
DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES
21.00
0.00
21.00
AP
00390724
05/23/2018
DESERT MOUNTAIN SELPA
1,100.00
0.00
1,100.00
AP
00390725
05/23/2018
DIRECTV
135.53
0.00
135.53
AP
00390726
05/23/2018
DOHONEY, BRENDA L
51.00
0.00
51.00
AP
00390727
05/23/2018
DUGMORE & DUNCAN INC.
1,204.13
0.00
1,204.13
AP
00390728
05/23/2018
DUMBELL MAN FITNESS EQUIPMENT, THE
187.50
0.00
187.50
AP
00390729
05/23/2018
DUNN, ANN MARIE
168.00
0.00
168.00
AP
00390730
05/23/2018
EBS CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
10,000.00
0.00
10,000.00
AP
00390731
05/23/2018
EMBROIDME
68.66
0.00
68.66
AP
00390732
05/23/2018
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
60.00
0.00
60.00
AP
00390733
05/23/2018
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP
22.80
0.00
22.80
AP
00390734
05/23/2018
FENG, YU LIN
100.00
0.00
100.00
AP
00390735
05/23/2018
FIRE ETC.
0.00
4,332.44
4,332.44
AP
00390736
05/23/2018
FIRST CLASS HEATING & AIR
8,350.00
0.00
8,350.00
AP
00390737
05/23/2018
FRONTIER COMM
2,959.40
561.54
3,520.94 ***
AP
00390738
05/23/2018
G AND M BUSINESS INTERIORS
23,379.47
0.00
23,379.47
AP
00390739
05/23/2018
GARCIA, BERENICE
15.00
0.00
15.00
AP
00390740
05/23/2018
GARCIA, CELINA FLEUR
61.00
0.00
61.00
AP
00390741
05/23/2018
GARDNER TRUCKING
71.00
0.00
71.00
AP
00390742
05/23/2018
GARDNER TRUCKING
429.00
0.00
429.00
AP
00390743
05/23/2018
GEOGRAPHICS
1,181.84
0.00
1,181.84
AP
00390744
05/23/2018
GEORGE HILLS COMPANY
962.80
0.00
962.80
AP
00390745
05/23/2018
GIORDANO, MARIANNA
189.00
0.00
189.00
AP
00390746
05/23/2018
GOMEZ, DENISE
12.50
0.00
12.50
AP
00390747
05/23/2018
GOMEZ-PRESTON, CHERYL
156.63
0.00
156.63
AP
00390748
05/23/2018
GONZALEZ, CATHY
126.00
0.00
126.00
AP
00390749
05/23/2018
GRAINGER
0.00
72.19
72.19
AP
00390750
05/23/2018
GRANADOS, KOINTA C OR SALVADOR JUAREZ
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390751
05/23/2018
GRAPHICS FACTORY INC.
156.24
0.00
156.24
AP
00390752
05/23/2018
GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT
266.65
0.00
266.65
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 11
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 51
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390753
05/23/2018
GUGLIELMO, TONY
32.74
0.00
32.74
AP
00390754
05/23/2018
HARDEEP, SINGH
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390755
05/23/2018
HATTEMER, RALF
71.00
0.00
71.00
AP
00390756
05/23/2018
HERC RENTALS INC.
8,304.84
0.00
8,304.84
AP
00390757
05/23/2018
HI WAY SAFETY INC
887.31
0.00
887.31
AP
00390758
05/23/2018
HILTI INC
455.29
0.00
455.29
AP
00390759
05/23/2018
HMC ARCHITECTS
1,162.50
67,995.90
69,158.40 ***
AP
00390760
05/23/2018
HOSE MAN INC
0.00
102.80
102.80
AP
00390761
05/23/2018
HOTTINGER, HEATHER
675.00
0.00
675.00
AP
00390762
05/23/2018
ICE DATA PRICING AND REFERENCE DATA LLC
133.85
0.00
133.85
AP
00390763
05/23/2018
IDEXX DISTRIBUTION INC
3,512.80
0.00
3,512.80
AP
00390764
05/23/2018
INLAND PRESORT & MAILING SERVICES
71.24
0.00
71.24
AP
00390765
05/23/2018
INLAND VALLEY COUNCIL OF CHURCHES
8,974.10
0.00
8,974.10
AP
00390766
05/23/2018
INLAND VALLEY DANCE ACADEMY
3,723.00
0.00
3,723.00
AP
00390767
05/23/2018
INTELESYS ONE INC
1,118.86
0.00
1,118.86
AP
00390768
05/23/2018
INTERNATIONAL LINE BUILDERS INC
270,728.91
180,485.95
451,214.86 ***
AP
00390769
05/23/2018
JOHNNY ALLEN TENNIS ACADEMY
1,642.20
0.00
1,642.20
AP
00390770
05/23/2018
JONES, NANCY
250.00
0.00
250.00
AP
00390771
05/23/2018
JTB SUPPLY COMPANY
4,848.75
0.00
4,848.75
AP
00390772
05/23/2018
K -K WOODWORKING
64.59
0.00
64.59
AP
00390773
05/23/2018
KB HOME
7,602.00
0.00
7,602.00
AP
00390774
05/23/2018
KEITH, JORRY
582.00
0.00
582.00
AP
00390775
05/23/2018
KVAC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC
0.00
125.00
125.00
AP
00390776
05/23/2018
LANTAI, KRIS
400.00
0.00
400.00
AP
00390777
05/23/2018
LEE, VAUGHN
15.56
0.00
15.56
AP
00390778
05/23/2018
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS LLC
5,291.57
0.00
5,291.57
AP
00390779
05/23/2018
LEVERAGE INFORMATION SYSTEMS INC
535.00
0.00
535.00
AP
00390780
05/23/2018
LIGHTHOUSE, THE
624.05
0.00
624.05
AP
00390781
05/23/2018
LIU, NAN
12.05
0.00
12.05
AP
00390782
05/23/2018
LIVE OAK DOG OBEDIENCE
936.00
0.00
936.00
AP
00390783
05/23/2018
LONG, QUISHAWA
285.32
0.00
285.32
AP
00390784
05/23/2018
LOUIE'S NURSERY
1,126.88
0.00
1,126.88
AP
00390785
05/23/2018
MADRIGAL, CECILIA
114.00
0.00
114.00
AP
00390786
05/23/2018
MALEA, NICHOLAS
61.00
0.00
61.00
AP
00390787
05/23/2018
MARK CHRISTOPHER INC
0.00
796.02
796.02
AP
00390788
05/23/2018
MARSHALL, SYLVIA
1,656.00
0.00
1,656.00
AP
00390789
05/23/2018
MARTINEZ, STEVE
51.00
0.00
51.00
AP
00390790
05/23/2018
MAXWELL, ANTHONY
9.00
0.00
9.00
AP
00390791
05/23/2018
MCGEE, KELLIE R
100.00
0.00
100.00
AP
00390792
05/23/2018
MOFFATT & NICHOL
18,017.00
0.00
18,017.00
AP
00390793
05/23/2018
MONDRAGON, FABIOLA
147.00
0.00
147.00
AP
00390794
05/23/2018
MORRIS, RICHARD
120.00
0.00
120.00
AP
00390795
05/23/2018
MORRISON SPORTS LLC
9,865.96
0.00
9,865.96
AP
00390796
05/23/2018
MOUNTAIN VIEW GLASS AND MIRROR INC
46.06
0.00
46.06
AP
00390797
05/23/2018
MOUNTAIN VIEW SMALL ENG REPAIR
1,739.85
0.00
1,739.85
AP
00390798
05/23/2018
MUSICSTAR
330.00
0.00
330.00
AP
00390799
05/23/2018
MUTUAL PROPANE
0.00
1,886.48
1,886.48
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 12
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 52
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390800
05/23/2018
NAPA AUTO PARTS
0.00
37.58
37.58
AP
00390801
05/23/2018
NAVARRO, JESSICA
12.50
0.00
12.50
AP
00390802
05/23/2018
NBS
9,593.75
0.00
9,593.75
AP
00390803
05/23/2018
NEIUBER, ROBERT
318.50
0.00
318.50
AP
00390804
05/23/2018
NEW COLOR SCREEN PRINTING & EMBROIDERY
145.46
0.00
145.46
AP
00390805
05/23/2018
OGBONNA, CHARLES
353.95
0.00
353.95
AP
00390806
05/23/2018
OLS SERVICE INC.
1,271.09
0.00
1,271.09
AP
00390807
05/23/2018
ONTRAC
73.20
0.00
73.20
AP
00390808
05/23/2018
OWEN ELECTRIC INC
92.93
0.00
92.93
AP
00390809
05/23/2018
PACIFIC YOUTH SPORTS
1,785.00
0.00
1,785.00
AP
00390810
05/23/2018
PASMA
99.00
0.00
99.00
AP
00390811
05/23/2018
PETES ROAD SERVICE INC
1,460.97
0.00
1,460.97
AP
00390812
05/23/2018
PRE -PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC
78.38
0.00
78.38
AP
00390813
05/23/2018
PRECISION GYMNASTICS
2,184.70
0.00
2,184.70
AP
00390814
05/23/2018
PRO -LINE INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS INC
637.45
0.00
637.45
AP
00390815
05/23/2018
PSA PRINT GROUP
127.15
0.00
127.15
AP
00390816
05/23/2018
QUICK CRETE PRODUCTS
1,385.67
0.00
1,385.67
AP
00390817
05/23/2018
RASCON, ERIC
112.00
0.00
112.00
AP
00390818
05/23/2018
RBM LOCK AND KEY SERVICE
275.99
0.00
275.99
AP
00390819
05/23/2018
RF WHITE CO INC
2,747.47
0.00
2,747.47
AP
00390820
05/23/2018
RICHARD WIGHTMAN CONSTRUCTION INC
110.00
0.00
110.00
AP
00390821
05/23/2018
RICHARD WIGHTMAN CONSTRUCTION INC
3,000.00
0.00
3,000.00
AP
00390822
05/23/2018
RICHARD WIGHTMAN CONSTRUCTION INC
2,200.00
0.00
2,200.00
AP
00390823
05/23/2018
ROADWAY ENGINEERING & CONTRACTING INC
5,883.87
0.00
5,883.87
AP
00390824
05/23/2018
RODRIGUEZ, VERONICA
12.50
0.00
12.50
AP
00390825
05/23/2018
ROUTE 66 INLAND EMPIRE
500.00
0.00
500.00
AP
00390826
05/23/2018
RYDER TRUCK RENTAL INC
250.00
0.00
250.00
AP
00390827
05/23/2018
SAMS CLUB/SYNCHRONY BANK
12.36
0.00
12.36
AP
00390828
05/23/2018
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT
434.00
0.00
434.00
AP
00390829
05/23/2018
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT
2,118.88
0.00
2,118.88
AP
00390830
05/23/2018
SAN MARINO ROOF CO INC
1,314.40
0.00
1,314.40
AP
00390831
05/23/2018
SANTA MONICA-UCLA MEDICAL CENTER
730.00
0.00
730.00
AP
00390832
05/23/2018
SASSOON, LORI
56.96
0.00
56.96
AP
00390833
05/23/2018
SBPEA
1,592.12
0.00
1,592.12
AP
00390834
05/23/2018
SC FUELS
25,857.46
0.00
25,857.46
AP
00390835
05/23/2018
SC FUELS
3,107.64
0.00
3,107.64
AP
00390836
05/23/2018
SCHOLASTIC BOOK FAIRS
468.77
0.00
468.77
AP
00390837
05/23/2018
SCOTT, MICHAEL
1,639.85
0.00
1,639.85
AP
00390838
05/23/2018
SERRATOS, STEVE
10.00
0.00
10.00
AP
00390839
05/23/2018
SHARANJIT, SINGH
166.00
0.00
166.00
AP
00390840
05/23/2018
SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC
2,637.09
0.00
2,637.09
AP
00390841
05/23/2018
SMITH, ALLYSON
12.50
0.00
12.50
AP
00390842
05/23/2018
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
16.82
296.36
313.18 ***
AP
00390843
05/23/2018
SOLAR CITY CORPORATION
0.00
17,939.95
17,939.95
AP
00390844
05/23/2018
SORACCO, LUISA
12.50
0.00
12.50
AP
00390845
05/23/2018
SOUTH COAST AQMD
0.00
128.61
128.61
AP
00390853
05/23/2018
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
19,545.23
2,293.11
21,838.34 ***
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 13
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 53
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No.
Check Date
Vendor Name
Ca
Fire
Amount
AP
00390854
05/23/2018
STABILIZER SOLUTIONS INC
685.00
0.00
685.00
AP
00390855
05/23/2018
STATER BROS MARKETS
15,000.00
0.00
15,000.00
AP
00390856
05/23/2018
STATEWIDE TRAFFIC SAFETY & SIGNS INC
2,097.24
0.00
2,097.24
AP
00390857
05/23/2018
STOTZ EQUIPMENT
15.66
0.00
15.66
AP
00390858
05/23/2018
STRESS LESS EXPRESS LLC
175.00
0.00
175.00
AP
00390859
05/23/2018
STURM RUGER & CO INC
161.12
0.00
161.12
AP
00390860
05/23/2018
SUPERION LLC
790.00
0.00
790.00
AP
00390861
05/23/2018
SWEET DOUGH CAFE
300.00
0.00
300.00
AP
00390862
05/23/2018
SYSCO LOS ANGELES INC
878.13
0.00
878.13
AP
00390863
05/23/2018
TALLY, JEFFERY
39.18
0.00
39.18
AP
00390864
05/23/2018
THEATREBAM CHICAGO
1,200.00
0.00
1,200.00
AP
00390865
05/23/2018
TK SYSTEMS INC
719.24
0.00
719.24
AP
00390866
05/23/2018
TOXGUARD FLUID TECHNOLOGIES INC
696.64
0.00
696.64
AP
00390867
05/23/2018
TRI -CITY TOWING INC
50.00
0.00
50.00
AP
00390868
05/23/2018
DAIMER TRUST
93.00
0.00
93.00
AP
00390869
05/23/2018
U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500
6,605.00
0.00
6,605.00
AP
00390870
05/23/2018
U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500
18,045.77
0.00
18,045.77
AP
00390871
05/23/2018
U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500
1,497.13
0.00
1,497.13
AP
00390872
05/23/2018
UNDERGROUND SVC ALERT OF SO CAL
321.85
0.00
321.85
AP
00390873
05/23/2018
UNITED WAY
116.00
0.00
116.00
AP
00390874
05/23/2018
UNIVERSAL MARTIAL ARTS CENTERS
882.00
0.00
882.00
AP
00390875
05/23/2018
UPS
125.96
0.00
125.96
AP
00390876
05/23/2018
VERIZON BUSINESS SERVICES
36.81
0.00
36.81
AP
00390877
05/23/2018
VERIZON BUSINESS SERVICES
41.92
0.00
41.92
AP
00390882
05/23/2018
VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
5,778.06
0.00
5,778.06
AP
00390883
05/23/2018
VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY
1,814.13
0.00
1,814.13
AP
00390884
05/23/2018
VO, VUONG
125.55
0.00
125.55
AP
00390885
05/23/2018
VORTEX INDUSTRIES INC
0.00
245.00
245.00
AP
00390886
05/23/2018
WANG, WULIN
12.50
0.00
12.50
AP
00390887
05/23/2018
WESTERN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE
705.00
0.00
705.00
AP
00390888
05/23/2018
WESTERN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE
350.00
0.00
350.00
AP
00390889
05/23/2018
WHITE CAP CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY
308.66
0.00
308.66
AP
00390890
05/23/2018
WHITE HOUSE PHOTO INC
350.00
0.00
350.00
AP
00390891
05/23/2018
WILSON ESTATES LLC
5,250.00
0.00
5,250.00
AP
00390892
05/23/2018
WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY INC
15,000.00
0.00
15,000.00
AP
00390893
05/23/2018
YOUNG REMBRANDTS
277.20
0.00
277.20
AP
00390894
05/23/2018
ZOETIS US LLC
1,966.56
0.00
1,966.56
AP
00390895
05/24/2018
AIRGAS USA LLC
0.00
284.50
284.50
AP
00390896
05/24/2018
EMCOR SERVICE
0.00
1,224.84
1,224.84
AP
00390897
05/24/2018
INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN
940.00
0.00
940.00
AP
00390898
05/24/2018
INTERSTATE BATTERIES
312.20
655.29
967.49 ***
AP
00390899
05/24/2018
KME FIRE APPARATUS
0.00
2,863.48
2,863.48
AP
00390900
05/24/2018
LN CURTIS AND SONS
0.00
62,742.62
62,742.62
AP
00390901
05/24/2018
OFFICE DEPOT
3,999.94
0.00
3,999.94
AP
00390902
05/24/2018
VISTA PAINT
557.74
0.00
557.74
AP
00390903
05/24/2018
ALTA VISTA MOBILE HOME PARK
500.00
0.00
500.00
AP
00390904
05/24/2018
CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STATE OF
1,726.49
287.94
2,014.43 ***
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 14
Current Date:
05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register
Portrait Layout
Time:
07:05:21
Page 54
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Agenda Check Register
5/8/2018 through 5/28/2018
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Citv Fire Amount
Total City: $3,325,338.00
Total Fire: $959,803.90
Grand Total: $4,285, tTT-.90
Note:
*** Check Number includes both City and Fire District expenditures
User: VLOPEZ - VERONICA LOPEZ Page: 15 Current Date: 05/29/2018
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 07:05:21
Page 55
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Electronic Debit Register
April 1, 2018 - April 30, 2018
DATE
DESCRIPTION
CITY
FIRE
AMOUNT
4/2
WIRE TRANSFER - To California ISO
559.56
559.56
4/2
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
849.18
849.18
4/2
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
2,896.55
2,896.55
4/3
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
1,902.86
1,902.86
4/3
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
2,199.79
2,199.79
4/3
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
4,969.45
4,969.45
4/3
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
7,756.15
7,756.15
4/3
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
10,557.70
10,557.70
4/3
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
105,630.11
105,630.11
4/3
U.S. BANK - Purchasing Card Payment - March 2018
39,816.07
10,245.72
50,061.79
4/3
U.S. BANK - Corporate Card Payment - March 2018
68,036.11
15,595.56
83,631.67
4/3
U.S. BANK - COSTO Card Payment - March 2018
1,635.88
293.77
1,929.65
4/3
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
17,289.22
17,289.22
4/4
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
1,432.60
1,432.60
4/4
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
234.67
234.67
4/5
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
390.00
390.00
4/5
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
390.00
390.00
4/6
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
268.73
268.73
4/9
WIRE TRANSFER - To California ISO
73,240.55
73,240.55
4/9
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
1,360.96
1,360.96
4/10
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
190.00
190.00
4/10
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
2,648.80
2,648.80
4/11
CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit
3,981.69
3,981.69
4/11
CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit
192,820.00
192,820.00
4/11
CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit
37,376.11
37,376.11
4/11
CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit
127,679.67
127,679.67
4/11
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
2,099.26
2,099.26
4/11
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
2,179.46
2,179.46
4/11
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
4,969.45
4,969.45
4/11
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
7,756.15
7,756.15
4/11
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
10,667.55
10,667.55
4/11
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
103,158.23
103,158.23
4/11
STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments
2,424.58
2,424.58
4/11
STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments
5,472.69
5,472.69
4/11
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
976.89
976.89
4/11
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
840.80
840.80
4/12
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
3,163.48
3,163.48
4/12
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
327.57
327.57
4/13
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
3,567.77
3,567.77
4/13
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
335.40
335.40
4/16
WIRE TRANSFER - To California ISO
645.88
645.88
4/16
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
6,997.40
6,997.40
4/16
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
861.80
861.80
4/18
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
630.06
630.06
4/18
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
1,160.00
1,160.00
4/19
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
2,210.44
2,210.44
4/19
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
196.92
196.92
4/20
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
12.00
12.00
4/20
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
162.94
162.94
4/24
WIRE TRANSFER - To California ISO
9,497.11
9,497.11
4/24
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
498.79
498.79
4/25
BANK FEE - MARCH 2018
37,055.69
37,055.69
4/25
STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments
2,424.58
2,424.58
4/25
STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments
5,299.96
5,299.96
4/25
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
554.28
554.28
4/25
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
160.56
160.56
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
141,833.79
141,833.79
4/26
CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit
31,697.75
31,697.75
4/26
CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit
127,110.36
127,110.36
Page 56
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Electronic Debit Register
April 1, 2018 - April 30, 2018
DATE
DESCRIPTION
CITY
FIRE
AMOUNT
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
1,554.88
1,554.88
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
2,185.06
2,185.06
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
4,969.44
4,969.44
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
7,781.99
7,781.99
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
10,766.09
10,766.09
4/26
CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit
103,181.69
103,181.69
4/26
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
1,846.12
1,846.12
4/26
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
147.20
147.20
4/27
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
286.18
286.18
4/30
WIRE TRANSFER - To California ISO
3,171.08
3,171.08
4/30
WORKERS COMP - City Account Transfer
578.36
578.36
4/30
WORKERS COMP - Fire Account Transfer
919.67
919.67
TOTAL CITY
800,914.17
TOTAL FIRE
585,670.64
GRAND TOTAL
1,386,584.81
Page 57
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Darryl Polk, DoIT Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION FOR THE APPROVAL OF A FOUR-YEAR AGREEMENT
FOR MAINTENANCE, SUPPORT AND CLOUD -HOSTING OF THE CITY'S
LAND MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE PLATFORM WITH ACCELA, INC. IN
THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $784,157; FUNDED IN THE AMOUNT OF $588,118
FROM THE CITY GENERAL FUND AND $196,039 FROM THE FIRE
DISTRICT FIRE FUND; AND AUTHORIZE AN ADDITIONAL
APPROPRIATION OF FIRE FUNDS PAY FOR THE FIRST YEAR OF THE
AGREEMENT.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve a four year agreement with Accela, Inc. for annual
maintenance, support and cloud hosting services of the City's land management software in the total
amount of $784,157, with costs shared between the City and the Fire District in the amounts of $588,118
from the City General Fund and $196,039 from the Fire District Fund; and authorize an appropriation to
pay for a portion of the first year of the agreement.
BACKGROUND:
On December 15, 2012, the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Accela, Inc. entered into a lease -purchase
agreemen for five years covering the initial build and configuration of the City's land management
information system as well as five years of maintenance, support and cloud -hosting services. Accela
replaced the aged Tidemark Advantage Permitting System with a web -based record keeping system for
development and construction projects as well as follow up inspection reports from across disciplines.
This platform, which is hosted in the Accela Cloud, uses an open architecture and a centralized database,
allowing information to be shared across departments, improving communication between City staff,
business partners and residents. The system provides official record keeping for the Planning, Building
and Safety, Engineering and Fire Departments.
At the conclusion of the lease agreement in December 2017, the City entered into maintenance and
support with Accela, Inc. which includes cloud hosting services, security patching, version updates and
troubleshooting assistance.
ANALYSIS:
Maintaining annual maintenance and support for mission critical platforms, such as Accela Automation, is
important for the City and for the Department of Innovation and Technology. Maintenance and support
Page 58
provides assistance with issues as well as the latest updates and enhancements. Hosting this software
service in the Accela cloud environment also reduces the capital costs and effort to maintain a physical
server and database environment in the City's datacenter.
The lease for Accela Automation expired on December 15, 2017, automatically transitioning the City into
maintenance and support. Staff has negotiated an 8% discount on the initial year pricing and limited the
inflationary increase to 3% annually over a four-year term with the following pricing:
Total Cost
General Fund
RCFD
Fiscal Year 2017/18: $187,366
$140,525
$46,841
Fiscal Year 2018/19: $193,113
$144,835
$48,278
Fiscal Year 2019/20: $198,806
$149,105
$49,701
Fiscal Year 2020/21: $204,872
$153,654
$51,218
Copies of the agreement are on file with the City Clerk's Office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total cost to the City over the life of the four-year agreement is $784,157, which includes all hosting,
support and maintenance costs associated with the Accela land management platform. The graduated
annualized pricing of the negotiated terms allows the City to gradually absorb the maintenance costs while
maintaining the performance and integrity of the land management platform. Staff recommends sharing the
cost of the platform with the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District at a rate of 25% of the total
hosting, maintenance and support costs.
The Fire District is requesting an appropriation of $46,842 into account No. 3281501-5300 (Contract
Services) to fund the first year of the agreement. Sufficient funds are available in the City General Fund
budget to cover the City portion of the first year of the agreement (Account No. 1001209-5300 - Contract
Services).
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Entering into a four-year agreement with pre -negotiated pricing supports Council's goals for mid-range and
long-term planning by creating a fixed cost structure for future budget planning.
Page 59
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Darryl Polk, DoIT Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A FIVE YEAR SUPPORT AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT FOR CHAMELEON SOFTWARE TO HLP INC., IN THE TOTAL
AMOUNT OF $150,885 FOR THE ANIMAL CARE MANAGEMENT
PLATFORM.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council approve a renewal of the software support and maintenance
agreement with HLP, Inc. to provide maintenance and support for the City's Chameleon animal
care management platform in the amount of $28,740 annually, for a five year total of $143,700, and include
a 5% contingency in the amount of $7,185 for a total of $150,885 funded from Account No. 1001209-
5300 (Contract Services).
BACKGROUND:
HLP provides the City's license for the Chameleon animal care management platform which is used to
manage daily operations at the City's Animal Services Department. The Department of Innovation &
Technology recommends continuing the annual software maintenance agreement for the proposed five
year term to provide access to enhancements, technical support, security patches and other updates to the
Chameleon software platform.
ANALYSIS:
The Department of Innovation & Technology manages multiple enterprise application software systems
that require support and maintenance. HLP Chameleon software is used to manage operations for the
Animal Services Department. The requested software support and maintenance agreement extends the
existing support agreements five years, reducing the exposure to inflationary cost increases and ensuring
continuity of operations for the Animal Services Department. Staff recommends a single -source award be
made to HLP Inc. for application software support and maintenance as HLP Inc. is the only vendor to
license and support our existing Chameleon software platform. Copy of the agreement is on file in the City
Clerk's Office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
First year funding is included in the Adopted FY 2017/18 Budget under account number 1001209-5300
(Contract Services).
Page 60
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The proposed five-year agreement supports Council's goal of mid and long-range planning by creating
predictable fixed costs for maintaining and supporting this mission -critical software platform over the five
year term of the agreement.
Page 61
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Romeo M. David, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A CONTRACT WITH WRIGHT CONSTRUCTION
ENGINEERING CORPORATION IN AN AMOUNT OF $296,571, PLUS A 10%
CONTINGENCY FOR THE DETENTION BASIN IMPROVEMENTS AT
RANCHO WASH LOCATED ON HILLSIDE ROAD WEST OF BUCKTHORN
AVENUE.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve the plans and specifications for the Detention Basin Improvements at Rancho Wash on file
with the City Engineer (Project);
2. Accept the bids received for the Project;
3. Award and authorize the execution of a contract in the amount of $296,571, to the lowest responsive
bidder, Wright Construction Engineering Corporation for the total bid;
4. Authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $29,657; and
5. Authorize a Purchase Order in the amount of $31,640 to Aufbau Corporation for on-call construction
inspection services.
BACKGROUND:
Rancho Wash is a natural watercourse situated in the northwesterly portion of the City that conveys storm
water runoff to the region. This storm water runoff drains into a detention basin located immediately north
of Hillside Road between Buckthorn Avenue and Moonstone Avenue. The detention basin provides an
area for debris and silt to settle before the storm water runoff is conveyed into an underground storm drain
facility positioned downstream of the basin. Because the side slopes of the detention basin are natural and
unimproved, the side slopes are vulnerable to erosion over time as well as during major storm events.
Staff has determined that slope erosion is occurring, creating the potential for slope stability concerns. The
proposed improvements at the detention basin are intended to restore the eroded slopes and provide
additional enhancements to prevent future erosion. Further, the proposed improvements
will provide improved access to facilitate maintenance equipment and operations by the City's
maintenance crew. A vicinity map is included as Attachment 1.
ANALYSIS:
The scope of work to be performed consists of, but is not limited to, constructing concrete retaining wall,
Page 62
head wall, reinforced concrete slab, river rock rip -rap, installation of chain -link -fence on top of the retaining
wall, modification of corrugated metal pipe riser, grading and compacting existing slopes and hydro -
seeding slopes for stabilization. The contract documents call for thirty-five (35) working days to complete
this construction.
The Notice Inviting Bids was released to the general contracting community and was published in the Daily
Bulletin on May 1 and May 8, 2018. The City Clerk's Office facilitated the formal solicitation for bidding the
project.
On May 15, 2018, the City Clerk's Office received eight construction bids. The Engineer's estimate for the
project was $320,000. The apparent low bidder, Wright Construction Engineering Corporation, submitted
a bid in the amount $296,571. A full bid summary is included as Attachment 2.
Engineering staff has reviewed all bids received and found all to be complete and in accordance with the
bid requirements with any irregularities being inconsequential. Staff has completed the required
background investigation and finds the lowest responsive bidder Wright Construction Engineering
Corporation, met the requirements of the bid documents.
Environmental:
Staff has determined that the project is Categorically Exempt per the California Environmental Quality Aci
(CEQA) Article 19. Categorical Exemptions. In Accordance with Section 15301 "Existing Facilities"
subsection (d), Class 1 projects consist of minor alteration of existing public facilities, therefore,
the Detention Basin Improvements at Rancho Wash are considered categorically exempt from CEQA.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Anticipated construction costs for this project are estimated to be as follows:
Construction Contract $296,571
Construction Contract Contingency (10%) $ 29,657
Construction I nspection $ 31,640
Estimated Construction Costs $357,868
Sufficient funds have been budgeted in Fiscal Year 2017/18 from General Drainage (Fund 112)
and Citywide Infrastructure Improvement (Fund 198) Funds, all of which are identified under the Capital
Improvement Project Account No.'s and in the amounts listed below.
Account No. Funding Source Description Amount
11123035650/1928112-0 Drainage Fund (112) Cucamonga SD $350,000
11983035650/1928198-0 Infrastructure Fund (198) Cucamonga SD $ 7,868
$357,868
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This project will continue to make public safety a priority by improving the existing detention basin.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Bid Summary
Page 63
h
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
�VICINITY MAP 1NSA
1�
DETENTION BASIN AT RANCHO WASH
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 64
BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING MAY 15, 2018
APPARENT LOW BIDDER
2
3
WRIGHT CONSTRUCION
GARRETT J. GENTRY
JEREMY HARRIS
DETENTION BASIN AT RANCHO WASH
GENERAL ENGINEERING,
ENGINEERING CORP
CONSTRUCTION, INC.
INC.
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
NO
QTY
UNIT
DESCRIPTION
1
1
LS
Mobilization
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$27,000.00
$27,000.00
$19,500.00
$19,500.00
$86,000.00
$86,000.00
2
1
LS
Clearing & grubbing
$8,000.00
$8,000.00
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
$7,890.00
$7,890.00
$6,500.00
$6,500.00
3(F)
1
LS
1 Earthwork
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
$75,000.00
$75,000.00
$30,750.00
$30,750.00
$38,752.00
$38,752.00
41
1
LS
Shoring, Sheeting & Bracing
$35,180.00
$35,180.00
$500.00
$500.00
$29,992.00
$29,992.00
$13,440.00
$13,440.00
$160.00
$13,120.00
$52.00
$4,264.00
$238.00
$19,516.00
$258.00
$21,156.00
5(F)
82
CY
Structural Backfill
Reinforced concrete retaining wall, retaining wall footing
$1,500.00
$180,000.00
$1,000.00
$120,000.00
$1,328.00
$159,360.00
$1,100.00
$132,000.00
6(F)
120
CY
and slab and all incidentals
8" thick reinforced conrete slab, including thickened edges,
$40.00
$30,400.00
$35.00
$26,600.00
$22.70
$17,252.00
$28.00
$21,280.00
71
760
SF
and all incidentals
$140.00
$10,640.00
$157.00
$11,932.00
$122.00
$9,272.00
$112.00
$8,512.00
8(F)
76
TONS
12" nominal round cobble with 3" minus rock rip -rap field
$500.00
$500.00
$600.00
$600.00
$2,426.00
$2,426.00
$1,500.00
$1,500.00
9
1
LS
Modify 72" C.M.P Riser- Introduce round holes at bottom
10
92
LF
Channel Wall Fencing
$120.00
$11,040.00
$69.29
$6,374.68
$95.00
$8,740.00
$72.00
$6,624.00
111
3,200
SF
Hydroseed Slopes
$0.35
$1,120.00
$0.75
$2,400.00
$2.40
$7,680.00
$0.50
$1,600.00
12
1
LS
Construction Notification Sign
$1,000.00
$1,000.00
$1,300.00
$1,300.00
$1,370.00
$1,370.00
$1,300.00
$1,300.00
13
1
LS
Traffic Control
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$600.00
$600.00
$16,900.00
$16,900.00
$6,000.00
$6,000.00
Identifies a "Final Pay" item, and shall be paid in
accordance with the Instructions to Bidders, Item I of the
(F)
Specifications.
TOTAL BID SCHEDULE
$320,000.00
$296,570.68
$330,648.00
$344,664.00
Page 65 ATTACHMENT 2
Page 66
BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING MAY 15, 2018
4
5
6
7
8
METROCELL
ROADWAY ENGINEERING
METRO BUILDERS &
KASA CONSTRUCTION
MINAKO AMERICA
CORPORATION dba MINCO
DETENTION BASIN AT RANCHO WASH
CONSTRUCTION INC.
& CONTRACTING INC.
ENGINEERS GROUP, LTD.
CONSTRUCTION
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
NO QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION
1
1 LS Mobilization
$34,590.00
$34,590.00
$49,600.00
$49,600.00
$28,820.00
$28,820.00
$95,000.00
$95,000.00
$17,000.00
$17,000.00
2
1 LS Clearing & grubbing
$13,685.00
$13,685.00
$30,000.00
$30,000.00
$8,625.00
$8,625.00
$16,800.00
$16,800.00
$13,000.00
$13,000.00
3(F)
1 LS Earthwork
$33,150.00
$33,150.00
$50,000.00
$50,000.00
$74,750.00
$74,750.00
$80,000.00
$80,000.00
$37,000.00
$37,000.00
4
1 LS Shoring, Sheeting & Bracing
$63,280.00
$63,280.00
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$28,750.00
$28,750.00
$500.00
$500.00
$67,000.00
$67,000.00
$341.00
$27,962.00
$250.00
$20,500.00
$308.54
$25,300.28
$65.00
$5,330.00
$250.00
$20,500.00
5(F)
82 CY Structural Backfill
Reinforced concrete retaining wall, retaining wall footing
$880.00
$105,600.00
$1,250.00
$150,000.00
$933.67
$112,040.40
$1,275.00
$153,000.00
$1,500.00
$180,000.00
6(F)
120 CY and slab and all incidentals
8" thick reinforced conrete slab, including thickened edges,
$63.00
$47,880.00
$25.00
$19,000.00
$44.79
$34,040.40
$30.00
$22,800.00
$20.00
$15,200.00
7
760 SF and all incidentals
6(F)
76 TONS 12" nominal round cobble with 3" minus rock rip -rap field
$225.00
$17,100.00
$225.00
$17,100.00
$302.64
$23,000.64
$200.00
$15,200.00
$550.00
$41,800.00
91
11 LS Modify 72" C.M.P Riser- Introduce round holes at bottom
$3,630.00
$3,630.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$5,175.00
$5,175.00
$2,500.00
$2,500.00
$47,000.00
$47,000.00
10
92 LF Channel Wall Fencing
$174.00
$16,008.00
$250.00
$23,000.00
$275.00
$25,300.00
$186.00
$17,112.00
$150.00
$13,800.00
11
3,200 SF Hydroseed Slopes
$0.75
$2,400.00
$1.00
$3,200.00
$3.45
$11,040.00
$0.35
$1,120.00
$2.00
$6,400.00
12
1 LS Construction Notification Sign
$650.00
$650.00
$2,000.00
$2,000.00
$2,875.00
$2,875.00
$1,000.00
$1,000.00
$6,000.00
$6,000.00
13
1 LS Traffic Control
$6,200.00
$6,200.00
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$8,625.00
$8,625.00
$7,500.00
$7,500.00
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
Identifies a "Final Pay" item, and shall be paid in
accordance with the Instructions to Bidders, Item I of the
(F)
Specifications.
TOTAL BID SCHEDULE
$372,135.00
$377,400.00
$388,341.72
$417,862.00
$467,700.00
Page 66
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Natalie Avila, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A CONTRACT WITH CALPROMAX ENGINEERING
INC., IN AN AMOUNT OF $639,464, PLUS A 10% CONTINGENCY, AND AN
APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $725,500 FROM THE AB 2766 AIR
QUALITY FUND FOR THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL SAFETY
ENHANCEMENTS AND GREEN BIKE LANE ALONG BASE LINE ROAD,
MSRC CONTRACT NO. ML14070 PROJECT.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve the plans and specifications for the Pacific Electric Trail Safety Enhancements and Green
Bike Lane along Base Line Road, MSRC Contract No. ML14070 (Project) on file with the City
Engineer;
2. Accept the bids received for the Project;
3. Award and authorize the execution of the contract in the amount of $639,464, to the lowest
responsive bidder, Calpromax Engineering, Inc., for the total bid;
4. Authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $63,946;
5. Authorize a Purchase Order in the amount of $19,200 to Onward Engineering for on-call construction
inspection services; and
6. Authorize an appropriation in the amount of $725,500 from the AB 2766 Air Quality fund balance.
BACKGROUND:
In September 2016, the City of Rancho Cucamonga received the fully executed AB 2766 Discretionary
Fund contract from the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)/Mobile Source Air
Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC). The AB 2766/MSRC Local Government Match
Program for Contract No. ML14070 provides funding reimbursement for the Project to improve the safety
and visibility at all existing crossings between the Pacific Electric Trail and major arterial or collector
streets. This project also includes the enhancement of our existing Class II bicycle facility along Base Line
Road between Alta Cuesta Drive and Day Creek Boulevard by installing a thermoplastic non -slip and skid
resistant green striping material and additional signage at conflict zones. These conflict zones were identified
where vehicular traffic crosses the bike lane. Avicinity map is included as Attachment 1.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga is improving existing infrastructure to provide safer routes for pedestrians
and bicyclists when traversing through the City while improving accessibility in the community. This
Project's goal is to provide safety enhancements to the regional Pacific Electric Trail and improve the
existing Class I I bike lanes along Base Line Road to encourage increased bicycling within the City.
Page 67
ANALYSIS:
The scope of work consists of the installation of advanced warning beacons, LED flashing signs, high
visibility crosswalks, video detection at Haven Avenue and the Pacific Electric Trail crossing, replacement
of non-compliant push buttons, and installation of green striping and bicycle signage at conflict zones along
Base Line Road. This project will improve motorist visibility and awareness of pedestrians and bicyclists
being present in the roadway at the various Pacific Electric Trail crossings and improve visibility of
bicyclists utilizing the bike lane along Base Line Road. The contract documents call for sixty (60) working
days to complete this construction.
The Notice Inviting Bids was released to the general contracting community and was published in the Daily
Bulletin on April 24 and May 1, 2018. The City Clerk's Office facilitated the formal solicitation for bidding
the project.
On May 8, 2018, the City Clerk's Office received four construction bids. The Engineer's estimate for the
project was $540,000. The apparent low bidder, Calpromax Engineering Inc., submitted a bid in the
amount of $639,464. Staff compared the engineer's estimate to the bids submitted and noticed the unit
cost to install green striping was more than double in price; from $10/sq.ft. (estimated) to $25/sq.ft.
(average of four bids). A full bid summary is included as Attachment 2.
The Engineering staff has reviewed all bids received and found all to be complete and in accordance with
the bid requirements with any irregularities to be inconsequential. Staff has completed the required
background investigation and finds the lowest responsive bidder Calpromax Engineering, Inc., meet the
requirements of the bid documents. On that basis, staff recommends awarding a contract to Calpromax
Engineering, I nc., in the amount of $639,464 and authorization of a 10% contingency for the project.
Environmental:
Staff has determined that the project is Categorically Exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act,
(CEQA) Article 19. Categorical Exemptions. In Accordance with Section 15301 "Existing Facilities"
subsection (c), Class 1 projects consists of minor alteration of existing public facilities, therefore,
the Pacific Electric Trail Safety Enhancements and Green Bike Lane Along Base Line Road, MSRC
Contract No. ML 14070 is considered categorically exempt from CEQA.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Anticipated construction costs are estimated to be as follows:
Bid and Advertisement $1,320
Construction Contract $639,464
Construction Contract Contingency $63,946
(10%)
Construction Inspection $19,200
Estimated Construction Costs $723,930
Adequate funds for this project are available in the AB2766 Fund (Fund 105) for this project but had not
been included in the Fiscal Year 2017/18 Amended Budget. Therefore, an appropriation in the amount of
$725,500 is recommended to cover the project costs allow award of the construction
contract. The AB2766 Discretionary Fund contract with the South Coast Air Quality Management District
allows for funding reimbursement to the City for fifty percent of the project cost up to a maximum of
$360,245 once the project is completed. It is recommended that funding for this project be appropriated
to Capital Improvement Project Account No:
Page 68
Account No. Funding Source Description Amount
11052085650/1952105-0 AB2766 Fund (105) PE Trail Enhancements-MSRC $725,500
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the City Council Goal of public safety by increasing the visibility of bicyclists along
Base Line Road and increasing the awareness of the Pacific Electric Trail crossings. The item also
addresses the City Council Goal of enhancing premier community status by utilizing the green bike lane
and being one of the first in immediate neighboring cities.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Bid Summary
Page 69
VICINITY MAP
LNWID AYE ❑❑� �� � -- Y�
UPLAND P E NDS FONTANA
❑❑Poona aw. (mee)
N.T.S.
CITti OF -O
RANCHO 9
CccAtionr.n i ° LOCATION
PROJECT
NISDW Houle
I sl® �� �❑ ®A LEGEND'
I _I s wEmarN� _ O PE TRAIL SAFETY ENHANCEMENTS
GREEN BIKE LANE
F3
-,- PE TRAIL &
�axrsn vwnc ONiAiL[Oi-,D rrmw�r
GREEN BIKE LANE
ATTAC H M ENTeto
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL CROSSING SAFETY ENHANCEMENTS
GREEN BIKE LANE ALONG BASE LINE ROAD BETWEEN
N
RANCHO
ALTA CUESTA DRIVE AND DAY CREEK BOULEVARD
UCAMONG
N.T.S.
ATTAC H M ENTeto
Mayor _. 0ennis MIuh a el I Mayor Pro Tem Lyn ne 5. Ke ri ne rl'
Council Members Wo Ili am 1. !,1 exarder. Sari 5pagnolo. DianeYlillI,-
City ManagerJahn i. Gilli-
X570 Civ Cz nter Drive I R.D. B - S-17 Rancho 917240877 1 904.471 27.0 xuv n. C,rvotRCus
BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING MAY 8, 2018
APPARENT LOW BIDDER
2
3
4
PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL SAFETY ENHANCEMENTS AND GREEN
HORIZONS
BIKE LANE ALONG BASE LINE ROAD, MSRC CONTRACT NO.
CALPROMAX
ELECNOR BELCO
CONSTRUCTION CO. INT'L
ML14070
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
ENGINEERING, INC.
ELECTRIC, INC.
ACCESS PACIFIC
INC.
BASE BID
UNIT
COST
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT COST
BID
AMOUNT
NO
QTY
UNIT
DESCRIPTION
MOBILIZATION, CLEARING & GRUBBING, AND
$27,500.00
$27,500.00
$45,000.00
$45,000.00
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
$68,310.00
$68,310.00
$63,000.00
$63,000.00
1
1
LS
DEMOBILIZATION
2
1
LS
TRAFFIC CONTROL
$35,000.00
$35,000.00
$12,000.00
$12,000.001
$15,000.00
$15,000.00
$31,250.00
$31,250.00
$65,000.00
$65,000.00
3
6
EA
CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION SIGN F
$750.00
$4,500.00
$1,200.00
$7,200.00
$1,000.00
$6,000.00
$2,028.00
$12,168.00
$1,783.50
$10,701.00
INSTALL HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK PER PLAN AT
GROVE, HELLMAN, BASE LINE, AMETHYST,
ARCHIBALD, RAMONA, HERMOSA, HAVEN, MILLIKEN,
$2,000.00
$32,000.00
$2,200.00
$35,200.00
$2,788.00
$44,608.00
$3,148.00
$50,368.00
$3,013.50
$48,216.00
KENYON, ROCHESTER, DAY CREEK, ETIWANDA,
41
161
EA
AND EAST COLOR AS NOTED PER PLAN
FURNISH AND INSTALL SIGN PER PLAN & CITY STD.
$500.00
$3,000.00
$300.00
$1,800.00
$291.00
$1,746.00
$440.00
$2,640.00
$313.65
$1,881.90
5
6
EA
401-B
REMOVE AND RELOCATE EXISTING SIGN PER PLAN
$200.00
$200.00
$100.00
$100.00
$205.00
$205.00
$293.00
$293.00
$221.40
$221.40
6
1
EA
& CITY STD. 401-B
REMOVE EXISTING SIGN AND SALVAGE TO CITY
$50.00
$300.00
$100.00
$600.00
$101.00
$606.00
$154.00
$924.00
$108.24
$649.44
7
6
EA
YARD
REMOVE EXISTING SIGN POST FOUNDATION AND
$75.00
$225.00
$125.00
$375.00
$125.00
$375.00
$448.00
$1,344.00
$135.30
$405.90
8
3
EA
BACKFILL WITH SLURRY CONCRETE
FURNISH AND INSTALL HYDRANT MARKER PER CITY
$50.00
$100.00
$18.00
$36.00
$18.00
$36.00
$28.00
$56.00
$18.45
$36.90
9
2
EA
STD.134
10
4
EA
TRIM TREES
$300.00
$1,200.00
$600.00
$2,400.00
$2,275.00
$9,100.00
$1,050.00
$4,200.00
$430.50
$1,722.00
GRIND EXISTING ASPHALT LIP (UP TO 1 -INCH) TO BE
$750.00
$750.00
$3,500.00
$3,500.00
$6,000.00
$6,000.00
$1,400.00
$1,400.00
$6,150.00
$6,150.00
11
1
LS
I FLUSH WITH EXISTING TRAIL CROSSING
REMOVE AND REPLACE TRUNCATED DOMES
$30.00
$2,160.00
$35.00
$2,520.00
$143.00
$10,296.00
$70.00
$5,040.00
$73.80
$5,313.60
12
72
SF
COMPLETE IN PLACE
GROVE AVENUE STRIPING PER PLAN, INCLUDING
$1,600.00
$1,600.00
$14,000.00
$14,000.00
$26,893.00
$26,893.00
$14,320.00
$14,320.00
$29,314.59
$29,314.59
13
1
LS
REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPING
BASE LINE ROAD STRIPING PER PLAN, INCLUDING
$225.00
$225.00
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$4,062.00
$4,062.00
$8,675.00
$8,675.00
$4,389.87
$4,389.87
14
1
LS
REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPING
AMETHYST AVENUE STRIPING PER PLAN,
$400.00
$400.00
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$6,574.00
$6,574.00
$5,268.00
$5,268.00
$7,105.71
$7,105.71
15
1
LS
INCLUDING REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPING
ARCHIBALD AVENUE STRIPING PER PLAN,
$500.00
$500.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$9,950.00
$9,950.00
$7,755.00
$7,755.00
$10,755.12
$10,755.12
16
1
LS
INCLUDING REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPING
RAMONA AVENUE STRIPING PER PLAN, INCLUDING
$400.00
$400.00
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$7,550.00
$7,550.00
$5,946.00
$5,946.00
$8,161.05
$8,161.05
17
1
LS
REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPING
HERMOSA AVENUE STRIPING PER PLAN,
$400.00
$400.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$9,736.00
$9,736.00
$7,555.00
$7,555.00
$10,523.88
$10,523.88
18
1
LS
INCLUDING REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPING
HAVEN AVENUE STRIPING PER PLAN, INCLUDING
$600.00
$600.00
$7,000.00
$7,000.00
$11,253.00
$11,253.00
$9,095.00
$9,095.00
$12,163.47
$12,163.47
191
11
LS
I REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPING
MILLIKEN AVENUE STRIPING PER PLAN, INCLUDING
$300.00
$300.00
$7,700.00
$7,700.00
$7,623.00
$7,623.00
$6,855.00
$6,855.00
$8,239.77
$8,239.77
20
1
LS
REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPING
KENYON WAY STRIPING PER PLAN, INCLUDING
$400.00
$400.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$4,961.00
$4,961.00
$4,757.00
$4,757.00
$5,366.49
$5,366.49
21
1
LS
REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPING
ROCHESTER AVENUE STRIPING PER PLAN,
$225.00
$225.00
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$6,442.00
$6,442.00
$5,036.00
$5,036.00
$6,963.03
$6,963.03
1
LS
INCLUDING REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPINGDAY
CREEK BOULEVARD STRIPING PER PLAN,
$50.00
$50.00
$4,800.00
$4,800.00
$4,716.00
$4,716.00
$5,316.00
$5,316.00
$5,097.12
$5,097.12
r23
1
LS
INCLUDING REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPINGETIWANDA
AVENUE STRIPING PER PLAN,
$250.00
$250.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$6,450.00
$6,450.00
$3,918.00
$3,918.00
$6,971.64
$6,971.64
1
LS
INCLUDING REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPING
2018-19_Bid Summary 1
Page 71
Mayor -. ❑ennis MIuh a el I Mayor Pro Tem Lyn ne 5. Ke ri ne rl'�
Council Members Wo Ili am I.:rl exarder. Sari 5pagnolo. DianeNrillI,-
City ManagerJahn i. Gilli-
X570 Civ Cz nter Drive I R.D. B - S-17 Rancho C.,- amonga. C/'. 917240877 1 904.471 27.0 xuv n. C,rvotRCus
BID SUMMARY FORBID OPENING MAY 8, 2018
APPARENT LOW BIDDER
2
3
4
PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL SAFETY ENHANCEMENTS AND GREEN
HORIZONS
BIKE LANE ALONG BASE LINE ROAD, MSRC CONTRACT NO.
CALPROMAX
ELECNOR BELCO
CONSTRUCTION CO. INT'L
ML14070
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
ENGINEERING, INC.
ELECTRIC, INC.
ACCESS PACIFIC
INC.
BASE BID
UNIT
COST
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT COST
BID
AMOUNT
NO
QTY
UNIT
DESCRIPTION
EAST AVENUE STRIPING PER PLAN, INCLUDING
$225.00
$225.00
$5,200.00
$5,200.00
$5,184.00
$5,184.00
$2,519.00
$2,519.00
$5,602.65
$5,602.65
25
1
LS
REMOVALS OF CONFLICTING STRIPING
REMOVE EXISTING PUSH BUTTON ASSEMBLY AND
REPLACE WITH NEW ASSEMBLY AND POLARA
$250.00
$4,000.00
$300.00
$4,800.00
$280.00
$4,480.00
$391.00
$6,256.00
$471.00
$7,536.00
BULLDOG III PUSH BUTTON INCLUDING NEW R10-3
26
16
EA
SIGN
FURNISH AND INSTALL ECONOLITE COBALT
CONTROLLER AT MILLIKEN AVENUE AND CENTRAL
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
$11,000.00
$11,000.00
$10,400.00
$10,400.00
$16,615.00
$16,615.00
$12,361.50
$12,361.50
PARK, SALVAGE EXISTING CONTROLLER TO CITY
27
11
EA
YARD
FURNISH AND INSTALL ECONOLITE COBALT
CONTROLLER AT DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AND
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
$11,000.00
$11,000.00
$10,400.00
$10,400.00
$16,615.00
$16,615.00
$12,362.00
$12,362.00
FIREHOUSE COURT, SALVAGE EXISTING
28
1
EA
CONTROLLER TO CITY YARD
FURNISH AND INSTALL ECONOLITE COBALT
CONTROLLER AT HAVEN AVENUE AND PE TRAIL,
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
$11,000.00
$11,000.00
$10,400.00
$10,400.00
$16,615.00
$16,615.00
$12,362.00
$12,362.00
29
1
EA
SALVAGE EXISTING CONTROLLER TO CITY YARD
REMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTING PUSH BUTTON
$75.00
$150.00
$132.00
$264.00
$45.00
$90.00
$68.00
$136.00
$25.00
$50.00
30
2
EA
SIGN
REMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTING PEDESTRIAN
$400.00
$3,600.00
$400.00
$3,600.00
$400.00
$3,600.00
$411.00
$3,699.00
$450.00
$4,050.00
31
9
EA
SIGNAL MODULE WITH GE MODEL PS7-CFFI-VLA
REMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTING FLASHING
$650.00
$7,800.00
$3,200.00
$38,400.00
$2,000.00
$24,000.00
$1,660.00
$19,920.00
$1,815.48
$21,785.76
32
12
EA
BEACONS WITH TAPCO BEACONS
FURNISH AND INSTALL TYPE 15 -FBS POLE WITH
TAPCO FLASHING SIGN & BEACONS PER PLAN
$17,500.00
$105,000.00
$8,500.00
$51,000.00
$11,000.00
$66,000.00
$12,683.00
$76,098.00
$13,812.90
$82,877.40
(AMETHYST AVENUE, RAMONA AVENUE, & KENYON
33
6
EA
WAY
FURNISH AND INSTALL TAPCO LED SIGN PER PLAN
(AMETHYST AVENUE, RAMONA AVENUE, & KENYON
$5,050.00
$30,300.00
$4,000.00
$24,000.00
$6,500.00
$39,000.00
$5,511.00
$33,066.00
$7,030.53
$42,183.18
34
6
EA
WAY
CONSTRUCT CONCRETE SIDEWALK PER CITY
$100.00
$400.00
$60.00
$240.00
$750.00
$3,000.00
$140.00
$560.00
$75.00
$300.00
35
4
SF
STANDARD 103
CONSTRUCT AC SIDEWALK PER CITY STANDARD
$10.00
$150.00
$70.00
$1,050.00
$570.00
$8,550.00
$70.00
$1,050.00
$123.00
$1,845.00
36
15
SF
103
37
3
LF
I CONSTRUCT AC BERM PER CITY STANDARD 104
$100.00
$300.00
$180.00
$540.00
$600.00
$1,800.00
$4,369.00
$13,107.00
$922.50
$2,767.50
FURNISH AND INSTALL VIDEO DETECTION SYSTEM
& BICYCLE INDICATOR AT HAVEN & PE TRAIL,
$32,500.00
$32,500.00
$28,000.00
$28,000.00
$32,000.00
$32,000.00
$33,121.00
$33,121.00
$35,820.00
$35,820.00
INCLUDING NEW CONDUCTORS FROM CABINET TO
38
1
LS
POLES
REMOVE AND SALVAGE TYPE 1-A 7' POLE AND
REPLACE WITH TYPE 1-A 10'. RELOCATE AND WIRE
$8,250.00
$16,500.00
$2,500.00
$5,000.00
$4,500.00
$9,000.00
$1,589.00
$3,178.00
$5,930.00
$11,860.00
39
2
EA
ALL EXISTING TRAFFIC GEAR TO NEW POLE
FURNISH AND INSTALL 3 -SECTION BICYCLE SIGNAL
$1,500.00
$6,000.00
$1,300.00
$5,200.00
$865.00
$3,460.00
$444.00
$1,776.00
$851.00
$3,404.00
40
4
EA
HEAD, COMPLETE IN-PLACE
REMOVE AND RELOCATE PUSH BUTTON ASSEMBLY
$150.00
$600.00
$350.00
7$1,400,001
$500.00
$2,000.00
$116.00
$464.00
$340.50
$1,362.00
41
4
EA
TO NEW POLE, COMPLETE IN-PLACE
2018-19_Bid Summary 2
Page 72
Mayor _. 0ennis MIuh a el I Mayor Pro Tem Lyn ne 5. Ke ri ne rl'�
Council Members Wo Ili am I.:rl exarder. Sari 5pagnolo. Diane Nri l l iams
City ManagerJahn i. Gilli-
X570 Civ Cz nter Drive I R.D. B - S-17 Rancho 917240877 1 904.471 27.0 xuv n. C,rvotRCus
BID SUMMARY FORBID OPENING MAY 8, 2018
APPARENT LOW BIDDER
2
3
4
PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL SAFETY ENHANCEMENTS AND GREEN
HORIZONS
BIKE LANE ALONG BASE LINE ROAD, MSRC CONTRACT NO.
CALPROMAX
ELECNOR BELCO
CONSTRUCTION CO. INT'L
ML14070
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
ENGINEERING, INC.
ELECTRIC, INC.
ACCESS PACIFIC
INC.
BASE BID
UNIT
COST
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT COST
BID
AMOUNT
NO
QTY
UNIT
DESCRIPTION
REMOVE AND RELOCATE PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL
HEAD TO NEW POLE (SIDE MOUNT), COMPLETE IN-
$250.00
$500.00
$600.00
$1,200.00
$800.00
$1,600.00
$429.00
$858.00
$676.50
$1,353.00
42
2
EA
PLACE
PAINT BICYCLE LOOP DETECTOR SYMBOL PER
$100.00
$200.00
$600.00
$1,200.00
$40.00
$80.00
$126.00
$252.00
$43.50
$87.00
43
2
EA
CALTRANS STD. A24C
UPDATE EXISTING ECONOLITE CONTROLLER TO
$1,750.00
$14,000.00
$2,100.00
$16,800.00
$1,600.00
$12,800.00
$2,533.00
$20,264.00
$1,700.00
$13,600.00
4411
8
EA
LATEST MANUFACTURER SOFTWARE VERSION
FURNISH AND INSTALL POLARA BULLDOG III
BICYCLE PUSH BUTTON, ASSEMBLY, R10-26 SIGN,
$5,000.00
$10,000.00
$1,850.00
$3,700.00
$2,500.00
$5,000.00
$3,400.00
$6,800.00
$2,214.00
$4,428.00
45
2
EA
POST, AND FOUNDATION PER CALTRANS STD. PLAN
FURNISH AND INSTALL GREEN PREFORMED
THERMOPLASTIC PER ENNIS-FLINT, VIZIGRIP AND
$10.00
$123,510.00
$17.00
$209,967.00
$26.00
$321,126.00
$28.00
$345,828.00
$27.70
$342,122.70
46
12,351
SF
SLIP RESISTANT, PER EXHIBIT A AND EXHIBIT C
47
52
EA
PAINT BIKE LEGENDS PER EXHIBIT BAND EXHIBIT C
$15.00
$780.00
$100.00
$5,200.00
$101.00
$5,252.00
$252.00
$13,104.00
$108.00
$5,616.00
FURNISH AND INSTALL POST AND PERMISSIVE
RIGHT YIELD SIGN INCLUDING FOUNDATION PER
$150.00
$5,700.00
$318.00
$12,084.00
$316.00
$12,008.00
$560.00
$21,280.00
$345.00
$13,110.00
48
38
EA
EXHIBIT A AND B
FURNISH AND INSTALL POST AND WEAVE YIELD
SIGN INCLUDING FOUNDATION PER EXHIBIT A AND
$150.00
$2,250.00
$318.00
$4,770.00
$316.00
$4,740.00
$595.00
$8,925.00
$345.00
$5,175.00
49
15
EA
EXHIBIT B
FURNISH AND INSTALL POST AND DRIVEWAY R10-
15 (MOD) SIGN INCLUDING FOUNDATION PER
$150.00
$150.00
$318.00
$318.00
$316.00
$316.00
$595.00
$595.00
$345.00
$345.00
501
11
EAI
EXHIBIT AAND B
FURNISH AND INSTALL POST AND R81 (CA) SIGN
$150.00
$600.00
$250.00
$1,000.00
$245.00
$980.00
$595.00
$2,380.00
$620.00
$2,480.00
51
4
EA
INCLUDING FOUNDATION PER EXHIBIT A AND B
PAINT 6" AND 8" STRIPE PER EXHIBIT A AND EXHIBIT
$2,500.00
$2,500.00
$1,300.00
$1,300.00
$1,252.00
$1,252.00
$10,074.00
$10,074.00
$1,353.00
$1,353.00
52
1
LS
C
BASIS OFAWARD
TOTAL BASE BID
$540,000.00
$639,464.00
$818,700.00
$937,644.00
$966,548.57
NOTES:
Bid Item #3 hada unit price o
$3,028 and a total price of $12,168.
Total Base Bid incorrect due to
Calculation error, therefore, total
price prevails and unit price revised
calculation error. Contractor listed
to $2,028.
$957,902.88 as total.
Bid Total was incorrect.
2018-19_Bid Summary 3
Page 73
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Eduardo Diaz, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A STREET FRONTAGE REIMBURSEMENT
AGREEMENT (SRA -65) FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC STREET
IMPROVEMENTS ON THE WEST SIDE OF WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD,
FROM THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF TRACT 16324 TO THE
NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF TRACT 18741, EXCLUDING PARCEL MAP
15550 FRONTAGES (APPROXIMATELY 1,500 FEET) IN CONJUNCTION
WITH DEVELOPMENT OF TRACT 16324, SUBMITTED BY MERITAGE
HOMES.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Street Frontage Reimbursement Agreement for
construction of public street improvements on the west side of Wardman Bullock Road, from the southerly
boundary of Tract 16324 to the northerly boundary of Tract 18741, excluding Parcel Map 15550 frontages
(approximately 1,500 feet), submitted by Meritage Homes, and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to
sign said agreement and to cause same to record.
BACKGROUND:
Tract 16324 was approved by the Planning Commission on May 12, 2004 as a residential subdivision of
63.5 acres into 123 lots for sing le -family -residential development, within the very low residential district of
the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located at the northerly end of Wardman Bullock Road. This approval
included conditions to complete offsite public street improvements to the westerly portion of Wardman
Bullock Road. Pursuant to these conditions, the developer may request a reimbursement agreement within
six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City. The improvements were accepted by
the City Council on July 20, 2016 and found safe for public use. The developer submitted a request for
reimbursement on January 4, 2017. The process of reviewing the request was prolonged due to internal
changes with Meritage Homes' staff and review of language modifications to the boilerplate reimbursement
agreement by the City Attorney's office.
ANALYSIS:
The Developer has submitted an itemized list of the construction costs that have been agreed to by the
developer and City staff. The total cost of the subject improvements was $125,498 which includes the
cost of constructing the frontage improvements adjoining other lots or parcels subject to reimbursement
under the provisions of Section 12.08.075 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Reimbursement
Page 74
will be paid to the Developer as fees are collected from the properties shown in Attachment 1 — Vicinity
Map attached hereto (AP N: 226-081-11, 226-081-12, 226-081-13, 226-081-15, and 226-081-16), except
that all right of reimbursement will cease ten (10) years after the date of this Agreement, whether or not
fully paid.
Copies of the agreement, signed by the Developer, are available in the City Clerk's office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Cost Estimate
Attachment 3 - Letter
Page 75
Tract Map 16324
& 18741
Vicinity Map
K1n-r-rn CrAI C
i
im.
-081-13
•'/
'rRACT 18741}'.`-'
Ih .r..
A
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 76
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ENGINEERING DIVISION
COST FOR REIMBURSEMENT PURPOSES — RELATED TO TR 16324
WESTSIDE WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD, SOUTHERLY BORDER OF TR 16324 TO
NORTHERLY BORDER OF TR 18741, EXCLUDING PM 1550 — ACROSS
APN: 226-081-11, 226-081-12, 226-081-13, 226-081-15, AND 226-081-16 FILE:
SRA - 65
ITEM AMOUNT
1. Grading: (Removals, Clear & Grub, mass
excavation)
2. Street Pavement
3. Street Curb & Gutter
4. Striping, Pavement Markings, Signs
5. Adjust Existing Manhole and Valves to Grade
SUBTOTAL
n
Retention
TOTAL COST
Refer to:
City Drawing No(s): 2072
Sheet(s): 1, 2, 3, & 4
$ 12,303.90
$ 52,771.87
$ 13,612.63
$ 8,892.00
$ 17,640.07
$ 105,220.47
$ 20,276.79
$125,497.26
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 77
Mr. Ed Diaz
Assistant Engineer
City of Rancho Cucamonga
RE: SRA -65 Wardman Bullock Reimbursement Request
Dear Ed,
As per our discussions I wanted to send this letter to confirm that Meritage has reviewed the
discrepancies that you have detailed for us and we agree with the final reimbursement amount
of $125,497.26.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Since -re ,
Brent Jo n n
Director o rward Planning
Meritage Homes
ATTACHMENTP.ge 78
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Gianfranco Laurie, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION TO REAPPROPRIATE FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$89,150 FROM THE MEASURE I FUND FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017/18
INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL VIDEO DETECTION AT
FIFTEEN LOCATIONS PROJECT.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Reauthorize an appropriation in the amount of $89,150 from the Measure I fund balance for the
Fiscal Year 2017/18 Installation of Traffic Signal Video Detection at Fifteen Locations
Project previously approved and recommended by the City Council on April 17, 2018.
BACKGROUND:
On April 17, 2018, the City Council took an itemized action to authorize an appropriation in the amount of
$89,150 from the Measure I fund balance for the Fiscal Year 207/18 Installation of Traffic Signal Video
Detection at Fifteen Locations. An additional appropriation is needed to supplement the current
budget and is required to award a construction contract for the project. A copy of the April 17, 2018, Staff
Report is included as Attachment 1.
ANALYSIS:
On May 2, 2018, the City Council approved the Amended Fiscal Year 2017/18 Budget. A copy of the May
2, 2018, Staff Report is included as Attachment 2.
The appropriation of the additional $89,150 from the Measure I fund balance for the Fiscal Year 2017/18
Installation of Traffic Signal Video Detection at Fifteen Locations Project was inadvertently excluded from
the amended budget documentation. Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council reauthorize the
additional appropriation previously approved to award a construction contract for the project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Staff recommends that the City Council reappropriate the additional budget request of $89,150 from the
Measure I fund balance. Additional funds from the Measure I fund balance will continue to be appropriated
into the following project accounts:
Page 79
Account No. 11743035650/1929174-0
$1,910
Account No. 11773035650/1932177-0
$1,910
Account No. 11773035650/1934177-0
$1,910
Account No. 11743035650/1976174-0
$1,910
Account No. 11983035650/1930198-0
$1,910
Account No. 11763035650/1928176-0
$1,910
Account No. 11743035650/1022176-0
$1,910
Account No. 11773035650/1933177-0
$75,780
Total Requested Appropriation
$89,150
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses City Council Goal of Public Safety by enhancing equipment at signalized
intersections for locations that have experienced community growth. The item also addresses the City
Council Goal of Enhancing Premier Community Status by increasing the active investment in improving
traffic management operations throughout the City.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 -April 17, 2018 City Council Staff Report
Attachment 2 - May 2, 2018 City Council Staff Report
Page 80
# ATTACHMENT+a
DATE: April 17, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Natalie Avila, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A CONTRACT WITH CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERING, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $190,974, PLUS A 10%
CONTINGENCY, AND AN APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $89,150
FROM THE MEASURE I FUND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2017/18
INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL VIDEO DETECTION AT FIFTEEN
LOCATIONS PROJECT.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve the plans and specifications for the Fiscal Year 2017/18 Installation of Traffic Signal Video
Detection at Fifteen Locations Project on file with the City Engineer (Project);
2. Accept the bids received for the Project;
3. Reject the lowest bid received from Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc., as non-responsive;
4. Award and authorize the execution of the contract in the amount of $190,974, to the lowest responsive
bidder, California Professional Engineering, Inc. for the base bid and Additive Bid Item No. Al;
5. Authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $19,100;
6. Authorize a Purchase Order in the amount of $13,056 to Onward Engineering for on-call construction
inspection services; and
7. Authorize an appropriation in the amount of $89,150 from the Measure I fund balance
BACKGROUND:
The Project includes installation of video detection system (VDS) equipment for traffic signals at 15
locations within the City. A vicinity map is included as Attachment 1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is
actively investing in improving traffic management operations throughout the City. As part of this effort, the
City is replacing existing in -ground inductive loop detection systems with VDS in conjunction with new
traffic signal projects and pavement overlay projects.
On January 17, 2018, the City Council approved the single source purchase of video detection system
equipment for the 15 intersections referenced herein. On that basis, a purchase order was issued to Iteris,
Inc., for the procurement of the equipment. The equipment has been delivered to the City with
the anticipation to proceed with the installation via this project.
Page Bm
ANALYSIS:
The scope of work for the project consists of the installation of City -furnished video detection equipment
and associated work. The project will eliminate the necessity for the traffic signal loop installations with the
upcoming overlay projects, saving the city the cost of these installations and the replacement of loops in
the future if they are damaged. The contract documents call for thirty (30) working days to complete thiE
installation.
The Notice Inviting Bids was released to the general contracting community and was published in the Daily
Bulletin on March 13th and 20th. The City Clerk's Office facilitated the formal solicitation for bidding the
project.
During the bidding phase two additional intersections: 1). Haven Avenue at Church Street and 2). Haven
Avenue at Town Center Drive were added to the project list, however, these two added locations require
the contractor to furnish and install all new video detection system equipment not previously purchased. In
addition, two additive bid items were introduced in the bid proposal which included an item to re -wire signal
cables (Al) and another item to replace the present reflective street name signs with new internally
illuminated street name signs (A2). Staff recommends that additive item Al be included for award under
this contract for the re -wiring of signal cables at the intersection of Arrow Route and Hermosa Avenue.
On March 27, 2018, the City Clerk's Office received five construction bids. The Engineer's estimate
totals in the amount of $247,300; with a base bid amount of $211,300 and the additive bid amounts
of $36,000. A full bid summary is included as Attachment 2.
The Engineering staff has reviewed all bids received and found four of the five to be complete and in
accordance with the bid requirements with any irregularities to be inconsequential. The apparent low
bidder, Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc., was determined to have an unbalanced bid proposal and disqualified
for consideration to award. On this basis staff recommends that the City Council reject the lowest bid
submitted by Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc., as non-responsive and that the City Council approve the bid
submitted by California Professional Engineering, Inc., which submitted the lowest responsive bid.
Environmental:
Staff has determined that the project is Categorically Exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Article19. Categorical Exemptions. In accordance with Section 15301 "Existing Facilities"
subsection (c), Class 1 projects consist of minor alteration of existing public facilities, therefore, the Fiscal
Year 2017/18 Installation of Traffic Signal Video Detection at Fifteen Locations is considered
categorically exempt from CEQA.
FISCAL IMPACT:
A total of $134,000 have been budgeted in Fiscal Year 2017/2018 from Measure I (Fund 177), Citywide
Infrastructure Improvement (Fund 198) and Gas Tax R&T7360 (Fund 174) Funds all of which are
identified under the Capital Improvement Project Account No's: 11743035650/1929174-0,
11773035650/1932177-0, 11773035650/1934177-0, 11743035650/1976174-0,
11983035650/1930198-0, 11763035650/1928176-0, 11743035650/1022176-0, and
11773035650/1933177-0.
Anticipated construction costs are estimate to be as follows:
Construction Contract (Base Bid) $174,974
Construction Contract (Additive Bid - Al) $ 16,000
Construction Contract Contingency (10%) $ 19,100
Construction Inspection a 13 056
Estimated Construction Costs $223,130
Page 82
Staff recommends that the City Council appropriate an additional budget of $89,150 from the Measure I
fund balance. Additional funds from the Measure I fund balance will need to be appropriated to the
following project accounts in order to cover anticipated construction costs.
Account No. 11743035650/1929174-0
$
1,910
Account No. 11773035650/1932177-0
$
1,910
Account No. 11773035650/1934177-0
$
1,910
Account No. 11743035650/1976174-0
$
1,910
Account No. 11983035650/1930198-0
$
1,910
Account No. 11763035650/1928176-0
$
1,910
Account No. 11743035650/1022176-0
$
1,910
Account No. 11773035650/1933177-0
$75.780
Total Requested Appropriation
$89,150
With the City Council's approval of the additional budget, sufficient funding will become available to award
the construction contract.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses City Council Goal of Public Safety by enhancing equipment at signalized
intersections for locations that have experienced community growth. The item also addresses the City
Council Goal of Enhancing Premier Community Status by increasing the active investment in improving
traffic management operations throughout the City.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Bid Summary
Page 82
ATTACHMENTS TO APRIL 17, 2018 STAFF REPORT
ARE AVAILABLE IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Pages 84-85
ATTACHMENT 2
DATE: May 2, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Tamara L. Layne, Finance Director
Robert Neiuber, Human Resources Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE AMENDED FISCAL YEAR 2017/18
APPROPRIATIONS AND A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE UPDATED
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (RCCEA)
SALARY TABLE.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council approve the attached Fiscal Year 2017/18 budgetary adjustments for
all City funds and a resolution approving the updated Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association
salary table.
BACKGROUND:
When the budget development process begins, staff is actually projecting estimated appropriations
fourteen to sixteen months ahead of anticipated needs. Historically, staff proposes an Amended Budget in
May of each year based on year-to-date actuals and projected revenues and expenditures for the
remainder of the fiscal year.
With respect to the salary table, staff submits an updated salary resolution to the City Council on a semi-
annual basis to reflect new, updated or removed positions and/or salaries included in the table based on
budgetary and administrative decisions made during the fiscal year.
ANALYSIS:
Amended Budget
In general, the attached schedules adjust estimated expenditures to reflect a more current snapshot in all
funds. Funding for items included in the Adopted Budget are increased or decreased to reflect more
recent experience. Adjustments have been made for the reallocation of resources when a particular line
item has not been fully expended and is utilized for another area of operations within a department's
budget. Also included in the adjusted figures are two additional items: 1) funding for purchase orders that
were originally budgeted but were carried over from Fiscal Year 2016/17; and 2) funding for various
expenditures approved by the City Council during the course of the current fiscal year.
Canyover Purchase Orders. At the end of each fiscal year, there are a varying number of financial
commitments outstanding, due primarily to timing issues, which are recorded in the City's financial reTLIR 83
as purchase orders. A portion of the City's reserves is procedurally set aside each year for funding these
commitments in the subsequent fiscal year. Although the initial budget appropriation for these purchase
orders was approved in the prior fiscal year, the outstanding commitment carries over into the current fiscal
year and must be funded in the current year's Amended Budget out of reserves. Generally, these
outstanding commitments are for capital projects or contract services that are completed subsequent to
the fiscal year in which they were approved. Total carryover purchase orders for the City's General Fund
amounted to approximately $1,864,213.
City Council Approved Changes. During the course of any fiscal year, the City Council approves
appropriation changes for items not anticipated during the budget preparation process, including
emergency repairs.
Annually, the City Council adopts the amended appropriations. There has been no shift of estimated
expenditures which deviates from the direction the Council has requested of staff. Capital improvement
programs, as they are addressed, are approved as separate Council items throughout the year.
Salary Table
The updated Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association (RCCEA) salary table reflects the addition
of two approved job classifications from the Fiscal Year 2017/18 budget that were inadvertently left off the
salary table: Principal Accountant and Business License Program Supervisor. Staff also included a job title
change from Senior GIS Technician to GIS Specialist with no change to duties or pay. The new title is
more in line with accepted GIS titles in the workplace.
i.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The attached schedules submitted for your review include the Fiscal Year 2016/17 Adopted Budget
amounts, the Fiscal Year 2017/18 Adopted Budget amounts and the Fiscal Year 2017/18 Amended
Budget amounts for revenues and expenditures by account/object number.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Amended FY 2017-18 Budget - City
Attachment 2 - Resolution - Salary Table
Attachment 3 - Salary Table - RCCEA
Page 88
ATTACHMENTS TO MAY 2, 2018 STAFF REPORT
ARE AVAILABLE IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Pages 88-174
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Trina Valdez, Management Analyst I
Noah Daniels, Finance Manager
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT NO. 002 AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE
TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH TANKO
STREETLIGHTING, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $82,000.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council approve and authorize an amendment to increase Professional
Services Agreement (C0#1 7-136) for Tanko Streetlighting, I nc. in the amount of $82,000.
BACKGROUND:
In 2017, the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Tanko Streetlighting, Inc. entered into a Professional
Services Agreement (C0#1 7-136) to provide a Citywide LED Streetlight Renovation.
ANALYSIS:
The Citywide LED Streetlight Renovation scope of work included retrofitting every existing High Pressure
Sodium (HPS) fixture that was included in the Purchase and Sale Agreement between the City of Rancho
Cucamonga and Southern California Edison (SCE) to a Light Emitting Diode (LED) fixture. The quantities
used for the initial scope of work were based off of existing data that the City had collected and was a
close estimate of total fixtures in the City. However, after completing five of the six phases of the
SCE purchase, the total amount of street lights needing to be retrofit to LED has exceeded the initial
estimated quantities.
Sales tax on the equipment was also inadvertently omitted from the proposal amount and has accounted
for over $133,000 of unexpected costs. The additional funds will complete the conversion of 14,944 street
lights in the City being retrofitted to LED.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This item would increase the contract amount by $82,000 to cover the added project costs. Adequate
funds from the Street Lighting Maintenance District Fund Nos. 151 through 158 to cover these additional
costs have been included in the Fiscal Year 2017/18 Budget.
Page 175
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Not Applicable
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 -Amendment No. 002
Page 176
AMENDMENT NO. 002
to
Professional Services Agreement (CO #17-136)
between
Tanko Streetlighting, Inc (hereinafter "Consultant")
and
City of Rancho Cucamonga (hereinafter the "City")
This Amendment No. 002 will serve to amend the Professional Services Agreement (hereinafter
"Agreement"), CO# 17-136, to incorporate the following:
Modify contract amount to increase in the amount of $82,000.00 to complete the Citywide LED
Streetlight Renovation.
All other Terms and Conditions of the original Agreement CO# 17-136, will remain in full effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties, through their respective authorized
representatives, have executed this Amendment by way of signature by both parties and on the date
indicated below. Please return two (2) original signed copies to the City no later than May 18, 2018.
The City will process both copies for signature and provide Consultant with one (1) fully executed copy
of the Amendment.
Tanko Str ting Inc.
By S- :Z 3
N e p D to
Title
By. -C 3�iY
Name Date
V.l%r�-
Title
(two signatures required if corporation)
Last Revised: 09/28/2012
City of Rancho Cucamonga
By:
Name
Title
By:
Name
Title
Date
Date
Page 1 of I
Page 177
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Trina Valdez, Management Analyst I
Noah Daniels, Finance Manager
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT NO. 001 AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE
TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH TANKO
STREETLIGHTING, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR
2017/18, AUTHORIZING THE RENEWAL OF THE PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018/19, AND AUTHORIZING
AN INCREASE TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $60,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018/19.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve Amendment No. 001 authorizing the following changes to
Professional Services Agreement (C0#1 7-137) for Tanko Streetlight, I nc:
1. An increase in the amount of $100,000 for Fiscal Year 2017/18;
2. Renewal of C0#1 7-137 for Fiscal Year 2018/19;
3. An increase in the amount of $60,000 for Fiscal Year 2018/19; and
4. Modify the agreement to allow Tanko to utilize subcontractors other than those listed in their proposal.
BACKGROUND:
In July 2017, the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Tanko Streetlight, Inc. entered into a Professional
Services Agreement (CO#17-137) to provide Citywide LED Streetlight On-going Maintenance.
ANALYSIS:
The maintenance contract scope of work included routine maintenance, quarterly night audits and
replacement of an estimated 8 to 10 street light knockdowns per year. The amount of street light
knockdowns has well exceeded that amount since taking ownership of the lights in August 2017. A total of
26 street lights have been knocked down since ownership and additional funds are needed in Fiscal Year
2017/18 to make the necessary repairs and replacements. In Fiscal Year 2018/19, additional funds are
being requested to cover the anticipated increase in the number of streetlight knockdowns.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds from the Street Lighting Maintenance District Fund Nos. 151 through 158 are included in the Fiscal
Page 178
Year 2017/18 Budget. Funds from the General City Street Lights Fund (Fund 150) in the amount of
$100,000 are included in Account 1150202-5300 of the proposed Fiscal Year 2018/19 Budget.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Not Applicable.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 -Amendment No. 001
Page 179
AMENDMENT NO. 001
to
Professional Services Agreement (CO #17-137)
between
Tanko Streetlighting, Inc (hereinafter "Consultant')
and
City of Rancho Cucamonga (hereinafter the "City")
This Amendment No. 001 will serve to amend the Professional Services Agreement (hereinafter
"Agreement"), CO# 17-137, to incorporate the following:
Modify contract amount to increase by $100,000.00 to complete additional Citywide Streetlight
Maintenance for this contract year only (July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018).
The above mentioned Agreement has been in effect for one (1) year. City would like to exercise
the option to extend the term of the Agreement for one (1) year for Fiscal Year 2018/19 (July 1,
2018 - June 30, 2019).
Modify contract amount to increase by $60,000.00 for Fiscal Year 2018/19 (July 1, 2018 - June
30, 2019).
Modify Exhibit A- Section 17, Task 13: Ongoing Maintenance (Page 32) of the Tanko
Streetlighting, Inc. proposal authorizing Tanko Streetlighting, Inc. may use subcontractors other
than Foddrill Construction for the maintenance services.
All other Terms and Conditions of the original Agreement CO#17-137, will remain in full effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties, through their respective authorized
representatives, have executed this Amendment by way of signature by both parties and on the date
indicated below. Please return two (2) original signed copies to the City no later than May 18, 2018.
The City will process both copies for signature and provide Consultant with one (1) fully executed copy
of the Amendment. /}
Tanko Streetligjxfir�. City of Rancho Cucamonga
By:
Name
s z -1/1'r
Date
rZ
Title if
By:CA-
Name
Da e
Title
(two signatures required if corporation)
Last Revised: 09/28/2012
M-
Name Date
Title
By:
Name Date
Title
Page I of 1
ATTACH M ENT 180
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Felicia Marshall, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AN AGREEMENT TO DEDICATE AN EASEMENT
FOR STREET AND RELATED PURPOSES FOR THE EXTENSION OF
SANTA ANITA AVENUE THROUGH THE EDISON POWER CORRIDOR,
NORTH OF 6TH STREET, SUBMITTED BY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
EDISON COMPANY ON BEHALF OF THE DEVELOPER, CRP OAKMONT
SANTAANITA, LLC.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council approve the subject agreement and accept the proposed easement
terms.
BACKGROUND:
DRC2015-00797, located approximately 1,100 feet north of Santa Anita Avenue and 6th Street
intersection is within the General Industrial (GI) District. CRP Oakmont Santa Anita, LLC, developer of
DRC2015-00797, a proposed 339,000 SF industrial building, were conditioned to dedicate an easement
for the extension of Santa Anita Avenue, north of 6th Street through an existing power corridor. The
property will have a frontage at the proposed Santa Anita Avenue cul-de-sac along the project's south
property line. Southern California Edison Company is the owner of the power corridor (APN 0229-271-
22). Therefore, Southern California Edison Company has provided the subject agreement to dedicate an
easement for street and related purposes for Santa Anita Avenue, 66 -foot full width through the 395 -foot
wide power corridor north of 6th Street to the City, at such time as street improvements are ready to be
constructed. The developer is nearing completion of the project plans and staff anticipates that
construction will begin in the near future.
ANALYSIS:
On March 2, 2016, a previous agreement was executed to dedicate an easement for street and related
purposes for the extension of Santa Anita Avenue. That agreement is set to expire and be of no further
force and effect if a certificate of occupancy was not issued for the proposed warehouse by December
31, 2018. The proposed agreement will adjust that date to December 31, 2020.
Prior to issuance of permits for construction of the street improvements, the developer will be required to
post improvement security bonds for the construction of the extension of Santa Anita Avenue.
Page 181
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed street extension will be added to the City's public street network for maintenance by the
City.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Not applicable.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Httacnment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Easement
Page 182
s,
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Engineering Division
Vicinity Map
ARROW I ROUTE
(BNSF) (METROLINK)
417 f f
w
S: C,C, E.
W
V _6.4lY' rll 1a/V1714 1jV*
Z-- i e= N�S161V
o
z
6TH
STREET
NTERSTATE
15
Y
Q
Q o
o
RANCHO
CUCAMONGA w
z
STREET,
ONTARIO
N
W E
S
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY
2 INNOVATION WAY, 2ND FLOOR
POMONA, CA 91768
TITLE & VALUATION
Easement
Location: City of Rancho Cucamonga
APN: 0229-271-22
RP File No.: GRT202786188
Affects SCE Document(s): 192043
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE
DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX $ — 0 —_See below
statement
COMPUTED ON FULL VALUE OF PROPERTY CONVEYED
Serial 70845A
Service Order 801192558
APPROVED
OR COMPUTED ON FULL VALUE LESS LIENS AND
REAL PROPERTIES
ENCUMBRANCES REMAINING AT TIME OF SALE
DEPARTMENT
SO. CALIF. EDISON CO.
BY GS DATE 05/02/18
SIGNATURE OF DECLARANT OR AGENT DETERMINING TAX FIRM NAME
Law Department
MR
EASEMENT
THIS EASEMENT IS RECORDED TO CORRECT THAT CERTAIN EASEMENT RECORDED
APRIL 23, 2018, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2018-0144072, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN
WHICH PARAGRAPH 12 INADVERTENTLY SHOWED AN INCORRECT EXPIRATION DATE.
DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAXES IN THE AMOUNT OF $220.00 WERE PAID
PREVIOUSLY ON AFOREMENTIONED INSTRUMENT.
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 184
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY
2131 WALNUT GROVE AVENUE
G03 - 2ND FLOOR
ROSEMEAD, CA 91770
TITLE & REAL ESTATE SERVICES
Easement
Location: City of Rancho Cucamonga
APN: 0229-271-22
RP File No.: GRT202786188
Affects SCE Document(s): 192043
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE
DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX $ _
COMPUTED ON FULL VALUE OF PROPERTY CONVEYED
Serial 70845A
Service Order 801192558
APPROVED
OR COMPUTED ON FULL VALUE LESS LIENS AND
--
REAL PROPERTIES
ENCUMBRANCES REMAINING AT TIME OF SALE
DEPARTMENT
SO. CALIF. EDISON CO.
BY GS DATE 05/02/18
SIGNATURE OF DECLARANT OR AGENT DETERMINING TAX FIRM NAME
Law Department
MR
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, a corporation, hereinafter called "Grantor",
does hereby grant to CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called
"Grantee", an easement for street purposes, in, on, under, over, along and across that certain real
property in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described
as follows:
Portions of Lots 94 and 95 of the Map of Rochester, as per map filed in Book 9, Page 20 of
Maps, in the Office of the County recorder of said County.
Said street easement is more particularly described on the Exhibit "A" and more particularly
depicted on the Exhibit "B", both attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof.
SUBJECT TO covenants, conditions, restrictions, reservations, exceptions, encumbrances,
rights, easements, leases and licenses, affecting the above described real property or any portion
thereof, whether of record or not.
The foregoing grant is made subject to the following terms and conditions:
The said Easement is granted subject to the right of Grantor to construct, maintain, use, operate,
alter, add to, repair, replace, reconstruct, enlarge and/or remove in, on, over, under, through,
along and across the above described real property, electric transmission and distribution lines
and communication lines, together with supporting structures and appurtenances, for conveying
electric energy for light, heat, power and communication purposes, and pipelines and
appurtenances for the transportation of oil, petroleum, gas, water, or other substances, and
conduits for any and all purposes.
2. Grantor shall not erect or place at any future time any of its facilities so as to unreasonably
interfere with the rights of Grantee created by this Easement grant.
3. The said Easement shall be exercised so as not to unreasonably endanger or interfere with the
construction, maintenance, use, operation, presence, repair, replacement, relocation,
Page 185
Grant of Easement
S.C.E., a corporation to
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Serial No. 70845A
RP File No.: GRT202786188
Affects SCE Document(s): 192043
reconstruction or removal of such electric transmission, distribution or communication lines,
pipelines, or other conduits.
4. Grantee agrees to hold harmless and indemnify Grantor to the fullest extent to which it can
legally do so, from and against all claims, liens, encumbrances, actions, loss, damage, expense
and/or liability arising from or growing out of loss or damage to property, including Grantor's
own property, or injury to or death of persons, including employees of Grantor, resulting in any
manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly, by reason of the exercise of the rights hereby granted;
provided, however, that this covenant shall not apply in those instances where such claims, liens,
encumbrances, actions, loss, damage, expense and/or liability are caused by the sole active
negligence of Grantor.
5. Grantee agrees to pay to Grantor, upon demand, any and all costs of relocation and/or
construction of such electric transmission, distribution and communication lines and supporting
structures, pipelines, and conduits which may be or become necessary by reason of the exercise
of the rights granted pursuant to this Easement.
6. Grantee agrees that in the exercise of its rights hereunder, its contractors, employees and other
agents will maintain a minimum clearance of thirty (30.00) feet between their equipment and any
and all overhead electric conductors.
7. Grantor shall have full unobstructed access to its facilities at all times and the right to clear,
keep clear, and remove any and all obstructions of any kind at all times.
8. Grantor reserves for itself the right to trim any tree or trees which may grow in or on the above
described real property and which, in the opinion of Grantor, endanger or interfere with the
proper operation or maintenance of said electric transmission, distribution and communication
lines, to the extent necessary to prevent any such interference or danger.
9. The above described real property is to be used only for the purposes specified herein and in the
event:
a. said real property is not so used;
b. said real property shall be vacated as a road right of way; or
the project for which this Easement is being granted is abandoned,
the Easement shall thereupon, ipso facto, revert to and merge in the interest of Grantor in the
above described real property.
10. Upon termination or reversion of the rights herein granted, Grantee shall execute and deliver to
Grantor, within thirty (30) days after service of a written demand therefore, a good and sufficient
quitclaim deed to the rights herein given. Should Grantee fail or refuse to deliver to Grantor a
quitclaim deed, as aforesaid, a written notice by Grantor reciting the failure or refusal of Grantee
to execute and deliver said quitclaim deed as herein provided and terminating this Easement
shall, after ten (10) days from the date of recordation of said notice, be conclusive evidence
against Grantee and all persons claiming under Grantee of the termination or reversion of the
rights herein given
2
Page 186
Grant of Easement
S.C.E., a corporation to
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Serial No. 70845A
RP File No.: GRT202786188
Affects SCE Document(s): 192043
11. As a controlling part of the consideration for the execution and delivery of this instrument by
Grantor, the Easement is accepted upon and subject to the express condition that the
improvement for which the Easement is given, regardless of the time performed, and any other
work or improvement commenced within two years from the date of recording of this Easement
(which improvement and other work or improvement are hereinafter sometimes collectively called
"Improvement") shall be done without any cost or expense whatsoever to Grantor, and that in the
event a special assessment or assessments is or are levied by an authorized lawful body against
the real property of Grantor for the Improvement, Grantee agrees that it will reimburse Grantor
and it shall be the binding obligation of the Grantee to reimburse Grantor for the full amount of
any and all such special assessment or assessments so levied for said Improvement and paid by
Grantor.
12. This easement is further given to accommodate the development of a warehouse at property
identified by Assessor's Parcel Numbers 0229-271-24, 25 and 26. This easement will expire and
be of no further force and effect to the extent that a certificate of occupancy is not issued for said
warehouse by December 31, 2020.
13. Also as a controlling part of the consideration for the execution and delivery of this instrument by
Grantor, Grantee covenants, for itself, its successors and assigns, to construct and maintain the
improvement to be located on the above described real property at its own expense.
14. Grantee hereby recognizes Grantor's title and interest in and to the above described real property
and agrees never to assail or resist Grantor's title or interest therein.
15. Any earth fill placed by Grantee within the boundaries of the above described real property shall
have a relative compaction density of ninety percent (90%).
16. Grantee agrees to provide twenty (20) -foot wide commercial type driveway(s) with curb
depression(s) capable of supporting forty (40) tons on a three axle truck at (such/a) locations
specified by the Grantor.
17. This easement shall not become effective unless and until the California Public Utilities
Commission approves it pursuant to Section 851 of the Public Utilities Code. To the extent
the California Public Utilities Commission rejects or otherwise conditions this Easement,
then Grantor may terminate same on ten (10) days notice to Grantee.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Southern California Edison Company has caused this
instrument to be executed this day of , 20
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY,
a corporation
By:
Jay Glasser
Land Services Agent
Land Management- Eastern Region
Real Properties Department
3
Page 187
Grant of Easement
S.C.E., a corporation to
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Serial No. 70845A
RP File No.: GRT202786188
Affects SCE Document(s): 192043
A Notary Public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual
who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or
validity of that document.
State of California
County of )
On before me, , a Notary Public,
personally appeared who proved to me on the
basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or
the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
4
Page 188
Grant of Easement
S.C.E., a corporation to
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Serial No. 70845A
RP File No.: GRT202786188
Affects SCE Document(s): 192043
GRANTEE, does hereby accept the above and foregoing Easement upon and subject to all of
the terms, covenants and conditions therein contained, and does hereby agree to comply with and
perform each and all of said terms, covenants and conditions.
DATED as of this day of -)20
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a California
corporation
Name:
Title:
Notary Public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who
signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or
validity of that document."
State of California
County of )
On before me, , a Notary Public,
personally appeared who proved to me on the
basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or
the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
5
Page 189
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Felicia Marshall, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF PARCEL MAP NO. 19836; ASSOCIATED
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES,
MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT; AND ORDERING THE ANNEXATION
TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND STREET LIGHT
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council:
1. Approve the final map for Parcel Map No. 19836;
2. Approve an associated Improvement Agreement;
3. Accept Faithful Performance bond and Labor & Materials bonds along with a Monumentation Cash
deposit; and
4. Order the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Light Maintenance District
No's 1 and 2.
BACKGROUND:
On September 13, 2017, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Parcel Map 19836 (Case No.
SUBTPM19836) to subdivide 0.92 acres into 2 parcels of land in the Low (L) District at the southeast
corner of Wilson Avenue and Winchester Court. This approval included conditions to construct certain
public improvements including street and landscape improvements.
ANALYSIS:
The developer, Yousef Audi, has submitted the Parcel Map along with an associated Improvement
Agreement, Faithful Performance bond, Labor & Materials bond, and Monumentation Cash deposit in the
following amounts:
Faithful Performance Bond $ 51,200
Labor and Material Bond $ 51,200
Monumentation Cash Deposit $ 2,860
The Parcel Map has been reviewed and is in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Parcel
Map. Further, the bonds and deposit are sufficient to ensure completion of the conditioned public
Page 190
improvements.
Copies of the agreement and bonds are available in the City Clerk's office. The Consent and Waiver to
Annexation forms signed by the developer are also on file in the City Clerk's office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed annexations would satisfy the conditions of approval for the development and supply
additional annual revenue into the lighting and landscape maintenance districts in the following amounts:
Landscape Maintenance District No. 1: $ 184.42
Street Lighting District No. 1: $ 35.54
Street Lighting District No. 2: $ 79.94
The development includes installation of 1 LED street light that will be maintained by Street Light
Maintenance District No. 1 and 1 LED street light that will be maintained by Street Light Maintenance
District No. 2.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Not applicable.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1-
Vicinity Map
Attachment 2
- LMD 1
Attachment 3
- SLD 1
Attachment 4
- SLD 2
Page 191
PM 19836
Vicinity Map
NOT TO SCALE
Wilson Ave
Hermosa SchnnI
Wilson Ave
Project Site
ATTACHMENT
Page 192
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (GENERAL CITY) FOR
PROJECT CASE NO. PM 19836
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously
formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscape and Lighting Act
of 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California
(the "Act", said special maintenance district known and designated as Landscape Maintenance
District No. 1 (General City) (the "District"); and
WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the Act authorize the annexation of
additional territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation of
resolutions, and assessment engineer's report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority
protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within
the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the Act related to the annexation of
territory to the District, Article XIII D of the Constitution of the State of California ("Article XIII D")
establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy assessments which apply
to the levy of annual assessments for the District on the territory proposed to be annexed to such
District; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference, have requested that such property (collectively, the
"Territory") be annexed to the District in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to
finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto (the
"Improvements"); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed
forms entitled "Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance
District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property" (the "Consent and
Waiver"); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have expressly
waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act to the annexation of
the Territory to the District and have expressly consented to the annexation of the Territory to the
District; and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act and/or Article
XIII D applicable to the authorization to levy the proposed annual assessment against the Territory
set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and have declared
support for, consent to and approval of the authorization to levy such proposed annual
assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 1 ATTACHMENT 2
Page 193
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly agreed for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns that:
(1) The proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory
from the District Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the
maintenance and operation expenses of the Improvements;
(2) The proposed annual assessment does not exceed the reasonable cost of
the proportional special benefit from the Improvements conferred on each parcel in the Territory.
(3) Only the special benefits derived or to be derived by each parcel in the
Territory from the Improvements have been included in the proposed annual assessment.
WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the
Territory to the District and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in
amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the above recitals are true and correct.
SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the
Territory do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional
special benefit conferred on each such parcel from the
Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the
Territory from the Improvements has been determined in relationship
to the entirety of the cost of the maintenance of the Improvement.
C. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of
the proposed annual assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation the Territory to
the District, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the proceeds
of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the levy of
annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in
Exhibit C.
SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the District, including the levy of all
assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 6th day of June 2018.
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 2
Page 194
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property to be Annexed
The Owner of the Property is: Yousef Audi, a married man as his sole and separate property
The legal description of the Property is:
Real property in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, county of San Bernardino, State of California,
described as follows:
The north 235 feet of the west 66 feet of the east one-half of the northeast one-quarter of the
northwest one-quarter of the northeast one-quarter of section 26, township1 north, range 7
west, San Bernardino Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, according
to the Official Plat thereof.
Except the north 33 feet thereof for road purposes.
The north 235 feet of the east 132 feet of the west one-half of the northeast one-quarter of the
northwest one-quarter of the northeast of section 26, township1 north, range 7 west, San
Bernardino Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, according to the
Official Plat thereof.
Assessor's Parcels Numbers of the Property:
0201-182-07
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 3
Page 195
Exhibit B
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2017/2018
Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City):
Landscape Maintenance District No. 1(General City) (the "Maintenance District") represents
various landscaped areas, parks and community trails located at various sites throughout the City.
These sites consist of several non-contiguous areas throughout the City. As such, the parcels
within this District do not represent a distinct district area as do the other LMD's within the City.
Typically, new parcels within this District have been annexed upon development.
The various sites maintained by the District consist of parkways, median islands, paseos, street
trees, entry monuments, community trails and parks. The parks consist of Bear Gulch Park, East
and West Beryl Park, Old Town Park, Church Street Park, Golden Oaks Park, Heritage
Community Park, Hermosa Park, Red Hill Community Park, Lions Park, Napa Park, Don Tiburcio
Tapia Park and the Rancho Cucamonga Adult Sports Complex).
Proposed additions to the Improvements for Project Case No. PM 19836:
4 new trees on Winchester Court and 8 new trees on Wilson Avenue
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 4
Page 196
Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2017/2018
Landscape Maintenance District No.1 (General City):
The rate per Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) is $92.21 for the fiscal year 2017/18. The following
table summarizes the assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City)
for PM 19836:
Land Use
Basis
EBU*
Factor
Rate per
EBU*
Single Family Residential
Parcel
1.00
$92.21
Multi -Family Residential
Unit
0.50
92.21
Non -Residential
Acre
2.00
92.21
The proposed annual assessment for the property described in Exhibit A is as follows:
2 Parcels x 1 EBU Factor x $92.21 Rate per EBU = $ 184.42 Annual Assessment
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 5
Page 197
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO STREET LIGHT
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS) FOR
PROJECT CASE NO. PM 19836
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously
formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscape and Lighting Act
of 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California
(the "Act", said special maintenance district known and designated as Street Light Maintenance
District No. 1 (Arterial Streets) (the "District"); and
WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the Act authorize the annexation of
additional territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation of
resolutions, and assessment engineer's report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority
protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within
the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the Act related to the annexation of
territory to the District, Article XIII D of the Constitution of the State of California ("Article XIII D")
establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy assessments which apply
to the levy of annual assessments for the District on the territory proposed to be annexed to such
District; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference, have requested that such property (collectively, the
"Territory") be annexed to the District in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to
finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto (the
"Improvements"); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed
forms entitled "Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance
District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property" (the "Consent and
Waiver"); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have expressly
waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act to the annexation of
the Territory to the District and have expressly consented to the annexation of the Territory to the
District; and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act and/or Article
XIII D applicable to the authorization to levy the proposed annual assessment against the Territory
set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and have declared
support for, consent to and approval of the authorization to levy such proposed annual
assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 1 ATTACHMENT 3
Page 198
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly agreed for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns that:
(1) The proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory
from the District Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the
maintenance and operation expenses of the Improvements;
(2) The proposed annual assessment does not exceed the reasonable cost of
the proportional special benefit from the Improvements conferred on each parcel in the Territory.
(3) Only the special benefits derived or to be derived by each parcel in the
Territory from the Improvements have been included in the proposed annual assessment.
WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory
to the District and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts
not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the above recitals are true and correct.
SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the
Territory do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional
special benefit conferred on each such parcel from the
Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the
Territory from the Improvements has been determined in relationship
to the entirety of the cost of the maintenance of the Improvement.
C. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of
the proposed annual assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation the Territory to
the District, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the proceeds
of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the levy of
annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in
Exhibit C.
SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the District, including the levy of all
assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 6th day of June 2018.
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 2
Page 199
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property to be Annexed
The Owner of the Property is: Yousef Audi, a married man as his sole and separate property
The legal description of the Property is:
Real property in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, county of San Bernardino, State of California,
described as follows:
The north 235 feet of the west 66 feet of the east one-half of the northeast one-quarter of the
northwest one-quarter of the northeast one-quarter of section 26, township1 north, range 7
west, San Bernardino Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, according
to the Official Plat thereof.
Except the north 33 feet thereof for road purposes.
The north 235 feet of the east 132 feet of the west one-half of the northeast one-quarter of the
northwest one-quarter of the northeast of section 26, township1 north, range 7 west, San
Bernardino Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, according to the
Official Plat thereof.
Assessor's Parcels Numbers of the Property:
0201-182-07
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 3
Page 200
Exhibit B
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2017/2018
Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial Streets):
Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial Streets) (the "Maintenance District") is used to
fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on arterial
streets throughout the City. These sites consist of several non-contiguous areas throughout the
City.
The sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on arterial streets and traffic signals on
arterial streets within the rights-of-way or designated easements of streets dedicated to the City.
Proposed additions to the Improvements for Project PM 19836:
As a result of the annexation, 1 new LED street light on Wilson Avenue
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 4
Page 201
Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2017/2018
Street Light Maintenance District No.1 (Arterial Streets):
The rate per Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) is $17.77 for the fiscal year 2017/18. The following
table summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No.1 (Arterial Streets)
for PM 19836:
Land Use
Basis
EBU
Factor*
Rate per
EBU*
Single Family Residential
Parcel
1.00
$17.77
Multi -Family Residential
Parcel
1.00
17.77
Non -Residential
Acre
2.00
17.77
The proposed annual assessment for the property described in Exhibit A is as follows:
2 Parcels x 1 EBU Factor x $17.77 Rate per EBU = $ 35.54 Annual Assessment
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 5
Page 202
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO STREET LIGHT
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 (LOCAL STREETS) FOR
PROJECT CASE NO. PM 19836
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously
formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscape and Lighting Act
of 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California
(the "Act", said special maintenance district known and designated as Street Light Maintenance
District No. 2 (Local Streets) (the "District"); and
WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the Act authorize the annexation of
additional territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation of
resolutions, and assessment engineer's report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority
protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within
the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the Act related to the annexation of
territory to the District, Article XIII D of the Constitution of the State of California ("Article XIII D")
establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy assessments which apply
to the levy of annual assessments for the District on the territory proposed to be annexed to such
District; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference, have requested that such property (collectively, the
"Territory") be annexed to the District in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to
finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto (the
"Improvements"); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed
forms entitled "Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance
District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property" (the "Consent and
Waiver"); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have expressly
waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act to the annexation of
the Territory to the District and have expressly consented to the annexation of the Territory to the
District; and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act and/or Article
XIII D applicable to the authorization to levy the proposed annual assessment against the Territory
set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and have declared
support for, consent to and approval of the authorization to levy such proposed annual
assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 1 ATTACHMENT 4
Page 203
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly agreed for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns that:
(1) The proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory
from the District Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the
maintenance and operation expenses of the Improvements;
(2) The proposed annual assessment does not exceed the reasonable cost of
the proportional special benefit from the Improvements conferred on each parcel in the Territory.
(3) Only the special benefits derived or to be derived by each parcel in the
Territory from the Improvements have been included in the proposed annual assessment.
WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory
to the District and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts
not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the above recitals are true and correct.
SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the
Territory do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional
special benefit conferred on each such parcel from the
Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the
Territory from the Improvements has been determined in relationship
to the entirety of the cost of the maintenance of the Improvement.
C. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of
the proposed annual assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation the Territory to
the District, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the proceeds
of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the levy of
annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in
Exhibit C.
SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the District, including the levy of all
assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 6th day of June 2018.
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 2
Page 204
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property to be Annexed
The Owner of the Property is: Yousef Audi, a married man as his sole and separate property
The legal description of the Property is:
Real property in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, county of San Bernardino, State of California,
described as follows:
The north 235 feet of the west 66 feet of the east one-half of the northeast one-quarter of the
northwest one-quarter of the northeast one-quarter of section 26, township1 north, range 7
west, San Bernardino Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, according
to the Official Plat thereof.
Except the north 33 feet thereof for road purposes.
The north 235 feet of the east 132 feet of the west one-half of the northeast one-quarter of the
northwest one-quarter of the northeast of section 26, township1 north, range 7 west, San
Bernardino Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, according to the
Official Plat thereof.
Assessor's Parcels Numbers of the Property:
0201-182-07
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 3
Page 205
Exhibit B
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2017/2018
Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets):
Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets) (the "Maintenance District") is used to fund
the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on local streets
throughout the City but excluding those areas already in another local maintenance district.
Generally, this area encompasses the residential area of the City west of Haven Avenue.
The sites maintained by the District consist of street lights on local streets and traffic signals (or
a portion thereof) on local streets generally west of Haven Avenue.
Proposed additions to the Improvements for Project PM 19836:
As a result of the annexation, 1 new LED street light on Winchester Court
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 4
Page 206
Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2017/2018
Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets):
The rate per Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) is $39.97 for the fiscal year 2017/18. The following
table summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets)
for PM 19836:
Land Use
Basis
EBU
Factor*
Rate per
EBU*
Single Family Residential
Parcel
1.00
$39.97
Multi -Family Residential
Unit
1.00
39.97
Non -Residential
Acre
2.00
39.97
The proposed annual assessment for the property described in Exhibit A is as follows:
2 Parcels x 1 EBU Factor x $39.97 Rate per EBU = $ 79.94 Annual Assessment
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 5
Page 207
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Ed Diaz, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION TO ACCEPT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ON THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AND ETIWANDA
AVENUE FOR TRACT 16226-2 AS COMPLETE, FILE THE NOTICE OF
COMPLETION AND AUTHORIZE RELEASE OF BONDS.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve and accept the public improvements required for the development of Tract 16226-2 and
authorize the City Engineer to file the appropriate Notice of Completion;
2. Release Faithful Performance Bond #0188678 and accept Maintenance Bond #0188678-1 for the
associated public improvements; and
3. Authorize the City Engineer to approve the release of the Maintenance Bond one year following the
filing of the Notice of Completion if the improvements remain free from defects in material and
workmanship.
BACKGROUND:
Tentative Tract 16226, located north of Wilson Avenue, east of Day Creek Boulevard and west of
Etiwanda Avenue, in the Low Residential Development District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), was approved
by the Planning Commission on July 24, 2002, for the division of 92.78 acres into 265 lots. The related
10 -year Development Agreement DRCDA 01-01 went into effect on May 17, 2002. Both the tentative map
and the development agreement have been extended multiple times. Tentative Tracts 16226 and 16227
together constitute Rancho Etiwanda Estates, a 632 -lot gated community at the northwest corner of Day
Creek Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. Tract 16226-2 is the final tract in Rancho Etiwanda Estates. On
December 3, 2014, City Council approved a substitute Improvement Agreement for Tract 16226-2. This
approval included conditions to construct certain public improvements including street, landscape, and
storm drain improvements.
Developer:
BMC Rancho Etiwanda, LLC
27200 Tourney Road, Suite 410,
Valencia, CA 91355
Release: Faithful Performance Bond #0188678 $524,500
Page 208
Accept: Maintenance Bond #0188678-1 $ 52,450
ANALYSIS:
All public improvements required of this development have been completed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. The public improvements will be re -inspected in approximately nine months to ensure they
remain in good order prior to release of the maintenance bond.
FISCAL IMPACT:
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Enhancing Premier Community Status through the construction of high quality public improvements
associated with the development of Tract 16226-2.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Page 209
TRACT 16226-2
&///// 9 North Etiwanda Preserve
SITE
BRENTWOOD
W1lem Ave Wham Aye Wilson Ave
iv
m � Etiwanda Creek -
n Community & Dog Park
8anyen 81 Banyan 5S Eaf
Le Ventana Q
x,o xio no
9`d y
Etiwanda Hlgh Schaal
9 Etiwanda
rid park i n Intermediate School
O
o ETfWANDA
r � �
m a
a
e
Base Line Rd Baseline Ave aaseiine Ave
Base Line Rd
Ci
ELb�nkwy C:
q�wy
`i
church 51 WEST E N D
f.A P� l7� Ms)rtiri; 6,4iilef Avp
Victoria Gardens P W 0. Tcnci:, (;rill
N
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 210
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Romeo M. David, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A CONTRACT WITH R.J. NOBLE COMPANY IN AN
AMOUNT OF $740,550, PLUS A 10% CONTINGENCY FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR 2017/18 LOCAL OVERLAY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council:
1. Approve the plans and specifications for the Fiscal Year 2017/18 Local Overlay Pavement
Rehabilitation on file with the City Engineer (Project);
2. Accept the bids received for the Project;
3. Award and authorize the execution of the contract in the amount of $740,550, to the lowest
responsive bidder, R.J. Noble Company, for the total bid;
4. Authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $74,055; and
5. Authorize a Purchase Order in the amount of $35,840 to Aufbau Corporation for on-call construction
inspection services
BACKGROUND:
The existing roadway pavement on various neighborhood streets have deteriorated to the extent requiring
asphalt overlay resurfacing. Asphalt overlay will extend the life of the pavement and improve rideability.
This project has been included in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 2017/18. A
Vicinity Map illustrating the various locations for asphalt overlay is included as Attachment 1.
ANALYSIS:
The scope of work consists of cold milling the existing pavement, routing and crack sealing, asphalt
concrete overlay, adjusting existing manholes and valves to new grade, installation of pavement markers
and striping. The contract documents call for forty (40) working days to complete this construction.
The Notice Inviting Bids was released to the general contracting community and was published in the Daily
Bulletin on May 8 and May 15, 2018. The City Clerk's Office facilitated the formal solicitation for bidding
the project.
On May 22, 2018, the City Clerk's Office received five construction bids. The Engineer's estimate for the
Page 211
project was $861,440. The apparent low bidder, R.J. Noble Company submitted a bid in the amount of
$740,550. A full bid summary is included as Attachment 2.
The Engineering staff has reviewed all bids received and found all to be complete and in accordance with
the bid requirements with any irregularities to be inconsequential. Staff has completed the required
background investigation and finds the lowest responsive bidder R.J. Noble Comapny meet the
requirements of the bid documents.
ENVIRONMENTAL:
Staff has determined that the project is Categorically Exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Article 19. Categorical Exemptions. In Accordance with Section 15301 "Existing Facilities"
subsection (c), Class 1 projects consist of minor alteration of existing public facilities, therefore, the Fiscal
Year 2017/18 Local Overlay Pavement Rehabilitation is considered categorically exempt from CEQA.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Anticipated construction costs for this project are estimated to be as follows:
Construction Contract $740,550
Construction Contract Contingency (10%) $ 74,055
Construction Inspection $ 35,840
Estimated Construction Costs $850,445
Sufficient funding has been budgeted in Fiscal Year 2017/2018 from the Gas Tax R&T7360 (Fund 174),
Measure I (Fund 177) and Citywide Infrastructure Improvement (Fund 198) Funds all of which are
identified under the Capital Improvement Project Account No.'s. Funding for this project is available in the
Fiscal Year 2017/18 Budget in the following amounts:
Account No.
Funding Source
Description
Amount
11743035650/1022174-0
Gas Tax Fund (174)
Local Street Rehabilitation
$295,558
11773035650/1022177-0
Measure I Fund (177)
Local Street Rehabilitation
$450,000
11983035650/1022198-0
Infrastructure Fund (198)
Local Street Rehabilitation
$104,887
$850,445
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This project will restore the existing road surface to a substantially new condition, extending the pavement
life, use and ridability, thus enhancing the City's position as the premier community in our region.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attchment 1 -Vicnity Map
Attachment 2 - Bid Summary
Page 212
BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING MAY 22, 2018
FY 17/18 LOCAL OVERLAY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
APPARENT LOW BIDDER
THE R.J. NOBLE
COMPANY
2
HARDY &HARPER, INC.
3
VANCE CORPORATION
4
ALL AMERICAN
ASPHALT
5
LC PAVING & SEALING
INC.
NO
QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
1
1 LS Mobilization
$10,000.00
$10,000.00
$40,000.00
$40,000.00
$30,000.00
$30,000.00
$46,500.00
$46,500.001
$40,000.00
$40,000.00
$15,000.00
$15,000.00
2
8,418 TONS 0.10' Asphalt Conrete Overlay
$80.00
$673,440.00
$65.25
$549,274.50
$69.69
$586,650.42
$70.00
$589,260.00
$74.00
$622,932.00
$81.00
$681,858.00
3 40,250 SY Cold Plane per Details
$1.80
$72,450.00
$1.50
$60,375.00
$1.76
$70,840.00
$2.00
$80,500.00
$2.30
$92,575.00
$1.55
$62,387.50
4
41 EA Adjust Manhole Cover to Grade
$450.00
$18,450.00
$450.00
$18,450.00
$400.00
$16,400.00
$400.00
$16,400.00
$600.00
$24,600.00
$950.00
$38,950.00
51
8 EA Adjust Sewer Cleanout to Grade
$200.001
$1,600.00
$450.00
$3,600.00
$500.001
$4,000.00
$500.00
$4,000.00
$175.00
$1,400.00
$475.001
$3,800.00
6
58 EA Adjust Water Valve and Gas Valve Covers to Grade
$250.00
$14,500.00
$75.00
$4,350.00
$100.00
$5,800.00
$84.00
$4,872.00
$175.00
$10,150.00
$55.00
$3,190.00
7
1 LS Re -Striping, Markings and Markers per City Std. Dwg. 133
$30,000.00
$30,000.00
$14,500.00
$14,500.00
$23,309.58
$23,309.58
$14,175.00
$14,175.00
$16,113.00
$16,113.00
$18,340.00
$18,340.00
8
1 LS Traffic Control
$41,000.00
$41,000.00
$50,000.00
$50,000.00
$40,000.00
$40,000.00
$22,200.00
$22,200.00
$30,000.00
$30,000.00
$37,500.00
$37,500.00
TOTAL BID SCHEDULE
$861,440.00
$740,549.50
$777,000.00
$777,907.00
$837,770.00
$861,025.50
Page 214 ATTACHMENT 2
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Curt Billings, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A CONTRACT WITH TSR CONSTRUCTION AND
INSPECTION IN AN AMOUNT OF $44,170, PLUS A 10% CONTINGENCY
FOR THE MCKINLEY STREET DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
LOCATED ON MCKINLEY STREET WEST OF WILLOW DRIVE.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council:
1. Approve the plans and specifications for the McKinley Street Drainage Improvement Project;
2. Accept the bid received for the Project;
3. Award and authorize the execution of the contract in the amount of $44,170, to the lowest responsive
bidder, TSR Construction and Inspection, for the total bid;
4. Authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $4,417; and
5. Authorize a Purchase Order in the amount of $10,240 to Aufbau Corporation for on-call construction
inspection services
BACKGROUND:
This project will abandon a portion of a corrugated metal pipe that has failed due to corrosion and has
required more frequent cleanings by City maintenance staff. Also, a curb opening inlet will be constructed
to combine two separate drainage inlets at the curb into one larger inlet. The curb inlet will redirect Ramona
Avenue drainage into an open top box channel that was constructed for the adjacent Willow Drive
drainage. The metal pipe to be abandoned is 12" x 18" and cannot be replaced without extensive impacts
to private walls, driveways, and landscaping to the properties it crosses.
In 1957, a residential development along Ramona Avenue, Tract 5347, constructed the metal pipe within a
drainage easement across one of its properties at 9895 McKinley Street. The nuisance and storm water
emptied into a ditch on an undeveloped parcel to the south. In 1970, This pipe was extended further south
across another residential lot and then exited through a curb outlet into a cul-de-sac street, also named
Ramona Avenue, with the Tract 4454 development. The pipe currently crosses three lots. However, only
the original portion within Tract 5347 will be abandoned and filled with concrete. The lower portion of the
pipe is in good condition and will remain for future use if needed, to drain a small undeveloped parcel it
crosses between the two residential Tracts. When completed the drainage easement across the property
at 9895 McKinley Street will be vacated
A larger curb opening inlet will be also be constructed on McKinley Street to redirect drainage flows away
Page 215
from the Ramona Avenue cul-de-sac, to an adjacent open top box channel that is 4' wide by 2' tall and
outlets easterly to the Area VI I storm drain in Hermosa Avenue. With the larger curb inlet, the box channel
will receive the combined drainage flows from Ramona Avenue and Willow Drive and is sufficiently sized
to contain these flows. This box channel was constructed within a drainage easement on the adjacent
property at 9903 McKinley Street and extends easterly across four more residential lots. It was
constructed with the Tract 9034 development along Willow Drive in 1976. It also originally drained out to
an open field. But, in 1987 it was intercepted and extended with a 36" concrete pipe to the Area VI I storm
drain.
This project is included in the Fiscal Year 2017/18 Budget. The proposed improvements will improve
maintenance operations by reducing cleaning operations for the City's maintenance staff. A Vicinity Map is
included as Attachment 1.
ANALYSIS:
The scope of work consists of, removal of asphalt pavement, concrete, portions of a metal storm drain and
gate, construction of asphalt paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, storm drain bulkhead, crushed aggregate base,
landscape rock, placement of 50psi low density cellular concrete abandonment grout, and install iron gate.
The contract documents call for twenty (20) working days to complete the construction.
The Notice Inviting Bids was released to the general contracting community and was published in the Daily
Bulletin on May 1 and May 8, 2018. The City Clerk's Office facilitated the formal solicitation for bidding the
project.
On May 15, 2018, the City Clerk's Office received one construction bid. The Engineer's estimate for the
project was $37,490. The apparent low bidder, TSR Construction and Inspection submitted a bid in the
amount of $44,170. A bid summary is included as Attachment 2.
The Engineering staff has reviewed all bids received and found all to be complete and in accordance with
the bid requirements with any irregularities to be inconsequential. Staff has completed the required
background investigation and finds the lowest responsive bidder TSR Construction and Inspection meet
the requirements of the bid documents.
ENVIRONMENTAL:
Staff has determined that the project is Categorically Exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Article 19. Categorical Exemptions. In Accordance with Section 15301 "Existing Facilities"
subsection (c), Class 1 projects consist of minor alteration of existing public facilities, therefore, the
McKinley Street Drainage Improvement Project is considered categorically exempt from CEQA.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Anticipated construction costs are estimated to be as follows:
Construction Contract $ 44,170
Construction Contract Contingency (10%) $ 4,417
Construction Inspection $ 10,240
Estimated Construction Costs $ 58,827
A total of $75,200 has been budgeted in Fiscal Year 2017/2018 from Citywide Infrastructure Improvement
(Fund 198), which is identified under the following Capital I mprovement Project Account No:
Page 216
Account No. Funding Source Description Amount
11983035650/1954198-0 Infrastructure Fund (198) McKinley at Ramona Repair $75,200
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The proposed McKinley Street Drainage Improvements will enhance the City position as the premier
community in our region.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Bid Summay
Page 217
VICIIVITY MAP
McKINLEY STREET DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN RAMONA
AVE. AND WILLOW DR, FRONTING 9903
AND 9895 McKI N LEY STREET
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 218
PALO ALTO ST.
j
A PKWY
�
Q
Q` �, W L.LJ
CHURCH
ST.
¢
W Z
0
O
Q
m
U
> Q
Q
< ❑
�J
r
W Q N
m
U I >
J .UCAMING
Q
1Y
Cq HEMLOCK
pE� HST ST
SAN BERNARDINO
Q
=
Lv
FOOTHILL BLVD.
HIALL w
Q
m
Lj
PROJECT
z
�
=
® z
CIVIC C TER DR �
SITE
ROUTE
�_ o
McKINLEY
JERSEY BLVD.
ARROW
Stn ST.
zstn
25th
S T.
24th
F�ERON
HU
OLT
7th STREET
6th STREET
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 218
BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING May 15, 2018
MCIF40i ley Street Drainage Improvement Project
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
Apparent Low Bid
TSR Construction
UNIT
COST
AMOUNT
UNIT
COST
BID
AMOUNT
NO
QTY
UNIT
DESCRIPTION
1
1
LS
Removals Per Removal Plan
$6,500
$6,500
$10,000.00
$10,000.00
2
1
LS
Construct Low Density Abandonement
Concrete
$6,500
$6,500
$6,000.00
$6,000.00
3
140
SF
Construct 4 Inch Thick AC Over 3 inch
Crushed Aggregate Base
$15
$2,100
$20.00
$2,800.00
4
2
EA
Adjust Water Valve to Grade
$200
$400
$500.00
$1,000.00
5
1
LS
Construct Sidewalk Culvert and all
Incidentals
$12,000
$12,000
$6,000.00
$6,000.00
6
97
SF
Construct 4 Inch Thick Concrete Sidewalk
$6
$582
$10.00
$970.00
7
34
SF
Construct 8 Inch Thick Concrete Cross Gutter
$12
$408
$100.00
$3,400.00
8
1
LS
onstruct Concrete Local Uepression
Includes Monolithic Curb
$6,000
$6,000
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
9
1
LS
Modify and Re Install Wrought Iron Gate
$500
$500
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
10
1
LS
Install Decorative Rock
$500
$500
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
11
1
LS
Mobilization/ Demobilization and Traffic
Control
$2,000
$2,000
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
TOTAL BASE BID
$37,490.00
$44,170.00
Page 219
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Gianfranco Laurie, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE AMENDED
MEASURE "I" FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN COVERING
FISCAL YEARS 2017/2022.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the amended Local Measure
"I" Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan covering Fiscal Years 2017/2022 as requested by the San
Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) to provide a public record of the intended use of
Local Measure "I" Funds.
BACKGROUND:
Measure "I", the county -wide transportation sales tax program, requires that each local jurisdiction
receiving revenues annually adopt a Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan which outlines the specific
projects upon which those funds shall be expended. Also, each local jurisdiction is required to amend the
program to adjust for changes as they become apparent.
ANALYSIS:
If changes are necessary (additions or deletions), the plan may be altered at each annual adoption or
intermittently with City Council approval. Staff recommends that the program be amended at the end of
each fiscal year to capture any projects that may have been added, account for the estimated actual
expenditures and adjust the plan as necessary for the upcoming budget year. Therefore, staff has
prepared the amended Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan for consideration by the City Council for
adoption and to be kept on file with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for
informational purposes.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Five -Year list has been over -programmed to allow for spillage and to insure that the adopted plan
contains ample projects for Measure "I" expenditures. In addition, no more than 50% of the estimated
annual revenue went to categorical expenditures in the plan or general program categories. A general
program category is a program of work without any identified streets/locations.
Page 220
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The Measure "I" Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan will enhance the City's position as the premier
community in our region through construction of needed transportation improvements.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Resolution
Attachment A- Measure I Five Year C1 P
Page 221
RESOLUTION NO. 18-037
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE
AMENDED MEASURE 661" FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM COVERING FISCAL YEARS
2017/2022 FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MEASURE "I" FUNDS
WHEREAS, San Bernardino County voters approved passage of Measure "I" in
November 2004, authorizing the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority to impose a
one-half of one percent retail transactions and use tax applicable in the incorporated and
unincorporated territory of the County of San Bernardino; and
WHEREAS, revenue from the tax can only be used for transportation improvement and
traffic management programs authorized in the Expenditure Plans set forth in Ordinance No. 04-1
of the Authority; and
WHEREAS, the Strategic Plan requires each local jurisdiction applying for revenue from
the Local Streets Program to annually adopt and update a Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan.
WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code 190300 and Ordinance No. 04-1 require each
local jurisdiction to maintain General Fund expenditures for transportation -related construction
and maintenance activities at the required Maintenance of Effort base year level in each fiscal
year of the adopted Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan, which for the City of Rancho
Cucamonga is $2,225,757.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
HEREBY RESOLVES, that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California
that the Amended Measure "I" Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan, attached to this resolution as
Attachment A is hereby adopted.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 6th day of June 2018.
Resolution No. 18-037 — Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT 1
Page 222
Please do not change, alter or modify this template. Use plus signs along left side of worksheet to add rows rather than manually inserting rows to ensure formulas are carried through.
MEASURE I LOCAL STREET PASS-THROUGH FUNDS FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PLAN PERIOD:
FY2017/2018 to FY2021/2022
RESOLUTION APPROVAL DATE:
6/6/2018
CONTACT PERSON & TITLE:
Gianfranco Laurie, Senior Civil Engineer
CONTACT PHONE:
909 774-4037
CONTACT EMAIL:
Gianfranw.Laurie@cityofro.us
AGENCY NAME:
Rancho Cucamonga
FY2017/2018
FY2018/2019
FY2019/2020
FY2020/2021
FY2021/2022
Total Available
(Carryover plus
estimate
CARRYOVER BALANCE:
$4,997,473.00
ANNUAL MEASURE I ESTIMATE:
$2,876,246.00
$2,961,071.00
$3,048,384.00
$3,136,150.00
$3,226,404.00
$20,245,728.00
In NMTP
Plan?
ATP
Component?
Estimated Total Nexus Project?
FY2017/2018
FY2018/2019
FY2019/2020
FY2020/2021
FY2021/2022
Carryover Current
Funds Estimate
Total Local Street
Measure I
Programmed
Named Projects: Yes Ne
Project Cost
Ty Public Sham
DIFCarryover Current Carryover Current Carryover Current Carryover Current
snae(%)_06 Funds Estimate Funds Estimate Funds Estimate Funds Estimate
4th St from Haven to Milliken - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 500,000.00
$ 500,000.00
$500,000.00
4th St from Hellman to Archibald - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 225,000.00
$ 225,000.00
$225,000.00
6th St from Hellman to Archibald - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 500 000.00
$ 500,000.00
$500,000.00
9th St from Grove to Hellman - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 420,000.00
$ 318,740.00
$318,740.00
Banyan St from Haven to Rochester - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 550 000.00
$ 550 000.00
$550,000.00
Banyan St from Rochester to Etiwanda - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 450,000.00
$ 450,000.00
$450,000.00
Base Line Rd from Milliken to West of Day Creek Blvd - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 1,100 000.00
$ 727,760.00
$727,760.00
Carnelian St from Base Line to Rte 210 - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 900,000.00
$ 900,000.00
$900,000.00
Carnelian St from Lemon to Wilson - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 568 000.00
$ 285 490.00
$285,490.00
Carnelian Saline and Ave from Foothill to Base Line - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 1,000,000.00
$ 1,000,000.00
$1,000,000.00
Church St from Pepper to Hellman - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 250 000.00
$ 202,690.00
$202,690.00
Cucamonga Storm Drain from east of Hellman to Amethyst to 19th St - SD and Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 4,900,000.00
$ 85,000.00
$85,000.00
Etiwanda Ave from Foothill to Base Line - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 500 000.00
$ 500 000.00
$500,000.00
Etiwanda Ave from Rte 210 to Wilson - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 600,000.00
$ 600,000.00
$600,000.00
Foothill Blvd from Haven to Milliken - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 900 000.00
$ 850 000.00
$850,000.00
Foothill Blvd from 1-15 Freeway to East - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 825,000.00
$ 825,000.00
$825,000.00
Foothill Blvd from Milliken to 1-15 Freeway- Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 1,400 000.00
$ 60 000.00
$60,000.00
Haven Ave from Base Line to Rte 210 - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 850,000.00
$ 850,000.00
$850,000.00
Haven Ave from Foothill to Church - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 450 000.00
$ 450 000.00
$450,000.00
Haven Ave from Church to Base Line - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 500,000.00
$ 500,000.00
$500,000.00
Haven Ave from Rte 210 to Wilson - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 900 000.00
$ 900 000.00
$900,000.00
Hellman Ave from San Bernardino to Base Line - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 477,000.00
$ 364,000.00
$364,000.00
Hermosa Ave from Arrow to Foothill - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 285 000.00
$ 250 000.00
$250,000.00
Hillside Ave from Archibald to Canistel - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 850,000.00
$ 286,970.00
$286,970.00
Highland Ave from Beryl to Archibald - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 500 000.00
$ 500 000.00
$500 000.00
Milliken Ave from Rte 210 to Banyan - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 497,000.00
$ 450,000.00
$450,000.00
Rochester Ave from 6th St to Arrow Route - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 611 000.00
$ 611 000.00
$611,000.00
Rochester Ave from Base Line to Banyan - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 1,000,000.00
$ 150,000.00
$150,000.00
Rochester Ave from Foothill to Base Line - Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 610 000.00
$ 433,540.00
$433,540.00
Local overlay at various Locations Attached List of Streets Pavement Rehabilitation
Yes
$ 850,445.00
$ 450,000.00
$450,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Project Count: 30
Named Projects Total:
$23,968,445.00
$ 2,619,190.00 $ 985,000.00 $
$ 1,660,000.00
$ $ 3,675,000.00 $
$ 2,500,000.00
$ $ 3,336,000.00
$14,775,190.00
Total Car over+Estimate:
$3,604,190.00
$1,660,000.00
$3,675,000.00
$2,500,000.00
$3,336,000.00
$14,775,190.00
(%) Named Projects:
1
125%
56%
121%
80%
103%
(') = Carryover funds may not be used on Catergorical Projects. Total Programmed: $ 20,814,870.00
Total Carryover Programmed: $ 2,619,190.00
In Accordance with Measure I Strateaic Plan Policy 40003140012/40016: Total Estimated Programmed: $ 18,195,680.00
1. If Measure I allocated to project is >_ $100,000, then list individually in Named Projects section. Check: $ 20,814,870.00
2. There is a 50% limit on total categorical projects. 150% of Estimated Measure I plus carryover: $ 30,368,592.00
3. There is a 150% constraint on total planned expenditures to Measure I estimated revenue. Does programing amount exceed 150% limit: No
4. Expenditures of Measure I Local Street funds must be detailed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan and adopted by resolution of the governing body.
5. Revised Capital Improvement Plans are due to SANBAG by the end of the fiscal year along with the resolution.
RESOLUTION NUMBER:
18-037
RESOLUTION APPROVAL DATE:
6/6/2018
CONTACT PERSON & TITLE:
Gianfranco Laurie, Senior Civil Engineer
CONTACT PHONE:
909 774-4037
CONTACT EMAIL:
Gianfranw.Laurie@cityofro.us
ClPsubmittaI Form FY2017/2018thru FY2021/2022
Page 223
ATTACHMENT A
Attachment A
2017-2018 PAVEMENT REHAB
-OVERLAY
NO.
STREET NAME:
FROM:
TO:
1
RANCHO
CARNELIAN
E. END
2
BEECHWOOD
CARNELIAN
E. END
3
EMERALD
BEECHWOOD
N. END
4
MOONSTONE
BEECHWOOD
N. END
5
JASPER
HAMILTON
19TH
6
GALA
JASPER
E. END
7
HAMILTON
JASPER
TOPAZ
8
AMBERWOOD
HAMILTON
N. END
9
TOPAZ
HAMILTON
19TH
10
SARD
18TH
HAMMLTON
11
HOLLY
SARD
W. END
12
CAMEO
18TH
HAMILTON
13
JASPER
LA PAIX
SIERRA VISTA
14
SIERRA VISTA
LA PAIX
S. END
15
TOPAZ
LA PAIX
ROBERDS
16
NAPA
LA PAIX
ROBERDS
17
SONOMA
LA PAIX
S. END
18
LA PAIX
JASPER
SONOMA
19
ROBERDS
JASPER
CARNELIAN
20
JASPER
HAMILTON
18TH
21
AVALON
LONDON
E. END
22
BERKSHIRE
LA VINE
N. END
23
CAMBRIDGE
MIGNONETTE
N. END
24
CAMBRIDGE
LA VINE
N. END
25
CIELITO
ELMHURST
HERMOSA
26
ELMHURST
MIGNONETTE
MEND
27
ELMHURST
LA VINE
CIELITO
28
HOLLY
LONDON
W. END
29
LA VINE
RAMONA
ELMHURST
30
LONDON
VICTORIA
N. END
31
LONDON
VICTORIA
S. END
32
MIGNONETTE
TEAK
HERMOSA
33
PASITO
MIGNONETTE
N. END
34
TEAK
JONQUIL DR
N. END
35
TEAK
LA VINE
N. END
36
VICTORIA
ARCHIBALD
RAMONA
37
MINOGNETTE
LONDON
BERKSHIRE
38
BERKSHIRE
HOLLY
END
39
HOLLY
BERKSHIRE
TEAK
ALDER
LION
CANDLEWOOD
r4l
LION I
CANDLEWOOD
BASELINE
ATTACHMENT A
Page 224
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Robert Neiuber, Human Resources Director
Lucy Alvarez -Nunez, Management Analyst I
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF THE ADDITION OF A COMMUNICATIONS AND
MARKETING OFFICER JOB CLASSIFICATION AND APPROVE A
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE SALARY SCHEDULE FOR RCCEA
COVERED EMPLOYEES.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council approve the addition of a Communications and Marketing Officer job
classification and approve a resolution adopting the salary schedule for RCCEA covered employees.
BACKGROUND:
The City's Communications Manager position serves an integral function, leading and supporting the City's
brand and public communications strategies. The City recently conducted a recruitment for the vacant
Communications Manager position and was unsuccessful in finding a candidate that best matched the
needs of the City.
ANALYSIS:
Based on the recruitment results and limited qualified candidates available to fill the needs of the City, the
City now desires to add a Communications and Marketing Officerjob classification.
The Communications and Marketing Officer classification is a new job title in the Communications job
series which allows for succession planning and provides an interim position for those aspiring to transition
to our Communications Manager position.
FISCAL IMPACT:
It is anticipated that the City would realize a cost savings of approximately $26,784 annually due to a lower
level salary range.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The City is responsible for filling key positions that allow us to provide the best service to the Community and
ensuring that the City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to be a premier employer.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Page 225
RCCEA Salary Schedule
RESOLUTION
Page 226
Resolution No. 18 -XXX
RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE
MID MANAGER, SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS
ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES
Monthly Pay Ranges Effective May 6, 2018
Minimum Control Point Maximum
Class Title
Step
Amount
Step
Amount
Step
Amount
Account Clerk
4375
$2,908
4415
$3,550
4435
$3,922
Account Technician
4423
$3,694
4463
$4,509
4483
$4,983
Accountant#
3465
$4,555
3505
$5,560
3525
$6,143
Accounting Manager*
2525
$6,143
2565
$7,499
2585
$8,285
Accounts Payable Supervisor#
3470
$4,670
3510
$5,701
3530
$6,229
Administrative Secretary'
4424
$3,713
4464
$4,532
4484
$5,007
Administrative Technician
4437
$3,962
4477
$4,836
4497
$5,343
Animal Care Attendant
4349
$2,554
4389
$3,118
4409
$3,445
Animal Care Supervisor#
3416
$3,567
3456
$4,355
3476
$4,811
Animal Caretaker
4378
$2,952
4418
$3,603
4438
$3,981
Animal Center Manager*
2506
$5,589
2546
$6,822
2566
$7,537
Animal Handler
4388
$3,102
4428
$3,787
4448
$4,185
Animal License Canvasser
4349
$2,554
4389
$3,118
4409
$3,445
Animal Services Dispatcher
4369
$2,822
4409
$3,445
4429
$3,807
Animal Services Officer 1
4421
$3,658
4461
$4,465
4481
$4,933
Animal Services Officer II
4441
$4,041
4481
$4,933
4501
$5,451
Assistant City Clerk #
3535
$6,458
3575
$7,883
3595
$8,710
Assistant City Engineer*
2590
$8,495
2630
$10,370
2650
$11,459
Assistant Engineer#
3488
$5,108
3528
$6,236
3548
$6,890
Assistant Library Director*
2572
$7,765
2612
$9,480
2632
$10,474
Assistant Planner#
3468
$4,624
3508
$5,645
3528
$6,236
Assistant to the City Manager*
2548
$6,890
2588
$8,411
2608
$9,293
Associate Engineer#
3518
$5,933
3558
$7,242
3578
$8,002
Associate Planner#
3487
$5,083
3527
$6,206
3547
$6,856
Box Office Coordinator
4450
$4,227
4490
$5,160
4510
$5,701
Budget Analyst#
3498
$5,369
3538
$6,556
3558
$7,242
Building Inspection Supervisor#2
3504
$5,532
3544
$6,754
3564
$7,462
Building Inspector 12
4444
$4,101
4484
$5,007
4504
$5,532
Building Inspector 112
4464
$4,532
4504
$5,532
4524
$6,113
Building and Safety Manager*
2533
$6,394
2573
$7,804
2593
$8,623
Business License Clerk
4378
$2,952
4418
$3,603
4438
$3,981
Business License Inspector
4418
$3,603
4458
$4,398
4478
$4,860
Business License Program Coordinator#
3432
$3,864
3472
$4,716
3492
$5,211
Rancho Cucamonga City Employees
Association Salary Schedule
Page 227
Resolution No. 18 -XXX
RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE
MID MANAGER, SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS
ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES
Monthly Pay Ranges Effective May 6, 2018
Minimum Control Point Maximum
Business License Program Supervisor#
3442
$4,062
3482
$4,958
3502
$5,478
Business License Technician
4408
$3,428
4448
$4,185
4468
$4,624
City Clerk Records Management Analyst#
3470
$4,670
3510
$5,701
3530
$6,299
City Planner/Planning Manager*
2583
$8,204
2623
$10,014
2643
$11,065
Communications & Marketing Officer#
3515
$5,845
3555
$7,134
3575
$7,883
Communications Manager*
2565
$7,499
2605
$9,155
2625
$10,115
Community Improvement Manager*
2533
$6,394
2573
$7,804
2593
$8,623
Community Improvement Officer 1
4421
$3,658
4461
$4,465
4481
$4,933
Community Improvement Officer II
4441
$4,041
4481
$4,933
4501
$5,451
Community Programs Coordinator
4450
$4,227
4490
$5,160
4510
$5,701
Community Programs Specialist
4437
$3,962
4477
$4,836
4497
$5,343
Community Services Coordinator
4450
$4,227
4490
$5,160
4510
$5,701
Community Services Manager*
2506
$5,589
2546
$6,822
2566
$7,537
Community Services Marketing Coord
4450
$4,227
4490
$5,160
4510
$5,701
Community Services Project Coordinator#
3500
$5,423
3540
$6,621
3560
$7,314
Community Services Specialist
4350
$2,566
4390
$3,133
4410
$3,462
Community Services Superintendent*
2536
$6,490
2576
$7,922
2596
$8,753
Community Services Supervisor#
3480
$4,908
3520
$5,993
3540
$6,621
Community Services Technician
4437
$3,962
4477
$4,836
4497
$5,343
Community Svc Marketing Manager*
2536
$6,490
2576
$7,922
2596
$8,753
Cultural Arts Manager*
2506
$5,589
2546
$6,822
2566
$7,537
Deputy City Clerk#
3430
$3,825
3470
$4,670
3490
$5,160
Deputy Dir. of Innovation and Technology
2558
$77242
2598
$8,840
2618
$9,769
Engineering Aide
4421
$3,658
4461
$4,465
4481
$4,933
Engineering Technician
4441
$47041
4481
$4,933
4501
$57451
Environmental Programs Coordinator#
3503
$5,505
3543
$6,721
3563
$7,425
Environmental Programs Inspector 2
4464
$47532
4504
$5,532
4524
$67113
Environmental Programs Manager*
2539
$6,588
2579
$8,042
2599
$8,885
Executive Assistant*
2460
$47443
2500
$5,423
2520
$57993
Facilities Superintendent*
2536
$6,490
2576
$7,922
2596
$8,753
Finance Manager*
2559
$77278
2599
$8,885
2619
$97818
Fleet Supervisor#2
3488
$5,108
3528
$6,236
3548
$6,890
Fund Development Coordinator#
3470
$47670
3510
$5,701
3530
$67299
GIS Analyst#
3505
$5,560
3545
$6,788
3565
$7,499
Rancho Cucamonga City Employees
Association Salary Schedule
Page 228
Resolution No. 18 -XXX
RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE
MID MANAGER, SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS
ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES
Monthly Pay Ranges Effective May 6, 2018
Minimum Control Point Maximum
GIS Specialist
4456
$4,355
4496
$5,316
4516
$5,874
GIS Supervisor#
3535
$6,458
3575
$7,883
3595
$8,710
GIS Technician
4436
$3,941
4476
$4,811
4496
$5,316
Human Resources Clerk
4389
$3,118
4429
$3,807
4449
$4,205
Human Resources Manager*
2583
$8,204
2623
$10,014
2643
$11,065
Human Resources Technician
4399
$3,277
4439
$4,000
4459
$4,421
Information Technology Analyst 1#
3505
$5,560
3545
$6,788
3565
$7,499
Information Technology Analyst II#
3520
$5,993
3560
$7,314
3580
$8,081
Information Technology Specialist 1
4456
$4,355
4496
$5,316
4516
$5,874
Information Technology Specialist II
4471
$4,693
4511
$5,729
4531
$6,330
Information Technology Technician
4411
$3,479
4451
$4,247
4471
$4,693
Librarian 1#
3435
$3,922
3475
$4,788
3495
$5,290
Librarian 11#
3457
$4,377
3497
$5,343
3517
$5,904
Library Assistant 1#
3373
$2,878
3413
$3,514
3433
$3,883
Library Assistant 11#
3414
$3,532
3454
$4,312
3474
$4,764
Library Clerk
4356
$2,645
4396
$3,228
4416
$3,567
Library Page
4244
$1,513
4284
$1,847
4304
$2,040
Library Page II
4293
$1,932
4333
$2,358
4353
$2,605
Library Services Manager*
2506
$5,589
2546
$6,822
2566
$7,537
Library Technician
4393
$3,180
4433
$3,883
4453
$4,290
Maintenance Su ervisor#2
3488
$5,108
3528
$6,236
3548
$6,890
Management Aide
4440
$4,021
4480
$4,908
4500
$5,423
Management Analyst 1#
3470
$4,670
3510
$5,701
3530
$6,299
Management Analyst II#
3498
$5,369
3538
$6,556
3558
$7,242
Management Analyst I11#
3515
$5,845
3555
$7,134
3575
$7,883
Office Services Clerk
4369
$2,822
4409
$3,445
4429
$3,807
Office Specialist 1
4349
$2,554
4389
$3,118
4409
$3,445
Office Specialist II
4369
$2,822
4409
$3,445
4429
$3,807
Park/Landscape Maintenance Su t*2
2536
$6,490
2576
$7,922
2596
$8,753
Payroll Supervisor#
3470
$4,670
3510
$5,701
3530
$6,299
Plan Check & Inspection Manager*
2533
$6,394
2573
$7,804
2595
$8,710
Planning Commission Secretary#
3444
$4,101
3484
$5,007
3504
$5,532
Planning Specialist
4443
$4,081
4483
$4,983
4503
$5,505
Planning Technician
4423
$3,694
4463
$4,509
4483
$4,983
Rancho Cucamonga City Employees
Association Salary Schedule
Page 229
Resolution No. 18 -XXX
RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE
MID MANAGER, SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS
ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES
Monthly Pay Ranges Effective May 6, 2018
Minimum Control Point Maximum
Plans Examiner 1
4474
$4,764
4514
$5,816
4534
$6,426
Plans Examiner ll#
3488
$5,108
3528
$6,236
3548
$6,890
Principal Accountant*
2532
$6,362
2572
$7,765
2592
$8,580
Principal Engineer*
2567
$7,575
2607
$9,246
2627
$10,216
Principal Librarian*
2495
$5,290
2535
$6,458
2555
$7,134
Principal Management Analyst*
2543
$6,721
2583
$8,204
2603
$9,064
Principal Planner*
2537
$6,523
2577
$7,962
2597
$8,796
Procurement & Contracts Analyst#
3433
$3,883
3473
$4,740
3493
$5,238
Procurement Clerk
4374
$2,893
4414
$3,532
4434
$3,903
Procurement Manager*
2530
$6,299
2570
$7,689
2590
$8,495
Procurement Technician
4411
$3,479
4451
$4,247
4471
$4,693
Public Services Technician 1
4413
$3,514
4453
$4,290
4473
$4,740
Public Services Technician 11
4423
$3,694
4463
$4,509
4483
$4,983
Public Services Technician III
4443
$4,081
4483
$4,983
4503
$5,505
Public Works Inspector 12
4444
$4,101
4484
$5,007
4504
$5,532
Public Works Inspector 112
4464
$4,532
4504
$5,532
4524
$6,113
Public Works Maintenance Manager*
2566
$7,537
2606
$9,200
2626
$10,165
Public Works Safety Coordinator #2
3468
$4,624
3508
$5,645
3528
$6,236
Records Clerk
4358
$2,671
4398
$3,261
4418
$3,603
Records Coordinator
4386
$3,071
4426
$3,750
4446
$4,143
Risk Analyst#
3433
$3,883
3473
$4,740
3493
$5,238
Risk Management Coordinator#
3470
$4,670
3510
$5,701
3530
$6,299
Secretary'
4394
$3,197
4434
$3,903
4454
$4,312
Senior Account Clerk
4395
$3,213
4435
$3,922
4455
$4,333
Senior Account Technician
4446
$4,143
4486
$5,058
4506
$5,589
Senior Accountant#
3498
$5,369
3538
$6,556
3558
$7,242
Senior Administrative Secretary'
4444
$4,101
4484
$5,007
4504
$5,532
Senior Animal Services Officer#
3461
$4,465
3501
$5,451
3521
$6,022
Senior Building Ins ector#2
3484
$5,007
3524
$6,113
3544
$6,754
Senior Civil Engineer*
2547
$6,856
2587
$8,369
2607
$9,246
Senior Community Improvement Officer#
3461
$4,465
3501
$5,451
3521
$6,022
Senior Electrician #
3485
$5,033
3525
$6,143
3545
$6,788
Senior GIS Analyst #
3520
$5,993
3560
$7,314
3580
$8,081
Senior Information Technology Analyst#
3535
$6,458
3575
$7,883
3595
$8,710
Rancho Cucamonga City Employees
Association Salary Schedule
Page 230
Resolution No. 18 -XXX
RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE
MID MANAGER, SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS
ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES
Monthly Pay Ranges Effective May 6, 2018
Minimum Control Point Maximum
Senior Information Technology Specialist
4493
$5,238
4533
$6,394
4553
$7,064
Senior Librarian#
3468
$4,624
3508
$5,645
3528
$6,236
Senior Park Planner#
3500
$5,423
3540
$6,621
3560
$7,314
Senior Planner*
2517
$5,904
2557
$7,206
2577
$7,962
Senior Plans Examiner#
3503
$5,505
3543
$6,721
3563
$7,425
Senior Procurement Technician#
3463
$4,509
3503
$5,505
3523
$6,083
Senior Risk Management Analyst#
3515
$5,845
3555
$7,134
3575
$7,883
Senior Special Districts Technician
4443
$4,081
4483
$4,983
4503
$5,505
Senior Veterinary Technician#
3461
$4,465
3501
$5,451
3521
$6,022
Special Districts Analyst#
3498
$5,369
3538
$6,556
3558
$7,242
Special Districts Technician
4437
$3,962
4477
$4,836
4497
$5,343
Street/Storm Drain Maintenance Supt*2
2536
$6,490
2576
$7,922
2596
$8,753
Supervising Public Works Ins ector#2
3494
$5,263
3534
$6,426
3554
$7,099
Theater Production Coordinator
4460
$4,443
4500
$5,423
4520
$5,993
Theater Production Supervisor#
3480
$4,908
3520
$5,993
3540
$6,621
Theatre Technician III
4423
$3,694
4463
$4,509
4483
$4,983
Traffic Engineer*
2569
$7,650
2609
$9,339
2629
$10,319
Utilities Division Manager*
2584
$8,254
2624
$10,065
2644
$11,121
Utility Operations Manager*
2524
$6,113
2564
$7,462
2584
$8,254
Veterinarian*
2579
$8,042
2619
$9,818
2639
$10,847
Veterinary Assistant
4407
$3,411
4447
$4,164
4467
$4,600
Veterinary Technician
4437
$3,962
4477
$4,836 -r-44-9-71
$5,343
When acting as Clerk to Commissions $50 paid per night or weekend day meeting. Compensatory time off
2. Refer to MOU for provision of boot
# Denotes Supervisory/Professional Class
* Denotes Management Class
Rancho Cucamonga City Employees
Association Salary Schedule
Page 231
RESOLUTION NO. 18 -XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN
UPDATED RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION SALARY SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017-18
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has determined that it is
necessary for the efficient operation and management of the City that policies be established
prescribing salary ranges, benefits and holidays and other policies for employees of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has previously adopted
salary resolutions establishing salary ranges, benefits and other terms of employment for
employees of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga recognizes that it is
necessary from time to time to amend the salary resolution to accommodate changes in position
titles, classifications salary ranges, benefits and other terms of employment; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California to approve the attached salary schedules for the Rancho Cucamonga City
Employees Association.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 6th day of June 2018.
Resolution No. 18 -XXX — Page 1 of 1
ATTACHMENT # 1
Page 232
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTIONS PERTAINING TO THE NOVEMBER
6, 2018 GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following Resolutions pertaining to the November 6, 2018
election:
• Resolution No. 18-038 Calling and Giving Notice of a General Municipal Election on November 6,
2018 for the purpose of electing one (1) Member of the City Council from District 2, one (1) Member
of the City Council from District 3 and one (1) Mayor elected at large, each for the full term of four
years; and to consolidate said election with the County of San Bernardino.
• Resolution No. 18-039 Adopting Regulations for Candidates for Elective Office pertaining to the
preparation of materials submitted to the electorate and the costs of the Candidate Statement for the
November 6, 2018 election.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Rancho Cucamonga is scheduled to conduct a General Municipal Election on November 6,
2018 for the purpose of electing one (1) Member of the City Council from District 2, one (1) Member of
the City Council from District 3 and one (1) Mayor elected at -large, each for the full term of four years. This
is the City's first "By District" election for Members of the City Council, approved by the voters in 2016.
The nomination period begins on Monday, July 16, 2018 and ends on Friday, August 10, 2018 at 5:00
p.m. If an incumbent does not file, the period is extended to Wednesday, August 15, 2018 for candidates
other than the incumbent to file for that office.
ANALYSIS:
The City contracts with the County of San Bernardino Registrar of Voters Office for election services and
it is required that the City request consolidation of the Municipal Election with the Statewide General
Election. The Resolution calling and giving notice of the November 6, 2018 election and requesting the
County to consolidate the General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election is attached for
consideration. Section 11 outlines the process for resolving a tie vote.
Also attached is a Resolution establishing regulations for candidates for elective office pertaining to
Candidate Statements submitted to the voters. Only candidates wishing to submit a Candidate Statement
will be required to pay a deposit to cover the cost of printing the statement in the sample ballots. The
Statement may include the name, age and occupation of the candidate and a brief description of no more
than 200 words of the candidate's education and qualifications expressed by the candidate himself or
Page 233
herself.
Adoption of the attached resolutions is required to begin the election process and consolidate with the
Statewide General Election to be held on the same date.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Sufficient funds have been included in the proposed FY 2018-2019 budget for the November election.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 18-038
Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 18-039
Page 234
RESOLUTION NO. 18-038
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE C IT Y OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING
NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2018, FOR THE
ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AND REQUESTING THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SAN
BERNARDINO TO CONSOLIDATE THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO
BE HELD PURSUANT TO ELECTIONS CODE SECTION 10403
RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES
WHEREAS, under the provisions of the laws relating to general law cities on the
State of California, a Regular Municipal Election shall be held on November 6, 2018, for the
election of municipal officers; and
WHEREAS, it is desirable that the General Municipal Election be consolidated with the
Statewide General Election to be held on the same date and that within the city, the precincts,
polling places and election officers of the two elections be the same, and that the County
Election Department of the County of San Bernardino canvass the returns of the General
Municipal Election and that the election be held on all respects as if there were only one
election; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to the requirements of the laws of the State of C a I i f o r n i a
relating to General Law cities, there is called and ordered to be held in the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California, on Tuesday, November 6, 2018, a General Municipal Election for the
purpose of electing one (1) Member of the City Council from District 2, one (1) Member of the
City Council from District 3 and one (1) Mayor elected at large, each for the full term of four
years.
SECTION 2. The ballots to be used at the election shall be in the form and
content as required by the law.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to procure and
furnish any and all official ballots, notices, printed matter and all supplies, equipment a n d
paraphernalia that may be necessary in order to properly and lawfully conduct the election.
SECTION 4. The polls for the election shall be open at seven o'clock a.m. the day
of the election and shall remain open continuously from that time until eight o'clock p.m. of
the same day when the polls shall be closed, except as provided in Section 14401 of the
elections code.
SECTION 5. In all particulars not recited in this Resolution, the election shall be
held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections.
Resolution No. 18-038 — Page 1 of 2
Page 235
SECTION 6. That pursuant to the requirements of Section 10403 of the Elections Code,
the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino is hereby requested to consent
and agree to the consolidation of a General Municipal Election with the Statewide General
Election on Tuesday, November 6, 2018, for the purpose of electing one (1) Member of the
City Council from District 2, one (1) Member of the City Council from District 3 and one (1)
Mayor elected at large, each for the full term of four years.
SECTION 7. The County Registrar of Voters is authorized to canvass the returns of
the Regular Municipal Election. The election shall be held in all steps necessary for the
holding of the consolidated election.
SECTION 8. The Board of Supervisors is requested to issue instructions to the
County Registrar of Voters to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of the
consolidated election.
SECTION 9. The City of Rancho Cucamonga recognizes that additional costs will b e
incurred by the County by reason of this consolidation and agrees to reimburse the County
for any costs.
SECTION 10. Notice of the time and place of holding the election is given and
the City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to give further or additional notice of the
election, in time, form and manner as required by law. Notwithstanding the generality of
the foregoing, the City Clerk is hereby instructed to act in conformance with California
Elections Code Section 10403 and to file this Resolution with the Board of Supervisors of
San Bernardino County and to transmit a copy of the same to the San Bernardino County
elections official.
SECTION 11. That in the event of a tie vote (if any two or more persons receive an
equal and the highest number of votes for an office) as certified by the Election Official, the
City Council, in accordance with Elections Code §15651 (a) shall set a date and time and
place and summon the candidates who have received the tie votes to appear and will
determine the tie by lot.
SECTION 12. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution and
enter it into the Book of original Resolutions.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2018.
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
Resolution No. 18-038 — Page 2 of 2
Page 236
RESOLUTION NO. 18-039
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING
REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE
PERTAINING TO THE PREPARATION OF MATERIALS
SUBMITTED TO THE ELECTORATE AND THE COSTS OF THE
CANDIDATE STATEMENT FOR THE NOVEMBER 6, 2018
ELECTION.
WHEREAS, Section 13307 of the Elections Code of the State of California provides that
the governing body of any city may adopt a charge against candidates pertaining to materials
prepared by any candidate for municipal election, including costs of the candidates' statement.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby
resolve, declare, determine and order as follows:
SECTION 1: General Provisions. That pursuant to Section 13307 of the Elections
Code of the State of California, each candidate for elective office to be voted for at the General
Municipal Election to be held in the City of Rancho Cucamonga on November 6, 2018, may
prepare a candidate statement on an appropriate form provided by the City Clerk. Such
statement may include the name, age and occupation of the candidate and a brief description of
no more than 200 words of the candidate's education and qualifications expressed by the
candidate himself or herself. Such statement shall not include party affiliation of the candidate,
nor membership or activity in partisan political organizations. Such statement shall be filed in the
Office of the City Clerk at the time the candidate's nomination papers are filed. Such statement
may be withdrawn, but not changed, during the period for filing nomination papers and until 5:00
p.m. of the next working day after the close of the nomination period.
SECTION 2: Additional Materials. No candidate will be permitted to include additional
materials in the sample ballot package.
SECTION 3. FOREIGN LANGUAGE POLICY. Pursuant to the Federal Voting Rights
Act, candidate statements will be translated into all languages required by the County of San
Bernardino. The County will mail separate sample ballots and candidates statements in the
required languages to only those voters who are on the county voter file as having requested a
sample ballot in a particular language. The County will make the sample ballots and candidates
statements in the required languages available at all polling places, on the County's website,
and in the Election Official's office.
SECTION 4: Payment. The City Clerk shall estimate the total cost of printing, handling,
translating and mailing the candidate's statements filed pursuant to the Elections Code,
including costs incurred as a result of complying with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (as
amended), and require each candidate filing a statement to pay in advance his or her pro rata
share as a condition of having his or her statement included in the voter's pamphlet. The
estimate is just an approximation of the actual cost that varies from one election to another
election and may be significantly more or less than the estimate, depending upon the actual
number of candidates filing statements. Accordingly, the Clerk is not bound by the estimate and
may, on a pro rata basis, bill the candidate for additional actual expense or refund any excess
paid depending on the final cost. In the event of underpayment, the Clerk may require the
Resolution No. 18-039 — Page 1 of 2
Page 237
candidate to pay the balance of the cost incurred. In the event of overpayment, the Clerk shall
prorate the excess amount among the candidates and refund the excess amount paid.
SECTION 5: That the City Clerk shall provide each candidate or the candidate's
representative a copy of this Resolution at the time nominating petitions are issued.
SECTION 6: That all previous Resolutions establishing Council policy on payment for
candidate's statements are repealed.
SECTION 7: That this Resolution shall apply only to the election to be held on
November 6, 2018 and shall then be repealed.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2018.
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA )
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a Regular Meeting of said Council held on the 611 day of
June 2018.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Executed this 7t" day of June 2018 at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Janice C. Reynolds, Clerk
Resolution No. 18-039 — Page 2 of 2
Page 238
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Curt Billings, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A PROJECT STUDY REPORT AND
DETERMINATION OF STATUTORY EXEMPTION FOR THE ETIWANDA
AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT LOCATED BETWEEN
WHITTRAM AVENUE AND NAPA STREET.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve the Project Study Report Equivalent for the Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation Project;
2. Determine that the project is Statutorily Exempt per Section 21080.13 of the Public Resources Code; and
3. Authorize Staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the Office of Planning and Research and with the
County Clerk as specified in Section 21080.13 (2) of the Public Resources Code;
BACKGROUND:
Etiwanda Avenue is designated a four -lane major arterial road in the City's circulation plan. In the south
east industrial area of the City, Etiwanda Avenue crosses the Southern California Regional Rail Authority
(SCRRA) railroad corridor at ground level and roadway traffic is reduced to one lane in each direction
between Whittram Avenue and Napa Avenue. The current daily traffic consists of 2,000 trucks and 19,000
cars. This roadway traffic crosses the SCRRA railroad track that is also shared by the Burlington Northern
and Sante Fe Railroad. This single railroad track carries 42 commuter trains and 15 freight trains each day.
An adjacent industry spur track crossing Etiwanda Avenue has been abandoned, however, SCRRA has
plans in the future to add a second commuter track as ridership and freight rail traffic increases.
Anticipating future growth, the City's General Plan identified this crossing to be grade separated.
In April 2015, a Project Study Report Equivalent was prepared to analyze the feasibility and estimate the
cost of eliminating the current grade crossing and replacing it with a grade separated roadway. Three
project alternatives were considered and only one alternative was found to be feasible based on
minimizing impacts to utilities, rail operations, and adjacent properties.
On May 16, 2018 the California Transportation Commission (CTC) approved a $60 million grant from the
Transportation Corridor Enhancement Program (TCEP), which is funded by Senate Bill 1 Gas Tax, for the
Project. This grant will provide 100% funding for the Etiwanda Grade Separation project costs after a
Baseline Agreement can be executed between the City, Caltrans and the CTC. The project administration
Page 239
guidelines were approved by the CTC on May 16, 2018, and stipulate that Project Baseline Agreements
are to be adopted by the CTC six months after the Project's environmental determination is certified.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has reviewed the Project Study Report Equivalent and agrees with the findings and conclusions and
recommends the City Council approve the Project Study Report Equivalent.
Staff also recommends that the City Council direct staff to file the Notice of Exemption as stipulated by
Public Resources Code § 21080.13 (2) as follows:
Whenever a local agency determines that a project is not subject to this division pursuant to this
section, and it approves or determines to carry out the project, the local agency shall file a notice
with the Office of Planning and Research and with the county clerk in each county in which the
project will be located in the manner specified in subdivisions (b) and (c) of Section 21152.
Environmental:
Staff has determined that the project is Statutorily Exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Article 18. Statutory Exemptions, Section § 15282. Other Statutory Exemptions, paragraph (g):
Any railroad grade separation project which eliminates an existing grade crossing or which
reconstructs an existing grade separation as set forth in Section 21080.13 of the Public
Resources Code
FISCAL IMPACT:
The estimated Project costs are programmed in the draft Fiscal Year 2018/2019 budget, from SB -1
TCEP (Fund 181), and are identified under the Capital Improvement Project Account No.
11813035650/1922181 -0, for the project.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The proposed Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation project improvements will enhance the City position as
the premier community in our region.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Project Study Report
Attachment 3 - Notice of Exemption
Page 240
VICINITY MAP
ETIWANDA AVE. GRADE
SEPARATION PROJECT
Page 241
PROJECT STUDY REPORT EQUIVALENT
ETIWANDA AVENUE
GRADE SEPARATION
April 2015
I
Pi•cpai-cd For:
Preparccl BY. -
0 1
.
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
June 2015
Project Study Report -Project Development Support
(PSR -PDS)
for
Etiwanda Avenue/SCRRA Grade Separation
APPROVAL RECOMMENDED:
APPROVED:
Curt Billings Dale
Mark Steuer
Director of Engineer/City Engineer
DATE
Page 243
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation June 2015
Vicinity Map
Page 244
FOOTH[L� Bivd
/ARFIOWRe
ETIWANDA Ars
>
GRADE SEPARATION
0
z
WNITTRAM Ave
_
~
W
CRRA/BNSF RA R
NAPA 5t
m
�
fith 5t
a
�
C
4
4
z
Z
}
Y0
#
R
J
-�
h
Ll
W
=
U
Ath 5+
ONTARIO MILLS EWNT
i
Page 244
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
June 2015
This project study report -project development support has been prepared under the
direction of the following registered civil engineer. The registered civil engineer attests
to the technical information contained herein and the engineering data upon which
recommendations, conclusions, and decisions are based.
IL C ILL-,
ISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER
rt !�
DATE
QROF� E���
31/16
CiVIL
Page 245
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Table of Contents
June 2015
1. Introduction.................................................................. 1
2. Background...................................................................2
3. Purpose and Need............................................................ 2
4. Alternatives....................................................................3
5. Alternatives Withdrawn From Consideration ............................ 9
6. System Planning & Coordination.........................................10
7. Right of Way.................................................................11
8. Environmental Determination/Document.................................14
9. Funding.........................................................................14
10.Schedule........................................................................15
I I.Project Personnel..............................................................15
12.Attachments.....................................................................15
Page 246
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
1. INTRODUCTION
June 2015
Proiect Description:
The City of Rancho Cucamonga proposes to develop a railroad grade separation at
the existing Etiwanda Avenue "At -Grade" crossing of the Southern California
Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) San Gabriel subdivision at Mile Post 44.1 (CPUC
Crossing No. 18.3-36-101 SG -44.1 Etiwanda; DOT Crossing No. 026151P SCRRA).
The proposed grade separation improvements consist of an overhead and raised
roadway profile and widening along Etiwanda Avenue. The limits of the proposed
improvements are from 375' south of the Etiwanda Ave. /Napa St. intersection to
660' north of the Etiwanda Ave./Whittram Ave. intersection. Etiwanda Ave. will be
widened from two lanes (1 -lane in each direction of travel) to four lanes (2 -lanes in
each direction of travel) within the project limits. The intersection of Etiwanda Ave.
at Whittram Ave. will be signalized and widened to allow for left and right turn
pockets in the northbound and southbound direction along Etiwanda Avenue.
Three "Build" alternatives are evaluated in this report. Alternative 1 will raise the
profile of Etiwanda Ave. over the existing SCRRA right of way, which consist of one
mainline track and a spur track, with an Overhead structure. Alternative 2 will lower
the profile of Etiwanda Ave. to pass under the SCRRA right of way with an
underpass structure. Alternative 3 raises the SCRRA mainline track over Etiwanda
Ave. with a flyover.
The total project cost is estimated at $42.87 million for Alternative 1 and $45.99
million for Alternative 2. Alternative 3 was determined to be non -feasible and
withdrawn from consideration. The total project cost includes design, design
construction support, right of way, SCRRA oversight, construction management, and
administration costs. The Project Approval/Environmental Documentation (PA/ED)
phase of the project is to be funded by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The
construction phase may include federal funds, Transportation Investment Generating
Economic Recovery Grant (TIGER), Railroad/BNSF, and CPUC Section 190 funds.
This project is anticipated to go to construction in FY 2019/2020 and be completed by
FY 2022. A Project Report (PR) and Environmental Document (ED) will serve as
approval of the "preferred" alternative.
Project Limits
Etiwanda Ave. (Napa St. to Whittram Ave,)
Number of Alternatives
3 Build Alternatives
Current Capital Outlay
Support Estimate for PA&ED
$2.90-$3.18 Million
and Design Engineering
Current Capital Outlay
$42.87-$45.99 Million
Construction Cost Range
Current Capital Outlay Right-
$0.68-$2.4 Million
of -Way Cost Range
Funding Source
City Funds, Federal Funds, TIGER, BNSF,
CPUC Section 190.
Page 247
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation dune 2015
Type of Facility Major Arterial Street
Number of Structures One (Major Arterial Overhead)
Anticipated Environmental CEQA Exemption per PRC 21080.14(a)
Determination or Document NEPA
2. BACKGROUND
The City of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan circulation element identifies the
separation of Etiwanda Ave. from the SCRRA tracks between 6'h Street and Arrow
Highway. Etiwanda Ave. is identified by San Bernardino Associated Governments
(SANBAG) as a Congestion Management Plan (CMP) route. Etiwanda Ave. has an
existing Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume of 15,315 vehicles per day (vpd)
within the project limits, per the City of Rancho Cucamonga's May 20, 2010 Traffic
Volume Summary published by the City Traffic Engineering Division. Vehicular
traffic along Etiwanda Ave. is expected to increase by 17.5% to I8,000 vpd in the
year 2030 as identified in the City's 2010 General Plan update. Etiwanda Ave. is also
identified as a truck route by the City of Rancho Cucamonga with a posted speed
Iimit of 55 MPH and serves as the main north /south access route for the City's
easterly industrial land use zone. The Iand use in the vicinity of the project is of
regional significance and attracts traffic from outside of the City on a daily basis.
Etiwanda Ave. is also an access route to the Auto Club Speedway and attracts
regional event traffic.
The Etiwanda Ave. grade crossing (FRA Crossing ID No. 0261151P) has experienced
a total of 7 vehicular/train movement accidents. All of these accidents have occurred
on the mainline track and have resulted in two fatalities and two injuries. The last
accident occurred in December of 1998. In the case of each accident vehicles on
Etiwanda Ave. either were stalled on the track or drove around crossing gates.
The existing delay experienced by vehicular traffic in the PM peak hour is resulting in
a Level of Service (LOS) of "F" which exceeds the CMP LOS maximum threshold of
LOS "E". Metrolink and BNSF train service on the San Gabriel subdivision for
calendar year 2013 was identified as 42 and 10 trips per weekday respectively for a
total of 52 trips. SCRRA track charts have identified the operating speed of the
mainline track as 79 and 55 mph for passenger and freight rail operations
respectively.
Vehicular and train traffic is projected to increase in the future design year of 2030.
Without the general plan identified improvements of a grade separation and roadway
capacity improvements of Etiwanda Ave. this condition of delay is expected to
worsen and contribute to unsafe driver behavior at the existing crossing gates.
3. PURPOSE AND NEED
Purpose:
The objective of this project is to establish a grade separation at the Etiwanda
Ave./SCRRA San Gabriel sub division grade crossing. A grade separation will
reduce vehicular delays and queuing along Etiwanda Ave. leading to improved
Page 248
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation June 2015
mobility and LOS in compliance with CMP policy. A grade separation will provide
for the safe operation of vehicles, trucks and trains whose volume is projected
increase within the project limits. It will also provide for improved emergency
vehicle response times for the area.
Need:
The existing Etiwanda Ave. grade crossing has experienced 7 train/vehicular
accidents resulting in 2 fatalities and injuries. This grade crossing has not
experienced a vehicle/train accident in 10 years, but the roadway's 55 mph speed
limit combined with over 52 daily train trips are a concern with anticipated future
growth. Etiwanda Ave. is identified in the City's General Plan Circulation Element
as a "Major Arterial" and is a regional north /south corridor providing access to the
City, Fontana, and unincorporated San Bernardino County. Increases in vehicular
traffic and truck volumes on Etiwanda Ave. combined with 52 daily train movements
on the SCRRA San Gabriel sub -division are resulting in excessive delays and
vehicular queues. This delay and queuing is expected to worsen with continued
growth and development in the vicinity of the project.
A new grade separation at the Etiwanda Ave. grade crossing is needed to address
mobility related to the increase in forecasted regional traffic demand, eliminate
vehicle/train accidents and maintain satisfactory CMP designated LOS thresholds.
4. Alternatives
Alternative 1- Etiwanda Ave / SCRRA/BNSF RR Overhead
This Alternative will widen Etiwanda Avenue to four lanes and construct a grade -
separated crossing over the SCRRA/BNSF railroad tracks. The proposed roadway
width is consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan Major
Arterial standard with of a 100' minimum right-of-way width, and 72' curb -to -curb
width. In consultation with the City, a profile and cross section with a reduced design
speed of 45 MPH was developed to minimize impacts to existing development
adjacent to the project limits.
An analysis of a profile grade line supporting a design speed of 50 MPH showed that
the Etiwanda Ave and Whittram Ave intersection would be raised 16'above existing
finished grade and an additional 6' over the 45 MPH design, creating a 7.3% grade
down Whittram Ave. from this intersection toward the East Etiwanda Creek. This
configuration would make access to private property adjacent to Whittram Ave.
unattainable. To minimize right-of-way impacts to development adjacent to the
project and the alignment of local streets, it is recommended that the City Council
consider an exception to reduce the design speed standard for this location.
The objective of this alternative is to provide an overhead crossing, utilizing MSE
walls to support the raised approaching roadway which minimize impacts to the
adjacent private development and span the railroad right-of-way.
Page 249
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation June 2015
Typical Section
Starting at the south end of Etiwanda Avenue, the existing roadway section consists
of two Ianes in each direction with left turn pockets at the Napa Street intersection.
Heading north, Etiwanda Avenue tapers down to one lane in the northbound direction
north of the Whittram Avenue intersection to the north end of the project limits.
This Alternative will widen Etiwanda Avenue to four traffic lanes (12' inside, 13'
outside in each direction) plus a 12' median/left tum -lane and two (2) 5' bike lanes,
and construct a grade -separated crossing over the SCRRABNSF railroad tracks, with
the exception of a an additional 14' northbound right turn lane onto Whittram
Avenue, a transition of one northbound traffic lane and bike lane to a 10' shoulder
from north of Whittram Avenue to the north project limits, and a transition from a
Class 2 bike lane to a Class 3 bike lane between 500' south of Whittram Avenue to
the north project limits. North of the Whittram Avenue intersection, the proposed
roadway section will taper down from four lanes (2 southbound, 2 northbound) down
to three lanes (2 southbound, 1 northbound) to match the existing cross section at the
north end of the project limit.
Horizontal Alignment
Existing Etiwanda Avenue is a north -south secondary arterial street. The horizontal
alignment was developed from south to north as follows:
• The south end of the alignment starts approximately 200' south of Napa Street in
the existing four -lane section.
• The north end of the alignment ends approximately 400' north of Whittram
Avenue in the existing three -lane section.
The proposed horizontal alignment of Etiwanda Avenue will follow the existing street
centerline alignment and will be able to accommodate the design speed exception of
45 MPH per the City's Street Design Policy. The reduced design speed is governed
by the vertical alignment and the minimum stopping sight distance for 45 MPH.
Vertical Alignment
The proposed vertical alignment of Etiwanda Avenue will be from south to north as
follows:
• The south end of the proposed vertical profile will match the existing roadway
and begin at Sta 44+00.00 with a 1.39% grade.
• At Sta 44+00.00 begin a 450' long sag vertical curve ending at Sta 48+50.00 with
an exit grade of 6.25%. This vertical curve passes through the Napa Street
intersection.
• At Sta 51+00.00 begin a 1,000' long crest vertical curve ending at Sta 61+00.00
with an exit grade of -3.85%.
• At Sta 62+50.00 begin a 450' long sag vertical curve ending at Sta 67+00.00 with
an exit grade of 1.81%, which matches the existing street at the north end of the
ki
Page 250
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation June 2015
proposed vertical profile. This vertical curve passes through the Whittram Avenue
intersection.
The proposed vertical alignment will result in a reduced design speed of 45 MPH
requiring an exception to City design standards. However, this vertical alignment
will accommodate access Whittram Ave. and reduce right of way impacts to existing
development when compared with that of a 55 MPH profile.
Because of the proposed raised vertical alignment on Etiwanda Avenue, the existing
local streets which connect to Etiwanda Avenue will need to be moderately raised to
meet the reconstructed Etiwanda profile at their intersection. At the south end, Napa
Street's profile will be raised 4.5' at its intersection with Etiwanda Avenue. At the
north end, Whittram Avenue's profile will be raised 10.5' at its intersection with
Etiwanda Avenue.
There are also new roadways proposed to provide access to the properties which will
no longer be directly accessible from Etiwanda Avenue when this alternative is
constructed.
• One roadway is proposed to diverge from Etiwanda Avenue north of Napa Street
and circle around the properties in the southeast quadrant of the crossing. This
will provide access to the truck scale which is currently accessed directly from
Etiwanda Avenue further north, but will be cut off when the Etiwanda Avenue
overhead structure and MSE walls are constructed along Etiwanda Avenue.
• Another roadway is proposed to continue Whittram Avenue through the
intersection with Etiwanda, turn south and east underneath the new proposed
overhead structure, and then head north into a T -intersection on Whittram Avenue
in the northeast quadrant. This new roadway provide access to the properties on
both the east and west sides of Etiwanda Avenue north of the crossing.
Walls
This alternative proposes MSE walls along the proposed raised approaching roadway
sections to avoid having embankment slopes that extend into private property. This
includes along Etiwanda Avenue from the intersection with Napa Street to the
beginning of the overhead bridge structure and from the end of the overhead bridge
structure to approximately 400' north of Whittram Avenue. MSE walls are also
proposed along Whittram Avenue approximately from the Etiwanda Avenue
intersection to about 150' to the east. Type 5 walls are proposed along the south
access road from Etiwanda Sta 47+00 to about 54+00 in both the northbound and
southbound direction.
Structures
This alternative has two feasible structural options, A and B, for the overhead
structure. Option A will utilize precast prestressed concrete (PC/PS) Bulb -T girders
for superstructure with a maximum total structure depth of 6'-0", and Option B will
s
Page 251
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
June 2015
be cast -in-place prestressed concrete (CIP/PS) continuous box girder superstructure
with a structure depth of 5'-6".
For Option A (PC/PS Bulb -T girders), there will be no falsework required for the
bridge superstructure construction, thus will considerably reduce the construction
time and meets both SCRRA and BNSF RR requirements for the overhead structure
design criteria. Option B (CIP/PS box girder) will require less structure depth as
compared to the PC/PS Bulb -T girder alternative, but it will require falsework. BNSF
design guidelines specifically state that the use of cast -in-place (CIP) beams is not
permitted for overhead superstructures while SCRRA does allow the use of CEP
construction. From constructability standpoint, both options are feasible, but
coordination and prior approval with the BNSF RR will be necessary if Option B
(CIP/PS box girder) is chosen.
For either option, the proposed overhead structure will be a multi -span with multi -
column bents structure from the begin bridge (BB) approximately Sta 65+00.00 to the
end bridge (EB) approximately Sta 71+ 05.00 for a total structure length of 605 feet.
The proposed structure depth depends on the structural option chosen. Option A
(PC/PS Bulb -T girders) would have a 6-6" structure depth, while Option B (CIP/PS
box girder) would have a 5'-6" structure depth. The falsework depth associated with
Option B would be approximately 2'-6" minimum.
The proposed vertical profile will meet or exceed the minimum temporary vertical
clearance of 22'-6" mandated by BNSF plus required structure depth and will meet or
exceed the final BNSF required permanent vertical clearance of 24'-0" over the
existing railroad tracks. The vertical clearance over the Whittram Avenue re-
alignment exceeds the minimum vertical clearance of 15'-0" per Caltrans standards.
Right -of --Way
The existing Etiwanda right-of-way width varies from 90'-100' on the south end,
100' at the RR, and 85'-110' on the north end. Since the minimum right-of-way
width of 100' for Major Arterials is wider than the existing right-of-way width in
some areas, additional acquisition will be needed to meet the City standard for Major
Arterial right of way width.
Traffic Handling
A grade crossing is identified in the City's General Plan at 6`h Street and, if
constructed with this project, would provide a detour to Rochester Avenue to the
west. Otherwise, traffic would instead be detoured further west to Milliken Avenue,
adding 3.8 miles to the detour route.
It is proposed that the new access roadways from Napa Street and the Whittram
Avenue re -alignment will be constructed in the first stage.
In the second stage, it is proposed that Etiwanda Avenue between Napa Street and
Whittram Avenue will be closed for construction of the Etiwanda overhead structure
6
Page 252
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation June 2015
and roadway. Traffic will be detoured around the project site using Arrow Route,
Milliken Avenue, and 0 Street.
Local traffic needing to access the adjacent project site properties north of the railroad
tracks can be routed along Arrow Route and Pecan Avenue to Whittram Avenue.
Access to the properties south of the railroad will be maintained on Napa Street from
Etiwanda Avenue. Some short term detours may be needed during construction of the
Napa Street and Whittram Avenue intersections with Etiwanda Avenue. The existing
at -grade RR crossing will remain intact and operational for train operations during
construction.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga has identified this Alternative as The Locally
Preferred Alternative for approval during the PANED phase of the project.
Alternative 2- Etiwanda Ave / SCRRABNSF RR Underpass
This alternative will impact the existing 12' diameter MWD transmission line
approximately 10' below existing grade along Etiwanda Ave. resulting in its
relocation. This MWD line connects to another major east -west MWD transmission
line crossing Etiwanda Ave. near 4'h street. Any relocation of the existing 12'
diameter system would result in additional right of way acquisition of existing
development adjacent to Etiwanda Ave. in order to maintain the a connection to the
east -west MWD transmission line.
This Alternative will widen Etiwanda Avenue to four lanes and construct a grade -
separated crossing carrying the SCRRABNSF railroad tracks. The proposed roadway
width is consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan Major
Arterial Standard with 100' minimum right-of-way width, and 72' curb -to -curb
width. A design speed exception of 45MPH is necessary to meet the Caltrans
Highway Design manual guidelines for minimum stopping sight distance with a
vertical alignment constrained by the short distance between Napa St. and Whittram
Ave. Substantial impacts to existing development would occur without the exception
to a reduced design speed of 45 MPH.
The objective of this alternative is to provide an underpass which minimizes impacts
to the existing infrastructures, adjacent private development and the railroad right-of-
way.
Typical Section
Starting at the south end of Etiwanda Avenue, the existing roadway section consists
of two lanes in each direction with left turn pockets at the Napa Street intersection.
Heading north, Etiwanda Avenue reduces down to three lanes in each direction (two
southbound, one northbound) at the intersection with Whittram Avenue and maintains
this section to the north end of the project limits.
7
Page 253
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation dune 2015
The proposed typical cross section for Etiwanda Avenue will meet the City's
requirements for a Major Arterial by providing for two traffic lanes (12' inside, 13'
outside), one 12' median and one 5' bicycle lane in each direction for a 72' curb -to -
curb width. With 6' sidewalks, the total roadway typical section width is 84'. Where
the proposed underpass crosses underneath the new railroad structures, the median
will accommodate an 8' raised median for the structure columns.
The existing left turn pockets on Etiwanda Avenue will be maintained along with the
four traffic lanes at the Napa Street intersection at the south end of the project. At the
north end of the project, the proposed roadway section will taper down from four
lanes approximately 500' north of the new Whittram Avenue intersection down to
three lanes (two southbound, one northbound) to match the existing cross section at
the north end of the project limit.
Horizontal Alignment
Existing Etiwanda Avenue is a north -south Secondary Arterial street. The horizontal
alignment was developed from south to north as follows:
• The south end of the alignment starts approximately 250' north of Napa Street in
the existing four lane section.
• The north end of the alignment ends approximately 500' north of the new
Whittram Avenue intersection in the existing three lane section.
The proposed horizontal alignment of Etiwanda Avenue will follow the existing street
centerline alignment and will be able to accommodate the design speed exception of
45 MPH per the City's Street Design Policy. The reduced design speed is governed
by the vertical alignment and the minimum stopping sight distance for 45 MPH.
Vertical Alignment
The proposed vertical alignment of Etiwanda Avenue will be from south to north as
follows:
• The south end of the proposed vertical profile will match the existing roadway
and begin at Sta 48+25.00 with a 1.24% grade.
• At Sta 48+25.00 begin a 450' long crest vertical curve ending at Sta 52+75.00
with an exit grade of -3.31 %.
• At Sta 52+25.00 begin a 750' long sag vertical curve ending at Sta 60+75.00 with
an exit grade of 5.99%.
• At Sta 61+75.63 begin a 450' long crest vertical curve ending at Sta 66+25.63
with an exit grade of 2.10% which matches the existing street at the north end of
the proposed vertical profile.
The proposed vertical alignment will result in a reduced design speed of 45 MPH
requiring an exception to City design standards. However, this vertical alignment
will result in reduced right of way impacts to existing development when compared
with that of a 55 MPH profile.
s
Page 254
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
June 2015
There are also new roadways proposed to provide access to the properties which will
no Ionger be directly accessible from Etiwanda Avenue when this alternative is
constructed.
• One roadway is proposed to extend north from Napa Street east of Etiwanda
Avenue and provide access to the properties in the southeast quadrant of the
crossing.
• Existing Whittram Avenue is proposed to be relocated 200' south of the existing
Whittram Avenue intersection. To the east of Etiwanda Avenue, the new
Whittram Avenue re -alignment provides access to existing development in the
northeast quadrant of the crossing. On the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, a new
roadway is proposed to extend west to the northwest quadrant providing access to
existing development.
Walls
This alternative proposes retaining walls along the proposed lowered roadway
sections to avoid having cut slopes that extend into private property. This includes
along Etiwanda Avenue from approximately 250' north of Napa Street to
approximately 500' north of the Whittram Avenue re -alignment, and along the
proposed Whittram Avenue re -alignment from approximately 400' west to 400' east
of the proposed intersection.
Structures
This alternative proposes a new structure for the railroad tracks at existing grade. The
proposed structure will be a two -span prestressed precast concrete box superstructure
with columns in the median of Etiwanda Avenue.
The proposed vertical profile will meet the BNSF required permanent vertical
clearance of 17'-6" for a concrete superstructure, plus required structure depth of 41-
0", with a ballast plus track thickness of 2'-6".
Right -of -Way
The existing Etiwanda right-of-way width varies from 90'-100' on the south end,
100' at the RR, and 85'-110' on the north end. Since the minimum right-of-way
width of 100' for Major Arterials is wider than the existing right-of-way width in
some areas, this segment could be reclassified as a Secondary Arterial (88' minimum
right-of-way width).
5. ALTERNATIVES WITHDRAWN FROM CONSIDERATION
A flyover of the SCRRA mainline over Etiwanda Avenue was evaluated as part of
this PSR. This alternative would raise the SCRRA mainline track above the existing
finished street grade and span over Etiwanda Avenue with a structure without
depressing Etiwanda Avenue. The existing mainline operating speeds for SCRRA
passenger operations on the San Gabriel subdivision would be maintained at 74 mph.
9
Page 255
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
June 2015
Advantages
This alternative would eliminate the need for major construction on Etiwanda
Avenue. It would maintain private property access from the arterial street with
minimal disruption to the existing ingress and egress patterns.
Disadvantages
This alternative would result in extensive track reconstruction to be able to maintain
the existing rail operations of 4 railroad spur tracks that provide service to industrial
customers to the east and west of Etiwanda Avenue. This location of the San Gabriel
subdivision has spur connections to the north and south of the mainline track. In
order to not interrupt rail operations during construction a shoofly to the north and
south of the mainline track would be needed. In addition the Nolan Control Point
signal (Milepost 44.5) would have to be reconstructed and communication lines
between it and the downstream Rochester Control Point signal (Milepost 42.3) and
upstream Speedway Control Point signal (Milepost 45.3) would have to be
reconstructed just to accommodate the temporary shoofly construction and operation.
Given the railroad maximum vertical grade of I%, approximately 4,600 feet of
mainline track reconstruction would occur to span over Etiwanda Avenue. Thus, this
alternative would require approximately 9,200 feet of temporary track shoofly
construction and additional extensive track realignment and construction of the 4
existing railroad spur lines in the vicinity of the construction limits. The shoofly
alignments east of Etiwanda Ave. would cross the East Etiwanda Creek and require
the construction of two temporary railroad bridges to span this unimproved creek.
The floodplain and hydraulics of this creek would require construction improvements
and armoring of the creek banks at the crossing.
Despite all of these improvements, this alternative would not eliminate the grade
crossing at Etiwanda Avenue. A grade crossing for the railroad spur servicing the
recycling centers in the northwest quadrant of the project limits would still cross
Etiwanda Avenue. Given these factors, this alternative was deemed to not meet the
project's purpose and need and was withdrawn from consideration.
6. SYSTEM PLANNING AND COORDINATION
Local Planning
The Etiwanda Ave. grade separation is identified in the City of Rancho Cucamonga's
General Plan Circulation Element. The roadway cross section and profile of the
Etiwanda grade separation have been modified in consultation with the City to
minimize impacts to existing land use and private property access in the vicinity of
the proposed grade separation it is recommended that the Rancho Cucamonga City
Council consider an exception to reduce the design speed standard for this location.
The design speed for the grade separation profile has been modified to 45 mph which
is less than the General Plan designated design speed of 55 mph for Major Arterials.
The standard curb to curb cross section width for a Major Arterial as defined by City
Standards is 72'. The proposed Etiwanda Ave. grade separation will use a curb to
IU
Page 256
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
June 2015
curb width of 70' to avoid airspace and access impacts to existing structures adjacent
to Etiwanda Avenue.
Railroad Planning
The Etiwanda Ave. Grade Separation will clear span the SCRRA right of way width
of 100'. This does not preclude the railroad from future expansion of the San Gabriel
subdivision within the project limits.
7. RIGHT-OF-WAY
Alternative 1
Partial Right of Way acquisitions of private property will be needed for the
construction of the Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation Alternative 1. The proposed
Overhead construction and associated access road configuration will result in the
following property impacts:
• Strack/Jones Trust (APN 0229-131-07-0000) — this property is located in the
northwest quadrant of the crossing. A fee take of approximately 430 square feet,
due to the Etiwanda Avenue widening, is required.
• Pacific Recycling (APN 0229-131-26-0000) — this property is located in the
northwest quadrant of the crossing. A fee take of approximately 350 square feet,
due to the Etiwanda Avenue widening, is required.
• ReIiant Energy (APN 0229-283-79-0000) — this property is located in the
southwest quadrant of the crossing. A fee take of approximately 9,800 square feet,
due to the Etiwanda Avenue roadway widening, is required.
• Colombero Family Partnership (APN 0229-161-01-0000, APN 0229-161-02-
0000, APN 0229-161-03-0000, APN 0229-161-04-0000, and APN 0229-161-05-
0000) — these properties are located in the northeast quadrant of the crossing. Fee
takes of approximately 11,160 square feet, due to the Etiwanda Avenue roadway
widening and Whittram Avenue re -alignment, is required.
• De Biase's/Cortese's (APN 0229-162-14-0000) — this property is currently being
acquired by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
• Strack/Jones (APN 0229-162-15-0000) — this property is located in the northeast
quadrant of the crossing. A fee take of approximately 270 square feet, due to the
Etiwanda Avenue widening, is required.
• Bolger (APN 0229-291-55-0000) — this property is located in the southeast
quadrant of the crossing. A fee take of approximately 1,600 square feet, due to
the Etiwanda Avenue widening and the proposed south access road turn around
off of Napa Street, is required.
• Lin (APN 0229-291-17-0000 and APN 0229-291-18-0000) — these properties are
located in the southeast quadrant of the crossing. A Fee take of approximately
8,000 square feet, due to the Etiwanda Avenue roadway widening and the
proposed south access road turn around off of Napa Street, is required.
• SCE (APN 0229-291-23-0000) — this property is located in the southeast quadrant
of the Intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and Napa Street. A fee take of
approximately 3,000 square feet, due to the new roadway access off of Napa
Street, is required.
Page 257
Etiwanda Avenue Grade
June 2015
Utilities
There are many existing utility lines underground and overhead within the proposed
roadway alignment. The following is a list of the known utilities:
San Gabriel Valley (SGV) Water Company
Metropolitan Water District
Storm Drain
Proposed Southern California Edison (SCE)
GTE
Overhead SCE Power line
36" Sewer
36" High Pressure Gas
36" CLMC Water
24" Fuel
16" Gas
15" Sewer
12" Gas
12.66' Metropolitan Water District (MWD)
12.75" Gas
8" Gas
4" Fuel
I" Gas
.75" Gas
The 12.66' MWD water main line will be protected in place. All of the remaining
identified existing utilities will be relocated. The underground utilities should be
relocated outside the Etiwanda Avenue roadway. The overhead utilities will be
relocated to avoid conflicts with the overhead alternative.
Railroad
This proposed alternative will not have an effect on the railroad operations. If
structural Option A (PC/PS girder superstructure) is chosen, there will be no
falsework required thus requiring minimal railroad involvement. If structural Option
B (CIP/PS continuous box girder superstructure) is chosen, falsework is required
which would require approval and coordination with SCRRA and BNSF Railroad.
This alternative will not preclude future expansion of the SCRRA/BNSF operations.
Alternative 2
Partial Right of Way acquisitions of private property will be needed for the
construction of the Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation underpass Alternative 2. The
proposed construction and associated access road configuration will result in the
following property impacts:
iz
Page 258
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
June 2015
• SA Recycling (APN 0229-131-16-0000) — this property is located in the
northwest quadrant of the crossing. A fee take of approximately 42,560 square
feet, due to the Whittram Avenue intersection and access road re -alignment, is
required.
• Strack/Jones Trust (APN 0229-13I-07-0000) — this property is located in the
northwest quadrant of the crossing. A fee take of approximately 430 square feet,
due to the Etiwanda Avenue widening, is required.
• Pacific Recycling (APN 0229-131-26-0000) — this property is located in the
northwest quadrant of the crossing. A fee take of approximately 350 square feet,
due to the Etiwanda Avenue widening, is required.
• De Biase's/Cortese's (APN 0229-162-14-0000) -- this property is currently being
acquired by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
• Strack/Jones (APN 0229-162-15-0000) — this property is located in the northeast
quadrant of the crossing. A fee take of approximately 270 square feet, due to the
Etiwanda Avenue widening, is required.
• Lin (APN 0229-291-17-0000 and APN 0229.291-18-0000) — these properties are
located in the southeast quadrant of the crossing. Fee takes of approximately
192,000 square feet, due to the Etiwanda Avenue roadway widening and
depressed grade eliminating access to these parcels, are required.
• SCE (APN 0229-291-22-0000) — this property is located in the southeast quadrant
of the crossing. A fee take of approximately 6,300 square feet, due to the
Etiwanda Avenue widening, is required.
Utilities
There are many existing utility lines underground and overhead within the proposed
roadway alignment. The following is a Iist of the known utilities:
San Gabriel Valley (SGV) Water Company
Storm Drain
Proposed Southern California Edison (SCE)
GTE
Overhead SCE Power line
36" Sewer
36" High Pressure Gas
36" CLMC Water
24" Fuel
16" Gas
15" Sewer
12" Gas
12.66' Metropolitan Water District (MWD)
12.75" Gas
8" Gas
4" Fuel
1" Gas
.75" Gas
13
Page 259
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation June 20I5
All of the identified existing utilities will be relocated. This includes the 12.66' MWD
water main line which will be a difficult and expensive relocation. The underground
utilities should be relocated outside the Etiwanda Avenue roadway. The overhead
utilities will be relocated to avoid conflicts with the underpass alternative. Any
existing utilities within the railroad right-of-way would likely need to be Iowered
under the roadway. A drainage pump station will be required to remove water from
the underpass. This pump station could possibly be constructed in the southeast
quadrant of the crossing.
Railroad;
This alternative would temporarily impact rail operations during construction. A
shoo -fly and extensive reconstruction of 4 existing spur Iines would be needed to
maintain existing freight operations.
8. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERNIINATION/DOCUMENT
Section 21080.14(a) of the Public Resources Code exempts railroad grade separation
projects that eliminLte an existing grade crossing, or reconstruct an existing grade
separation, from the requirements of CEQA. This statute is in effect until January 1,
2016 unless a new statute extending this date is enacted by the State legislature in
advance of the January 1, 2016 deadline. Should no legislation be enacted to extend
the exemption, this project would be required to secure a CEQA certification for the
proposed construction of the project.
This project will be required to pursue a NEPA certification to receive federal funds.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga will serve as the lead agency for NEPA certification
of this project.
Jurisdictional agency permits will be required for construction of this project.
Permits that must be secured for the authorization of construction of this project
include:
• A Section 401 permit from the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board.
• A Right of Entry (ROE) permit with SCRRA for access to the railroad right of
way,
• A Construction and Maintenance (C&M) agreement with SCRRA to define
the construction and maintenance responsibilities of the City and SCRRA.
• California Public Utilities Commission General Order 88-B will be required
for the new rail/highway bridge to be constructed by the Project.
9. FUNDING
The City of Rancho Cucamonga will seek to secure a combination of federal funding
and State Section 190 program funds to augment the current City fees that have been
allocated for this project's environmental documentation and design phase.
14
Page 260
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
June 2015
Based upon data the crossing's Priority Index was determined to be 183.3. Details of
the priority index are provided in the table below.
Dot It]
Railroad
Veh
Train
Sec. 190
AH'
BD
VS
RS
CG
1 T
OF
SCF
Priority
Construction
(ADI)
Cost
Index
share
026151P
SORRA/
15.315
52
$5M
0
2
5
6
2
7
2
24
183.3
BNSF
'Acciaenr lnsrary u•rrrr rr tree lust fv years ty tore crossing -s operation.
10. SCHEDULE
Project Milestones
Scheduled Delivery Date
(Month /Year)
PROGRAM PROJECT
BEGIN ENVIRONMENTAL
10115
CIRCULATE DED
6116
PA & ED Approved
11116
PS&E
10117
Right of Way
9120
7122
Construction
The anticipated funding fiscal year for construction is 2021122.
11. PROJECT PERSONNEL
Curt Billings, Project Manager City of Rancho Cucamonga
Steve Henderson, P.E. Project Manager Jacobs
Sam Xie, P.E. Sr. Structural Engineer Jacobs
Jason Jung, P.E. Project Engineer Jacobs
12. ATTACHMENTS
A. Alternative I Typical Section, PIan& Profile
B. Alternative 2 Typical Section, Plan& Profile
C. Preliminary Construction Cost Estimates
D. Utility Layout Plan
E. R/W Layout Plan
F. Advance Planning Study
G. Grade Crossing Accident/Incident Reports
15
(909)477-2740
(909) 974-2704
(949)224-7606
(909) 974-2736
Page 261
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation June 2015
Attachment A
Page 262
COr
n
C 3
� c>I
� 1
1 �
1 '
1
1 y
1 1 ,
1 ' 1
V
1
��e r m RO to
m m 1
I
I /tom w
I o
I t _
I6'-011 G� N
•• m N
ZOr ZQ
w I y ,F)
N I m m
m m I ci N LA
C3 v o z
mLA n
o
Z
r,
CO m
m w r
m o o '- z
� m
r m Ih
z� '
mm o
------------' +l
I , 1-
1
Io
1 '
e ,
1 �
t 1 C
O
o n
--�---
— n — Z
DO
1- I x
M
a In Q 12'-01 n
= 1 4m {
n I X � m czi
I O r N -r
C1 Z
`c I
o '1
r a
k<
v
M c�
n m
2 , r
z i
r Aa s M-1 a
m aR •� M30 Z a
0 OzrC n
8 p5(M 0 z
W (0) m
$ —M -IM c
^� "zm 3 g
D $ .
d dR e (A Z
m c) I&
�US£RNWE -3 Jung) 5OATE PLOTTED-) 5/11/201! TIME PLOTTED -> 2:34:15 Pu
D
Page 263
fl
Pn
4
030rz
cr,:Dcp
Z9rnM —I
!m
F) = so 30 z
C)
MZ OC
030 mum 0
=mim";-9 c
NAPA St
ULR
T . ........ 46+11.05. ......
0 Elev f109.76 LR -0
=!40
0+
-C
-4
+ ......... --------
......... --------
co
0
Evc.
2 .6
to
+
------------------------ : ---------
Ul
M0.00 myt
I
o
kn
+ --------------------- ------- ----- ............ ....
La
+ ...........
+ ------ --------------------------
r Ln
+
Im OT
<
Z cl
IFLn ON
m
L,,,P - -
(A + POO -
rn M L"
ohm'+
sU3
ago I 'ab 'T
23
-5E11R• —TRACK U '0
+
CO C
T
0
—2,0
lob rn -
Ul
+ — +
00 Q
1149.2
L
IV
Ch
+
cri WHITTRAM Ave 4
W +
m'1341.89-
0
C)
rn
cm ter.z
c
+
m
A.Ila
W
+ W.
o
(A + ' Ln 11 4. 6 .a
NCI
+
+
acrot
+ --------------
—,.
4 �7+ 0 EVr�
0 1 1
0
(n
CM
cu
0
COL.
gz= al
G -
to
+ +i
. . . . . . . . . .
w Ln -4
ON 0 0 0 lop 0
1A
Page 264
NO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+
C,
+ -------- -------
0
043+40.63
3
1103.61
'44+M.M'B VC
0
to+
Ln
4 .................................. -----------
NAPA St
ULR
T . ........ 46+11.05. ......
0 Elev f109.76 LR -0
=!40
0+
-C
-4
+ ......... --------
......... --------
co
0
Evc.
2 .6
to
+
------------------------ : ---------
Ul
M0.00 myt
I
o
kn
+ --------------------- ------- ----- ............ ....
La
+ ...........
+ ------ --------------------------
r Ln
+
Im OT
<
Z cl
IFLn ON
m
L,,,P - -
(A + POO -
rn M L"
ohm'+
sU3
ago I 'ab 'T
23
-5E11R• —TRACK U '0
+
CO C
T
0
—2,0
lob rn -
Ul
+ — +
00 Q
1149.2
L
IV
Ch
+
cri WHITTRAM Ave 4
W +
m'1341.89-
0
C)
rn
cm ter.z
c
+
m
A.Ila
W
+ W.
o
(A + ' Ln 11 4. 6 .a
NCI
+
+
acrot
+ --------------
—,.
4 �7+ 0 EVr�
0 1 1
0
(n
CM
cu
0
COL.
gz= al
G -
to
+ +i
. . . . . . . . . .
w Ln -4
ON 0 0 0 lop 0
1A
Page 264
+ O N W a IJI Dl
O
O 0+00.00
1111.19
KA
.'• ' -------------------------------------
O 31. 811C 1115.39 ,
1116 1+.5300 '
1+30.34.
i 1116.50
!4k
rx y+ O.
W
c
•N'8 ` 3+31.00
1126.53
mi
'• ' in 3+66.04, HI
' 1122.40
a ,
MCI
iv
Ln .... .- ;
O y
O 5+31.00 EVC o
1119.51
5+40.00 BVC
1119.19 '
�
QN
6+40.00 "
1115.69 008
{ CP
. - 6+74.81- LO =gin
+ 7+40.00 EVC
1117.38
m
� . cn cn
o - 0+12:09 QVC O
1120.30 Z -I
N 2
o • ciS 00IT1 n
N I O N y• a 10+.31 H
a •L # ; p VNO 1121.05 1 12:09 ..-..... M i]
r" o �N8 1122.00 M
�e 1 LA
��" II Ln
I i LAI Z77
• JO O
Lj + .11+12.09 EVC
c r i O 1119.85 } 0
dt
••i .mow .
r _
4 N '
f '
(pl
_ 14+00.00 SVC
+
+ 1113.66
++ . •� 14+79.27 LO
1dL
---� _ 1112.81 OON • o
1� + _ 15+.QO u
p 1111;51
�o�
II Don
N
r
16+00.00 EVC
p 1114.76
O
16+50.00 04C my
1116.42 r ��
+I i
17+76.35 HI
•� . ■ 8 j 1118.49 18+00.00
�rr0 o rms !' 1121.33
O
M.1N�m g o r
19+50.00 EVC
m Tim C 1114.58 j 19+66.00
•AN - J 1113.86
19+91.06
.11 mm 4C4
O O N W a 1!1 O1
O O O O O
Page 265
1✓tiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Attachment B
June 2015
Page 266
'y �m
2F Gos
0
W
o
D'
m
n
a
a
z
Z
CI
v
0
x
I
z
r
0
I
z
X
r
n
<
m
�m
I mF
r
z
ti 0
LW
N n
-C
0
M
I ��
v
m
Cl
a m
''
at
0
rm
Z �
M m
W
"
o
w
o
N
O
m
A
�
a
m
In
n
Z
�'
r m
m
a
a
m
—�
m
LA
^)
-1
z
o
�
v
n
z
N
a
a
w
m
�
4
m
ci
r m
aX
Ln
1'
mm
o
m
1'
0
z
rnJF
�-1
1--1
K
1 v
m n
n
z
a
a
z
i
//�1'
a
U
NCT
wa
I N M
Z
r
G
zE
x
1 0M
z
r-
r-
o
-4 -4
�
m
I
z
n
v
2
0
m
N
M
n
a
=a
C
---Ia
o 0
o
W
c
z mc/
a 0
0
mZ�
C
o z
H
aa
�mm
�
s
cam-im
c
I I
Nov
a
v
-OZm
a
n
�'
IA
N
M
o
z
�IlSERNpME>JungJ
C
n
al
OpiE PLOTTED
a
) 5/11/2015
TIME PLOTTED -> 2.34:16 PM
age 26 7
z
0
rz
r
m
tZma
J
J<�
i
O O _
Q O O O 0 a 8 G
!4443h:3b ' ! !
.1104.54'
o
v
_ 4B+25.00 SVC jk
0 1109.44
49+47.65 HI
1110.20
O N� _ ....... ..
{N
w
o aco 50+50.00
- N 1112.23
+ ;A -c ` .............. ..
52+75:00 -EVC_,
F 11IQ4'.77 ONA
53+25 a0 BVC v
0 1103.1x2 a°=o
a c� 73 c
N _ ml ID ' ! �mm
30
LO
O +l lwl r 01
f7 CINf1+1
N g _ ± .1 0++ �� ow
N 7 anC C
OtAl
r+ { I. ;;po O
m
a as
o cif x =o" m
r °1 /30,
Eft � L� w
+ - �3 f
LnLO.
+ - --------------- --------
0 1
60+75.bO- EVC
+ •-� •---- --.... d 1.113,]9 ,.-...
61+75'.63'BVC
N 1
-119.1.8 ....
c
C.- .at ...............
_ a
Low
:LA(A0. .. _ .... - . 64+00.63.1
g ,�N0 1.132.65
?Nn
U,
In
e 66+25.63 EVC -4 i
i µ
1137.36
en
+ - -----------------------
co
--...- ----- ----.
o
CO -4 k Li r i i
+oi _
0 ++ {{��
p p O Q O 0 O O
Page 268
F
•� _'II a 4
°
i
O O _
Q O O O 0 a 8 G
!4443h:3b ' ! !
.1104.54'
o
v
_ 4B+25.00 SVC jk
0 1109.44
49+47.65 HI
1110.20
O N� _ ....... ..
{N
w
o aco 50+50.00
- N 1112.23
+ ;A -c ` .............. ..
52+75:00 -EVC_,
F 11IQ4'.77 ONA
53+25 a0 BVC v
0 1103.1x2 a°=o
a c� 73 c
N _ ml ID ' ! �mm
30
LO
O +l lwl r 01
f7 CINf1+1
N g _ ± .1 0++ �� ow
N 7 anC C
OtAl
r+ { I. ;;po O
m
a as
o cif x =o" m
r °1 /30,
Eft � L� w
+ - �3 f
LnLO.
+ - --------------- --------
0 1
60+75.bO- EVC
+ •-� •---- --.... d 1.113,]9 ,.-...
61+75'.63'BVC
N 1
-119.1.8 ....
c
C.- .at ...............
_ a
Low
:LA(A0. .. _ .... - . 64+00.63.1
g ,�N0 1.132.65
?Nn
U,
In
e 66+25.63 EVC -4 i
i µ
1137.36
en
+ - -----------------------
co
--...- ----- ----.
o
CO -4 k Li r i i
+oi _
0 ++ {{��
p p O Q O 0 O O
Page 268
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation June 2015
Attachment C
Page 269
Alternative 101-1 (with MSE Walls)
Etiwanda / SCRRA/BNSF Railroad Grade Separation
Preliminary Project Cost Estimate
Page 270
Unit
Unit CostR57
Total
O D Y ITEMS:
Earthwork
RoadwayExcavation
CY
$15
$235,500
Imported Borrow
CY
$20
$238,000
Clearing and Grubbing
AC
$5,000$5,000
Pavement Structural Section
As halt Concrete
TON
$70
$700,000
A re ate Base
CY
$30
$150,000
Draine e
Storm Drains
LS
$120,000$120,000
Water Oualit Treatment
LS
$100,000$100,000
Water Pollution Control
LS
$100,000
1
$100,000
Specialty Items
Retaining Walls MSE
SF
$60
50000
$4,000,000
Structure Excavation e 5 Wall
CY
$25
740
$18,500
Structure Backfill e 5 Wap
CY
$40
1520
$601800
Structural Concrete e 5 Wall
CY
$500
730
$365,000
Bar Reinforcing Steel e 5 Wall
LB
$1
74200
$74,200
Concrete Barrier Type 26
LF
$175
2500
$437,500
Concrete Barrier Type 736
LF
$85
1430
$121,550
Minor Concrete sidewalk, curb & utter
CY
$400
1620
$648,000
Chain Link Fence
LF
$15
3700
$55,500
Traffic Items
LI htin
LS
$250,000
1
$250.000
Permanent Signing & StrielnR
LS
$10,000
1
$10,000
Traffic Control Systems
LS
$50.000
1
$50,000
Transportation Mana ement Plan
LS
$7,500
1
$7,500
Removals
Remove Concrete sidewalk, curb, driveway)
CY
$200
375
$75,000
Remove Chain Link Fence
LF
$12
690
$8,280
ROADWAY SUBTOTAL
$7,512,000
STRUCTUR ETE S:
Unit
I Unit Cosi
Quanti
Total
Bridge Structure
SF
$330
50400
$16,644,000
STRUCTURE SUBTOTAL
F16,644,000
RAI RQA S:
Unit
Unit Cost
Quanti
Total
SCRRA Des gn Approvals
LS
$20,000
1
$20,000
BNSF Design Approvals
LS
$20,000
1 1
$20,000
C&M Agreement with BNSF
LS
$10,000
1
$10,000
Existm At -Grade Crossing Removal
LS
$7,500
1
$7,500
RAILROAD SUBTOTAL
$58,000
Misc Minor Items lied to Roadway Cost
LS
10%
1
$760,000
Mobilization
IS
10%
1
52,430,000
Contingencies
LS
20%
1
$4,850,000
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION
$31,494,000
RIGHT OF WAY:
Unit
Unit Cost
Quantity
Total
Acquisition/Easements
SF
$8
34610
$276,880
TemporarV Construction Easements
SF
$3
41870
$125,610
Titlelescrowlle al fees
LS
$250,000
1
$250,000
Environmental Mitigation
AC
$25,000
1
$25,000
RIGHT OF WAY SUBTOTAL
$678,000
U R OCATIQ •
Unit
Unit Cost
Ouanft
Total
Utility relocation est
LS
$5.000.000 1
1
$5,000,000
CAPITAL COST SUBTOTAL
$37,172,000
ENGINEERING SERVICE FEES:
S:Desi
-
Design
n 9%
$2,835,000
Construction Management 81�e
$2,520,000
Environmental Documents
1
$350,000
GRAND TOTAL
542,877,000
Page 270
Alternative 2 UP (with CY Std Type 1 Retaining Walls)
Etiwanda 1 SCRRA/BNSF Railroad Grade Separation
Preliminary Project Cost Estimate
Page 271
Unit
Unit Cost
Quantity
Total
WAY IT M :
Earthwork
Roadway Excavation
CY
$15
50000
$1,000,000
Clearing and Grubbing
AC
$5,000
1
$5,000
Pavement Structural Section
Asphalt Concrete
TON
$70
18000 1
$1,260,000
Aggregate Base
CY
$30
12000
$360,000
Drainage
Storm Drains
LS
$100,000
1
$100,000
Water Quality Treatment
LS
$100,000
1
$100,000
Specialty Items
Retaining Walls e 1 RW
SF
$85
45000
$3.825.000
Concrete Barrier
LF
$85
3000
$255,000
Minor Concrete sidewalk, curb & utter
CY
$400
1000
$400,000
Water Pollution Control
LS
$100.000
1
$100,000
Chain Link Fence
LF
$15
3000
$45,000
Traffic Items
Li htin
LS
$250,000
1
$250,000
Permanent Signing & Striping
LS
$10,000
1
$10,000
Traffic Control Systems
LS
$50,000
1
$50,000
Transportation Management Plan
LS
$7,500
1
$7,500
Temporary Shoring for RW Construction
LS
$300,000
1
$300,000
Removals
Remove Concrete (sidewalk, curb, driveway)
CY
I $200
400
$80,000
ROADWAY SUBTOTAL
$8,068,000
STRUCTURE ITEMS:
Unit
Unit Cost
Quantity
Total
Bridge Structures
SF
$1,000
8134
$8,134,000
Tem ra Shoring for Bridge Construction
LS
$750.000
1
$750,000
Pump Station (Structure and Equipment)
LS
$1,400,000
1
$1,400,000
STRUCTURE SUBTOTAL
$10,284,000
RAILROAD MS:
Unit
Unit Cost
Quantity
Total
SCRRA Design Approvals
LS
$20,000
1
$20,000
BNSF Design AeRrovals
LS
$20,000
1
$20,000
C&M Agreement with BNSF
LS
$10,000
1
$10,000
Existing At -Grade Crossing Removal
LS
$150,000
1
$150,000
Reconstruct RR Tracks
LF
$275
3800
$1,045,000
Remove and Reinstall Turnouts
EA
590,000
5
$450,000
RR Signals
EA
$500,000
1
$500,000
Temporary Shooll (Track Construction and Removal)
LF
$275
4700
$1,292,500
RAILROAD SUBTOTAL
$3,488,000
Misc Minor Items (Applied to Roadway Cost
LS
10%
1
$810,000
Mobilization
LS
10%
1
$2,190,000
Contingencies
LS
20%
1
S4,370,000
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION
$28,400,000
RIGHT OF AY:
Unit
Unit Cost
Ouanft
Total
Acquisition/Easements
SF
$8
241900
$1,814,250
Titlelescrowilenal tees
LS
$250,000
1
$250,000
Environmental Mitigation
AC
$350,000
1
$350,000
RIGHT OF WAY SUBTOTAL
$2,416,000
UTILITY RELOCATION:
Unit
I Unit Cost
Quantity
Total
Utility relocation est
LS
I $10,000,000
1
$10,000,000
CAPITAL COST SUBTOTAL
$40,815,000
ENGINEERING SERVICE FEES:
Desion 9%
$2,556,000
Construction Management 8%
$2,272,000
Environmental Documents
$350.000
GRAND TOTALI
$45.993.000
Page 271
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Attachment D
June 2015
Page 272
^� 4J.6
m mrd y ^�
_4m`
m A�. �^ I i{`.
r r '''�
* ti
n nX 3D-
1 rn
ib
m
,vr Yf . -
r O
• � � ` i Q � ; �'tS
`d t 1.• ,r • .�s— 1'74`' } -�'
■
i
as
Vo
IT
EV
'1
;44 % . -
rl,
�.]j( + F
t Q.
1!7
lF"lr r•.i; " • 1. r
C �` SMI- �
UP
rn
Cm
17 ;•, 4� M
J ri
,f ;D
rn
tl1 a .�. ,{ O
.. •* h •. a
ca
C 1' '• 4ti �` y x x r� t' j Z m
r : ''
rn
tom• V
m`-I r0 Y
■.�m m ei
s ��' , � •.�, � I � ' _fir TT
LM
r ti
It �
s
4.
4f
An
' W
■
io
-C
I
I
i
Page 273
MUM
/-_�ry a C
!� 16 'r
M rn n
M m �•4s � 'O
m m
rn r
.--Mud
om - �,� •
m 0 �.
4 m
t
o
•1(,14t.�-i' ..� �.i .1 �/tk� 43
- iia
La
. ,�
rn
TJ �
m,n
+ Ij
Ct
.f .._ ..,
ti # z
CALA--
O f 7 ^'mar„ Y5•-+•++� T _
CM
O
Ir
rrn Q
Tri 'I ,E„m
AM
}
45
"0,:
ZA
l
C
z
4
NIL
N
i r
.maxIt
ro
ILAN
L_ � -
,.�
xflipCF IV
N w N s+ •rte .-� ti
Page 274
<, ,
= a
--11 m
•
T a 1•
• a { t:
iU
f
f"
I
s
1
C
l
w
Page 275
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Attachment E
June 2015
Page 276
s
��±ir��i kr�, � , �'+ T`}'ri.t• t r � �,-' � � R! tip:
r
rR ■ y
�r
4
LAW.
� 4
op
ii.0
r
Lt
4Lral PT
17
N rip
,#=I, T• �l �'� +�,� • � i � � yr
i • r i
3
I x
g.�-
�jj 1RI
rte+ .�. ...... i } - � ' •+' ,
.'T mow♦ ' � J� I 1 � }i�
4A moi.
� •' .-„i,�,�.. r �� r i '`'*�� ms.µ ,r:' *
ol
• j.w,.; f:rte 1�~ � �'~ t ,
�+ �; � .moi _ � � • � - -
;• ' • fir- � ,,. , �' '..ry7'
r t t
� I i
Wy f •, c.
Tj
SCR
EIA
" ! � lu _ y
Jo
� I
I i
O �.
131.
a 1 'M �` _l
+ - a''� s • G. IAL AC(ii7!
! {} rME
I
C77" ,
r
0
O F%. row
n 16 I li A
r 11
rn
Ln
IMO
r
�� ■_{ �I L` i rte. ; {T.
O
�(^ } W'�
J Ir.
a
in
tax
iL
AIM
a �f+-
�* ,. 0229-
is
21s m
O 4
MW
i
Page 278
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation June 2015
Attachment F
Page 279
BS -
ADVANCE PLANNING STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ETIWANDA AVE. GRADE SEPARATION
SECTION 1-- APS DESIGN MEMO
Page 280
./ f FOOiFIEit Rlvd
ETIWANIA Ave
9' GRADE EPARATION
AR 4N A34
z
wHITT_Rsu evef
w rrrJll RFRNFhA
fi
I 1!
—Fi4f1 51z`�zW- sear� u
� 4iR St
ONTARIO uILLS Pk+Y"
_>1
ETIWANDA AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION
BETWEEN 61h St and ARROW ROUTE
Prepared for:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. Box 807
10500 Civic Center Dr.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Curt Billings, Project Manager
Tel: (909) 477-2740
Prepared by:
j BS"
3257 Guasti Road, Suite 120
Ontario, CA 91761
Contact: Sam Xie, PE
Tel: (949) 224-7606
June, 2015
Page 281
BSCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ETIWANDA AVE. GRADE SEPARATION
Table of Contents
SECTION 1— APS DESIGN MEMO Page
1. VICINITY MAP....................................................................................................................1
2 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 2
3. STRUCTURE TYPE.............................................................................................................. 2
4. ALIGNMENT........................................................................................................................ 2
5. CLEARANCE........................................................................................................................2
6. FALSEWORK ISSUE...........................................................................................................2
7. IMPACT TO EXISTING UTILITIES...................................................................................2
8. AESTHETICS........................................................................................................................3
9. FOUNDATION ISSUE..........................................................................................................3
10. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS...............................................................................................3
11. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS..............................................................................3
12. COSTS...................................................................................................................................3
SECTION 2 — CONSULTANT PREPARED STRUCTURE ADVANCE
PLANNING STUDY (APS) CHECKLIST
SECTION 3 — ADVANCE PLANNING ESTIMATE
SECTION 4 — APS BRIDGE GENERAL PLANS
SECTION 5 — PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
ADVANCE PLANNING STUDY MEMO
Page 282
JACOBS
1. VICINITY MAP
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ETIWANDA AVE. GRADE SEPARATION
FOOTHILL 61vd
ETIWANDA Avo
GRADE SEPARATION
a
/ARROW Rte
d
2
a
� II WHITTRAM Ave
5 RRA/0"t RA LROA
a'
NAPA St
I,
r _ _6th St a N ;
a d
Ar—
Z
LLJ W, B
w
J � _
4th St
ONTARIO MILLS�wy-=
2. INTRODUCTION
Jacobs team is working with the city of Rancho Cucamonga to provide a feasibility study for a grade
separation at Etiwanda Avenue and Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) 1 BNSF
Railroad north of Interstate 10 (I-10) and east of Interstate 15 (I-15).
The project study is evaluating 2 build alternatives (Alternatives 1 and 2), for grade separation at the
railroad crossing. AIternative 1 (preferred) is to reconstructing Etiwanda Avenue to go over the railroad
on structure with approaching Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) walls. The preferred alternative
will avoid relocating most of the utility in the vicinity of the proposed structure. Alternative 2 is
depressing Etiwanda Avenue below the grade of the tracks with approaching non-standard large
diameter cast -in-place tangent pile walls.
The preferred alternative will minimize right-of-way (R/W) acquisition and property impacts by using
MSE walls on both sides of the approaching roadway and a grade separation structure over the railroad
R/W. This alternative will have the least amount of impact to existing underground and overhead
utilities, right-of-way acquisition, and the SCRRA/BNSF Railroad operations, thus will be less
expensive to construct.
It will not be a feasible option to build depressing grade separation structure (Alternative 2). One main
ADVANCE PLANNING STUDY MEMO 1
Page 283
p BS
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ETIWANDA AVE. GRADE SEPARATION
issue would be the existing 152"0 water line that can't be relocated to depress Etiwanda Rd below
railroad. In addition, there is not enough space within the R/W to relocate all the utilities next to the
structure. By lowering the profile grade below the railroad, there will not be enough space for
supporting and anchoring the retaining structure within R/W limits. Also, there are a few existing
buildings that are located close to the R/W, which will add significant surcharge loads on the structure
approach retaining walls.
Reference is made to the Project Report for detailed descriptions of all the alternatives.
3. STRUCTURE TYPE
In this APS report emphasis is given to the feasible and preferred alternative (Alternative l).
A 600' long 5 -span bridge is proposed for crossing the railroad. The bridge spans are 135'-0", 135'-0"
(over RR RIW), 110'-0", 110'-0" and 110'-0" long, respectively.
A pre -cast prestressed (PC/PS) concrete bulb -tee (Bulb -T) girder superstructure bridge is recommended
for Etiwanda Grade Separation. This superstructure will be built over the railroad tracks without
falsework support during construction, which will mitigate the disturbance to the railroad operation.
The bridge superstructure will have a structure depth of 6'-0" with a crown section with constant cross
slope of I%.
The structure for this overcrossing will be supported on 7' x 10'-6" oblong shaped multi -column
outrigger bents. The structure ends will be supported on seat -type abutments. ITT Cast -In -Drilled -
Hole (CIDH) concrete shaft for the column foundation will be used at all columns and 24"0 CIDH
concrete piles for abutment foundations based on the Preliminary Foundation recommendations. The
bridge site specific Geotechnical Foundation Report will identify the recommended foundation type for
the final design during the PS&E design phase.
4. ALIGNMENT
The bridge has no alignment horizontal curve. The profile of the bridge is defined by a 1,000 foot
vertical curve with an incoming grade of +6.25% and an outgoing grade of -3.85%.
S. CLEARANCE
The required minimum vertical clearance per Code of Federal Regulation is 23'-4" measured from the
top of the highest rail to the bottom of the structure. The considered vertical clearance below the
proposed overcrossing structure is 24'-6", which satisfy the code requirement.
6. FALSEWORK ISSUE
Falsework will not be required for bridge structure since it would be built with precast girder seated on
the bent cap and abutment.
7. IMPACT TO EXISTING UTILITIES
Existing utility plans shows list of known utilities as follows:
San Gabriel Valley (SGV) Water Company
ADVANCE PLANNING STUDY MEMO
2
Page 284
BS_
Storm Drain
Proposed Southern California Edison (SCE)
GTE
Overhead SCE Power line
36" Sewer
36" High Pressure Gas
36" CLMC Water
24" Fuel
16" Gas
15" Sewer
12" Gas
144" Metropolitan Water District (MWD)
12.75" Gas
8" Gas
4" Fuel
1" Gas
0.75" Gas
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ETIWANDA AVE. GRADE SEPARATION
Based on the as -built utility plans, the column and foundation location was set to avoid relocation of the
144" O MWD water main line and large diameter HPG gas lines relocation. Prior to final design phase,
a precise utility survey is anticipated to identify the accurate locations of those utilities.
S. AESTHETICS
No special aesthetic requirements are specified now. It is expected that aesthetic requirements, as
needed, can be accommodate in the final design stage.
9. FOUNDATION ISSUE
No special issues arise at this stage of design.
10. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL
No information of known hazardous material is available at this time.
11. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
The bridge will be constructed in one stage. No special construction requirements or limited site access
is recommended at this time.
12. COSTS
See Section 3, Advance Planning Estimates, for bridge cost estimate.
ADVANCE PLANNING STUDY MEMO
Page 285
JACOBS
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ETIWANDA AVE. GRADE SEPARATION
SECTION 2 - CONSULTANT PREPARED STRUCTURE ADVANCE
PLANNING STUDY (APS) CHECKLIST
ADVANCE PLANNING STUDY
Page 286
Consultant Prepared Structure Advance Planning Study (APS) Checklist
Sheet 1 of 2
June 10, 2015 1 Jacobs
Phone No:
949-224-7606
Sam Xie 949-224-7606
EA: County: Rte: KP(PM)
SBd Etiwanda Avenue
Project Description:
Construct a new grade separation structure over existing railroad tracks
Bridge No(s)• Bridge Name(s),
To be Assigned Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Total number of bridges in project: I APS Alternative Letter or Number (if more than one): 1
1 bridge (new) is presented in this report
Purpose of this APS; Initial APS Cost & Feasibility ® Revised scope ❑ Update cost ❑
Part A Items to collect and considerations prior to beginning the APS
All items listed in Part A are to be made available and submitted if requested by the Liaison Engineer.
(Mark NIA if not applicable)
® Preliminary profile grade of proposed structure.
® Typical section of the proposed structure. (Including barrier type, sidewalks, cross slope %, etc.)
❑ Grades or spot elevations of roadway below the structure.
❑ Typical section of roadway below the structure. (Including shoulders, gutters, embankment slope.)
® Site map: including horizontal alignment of new structure and the roadway below, topo, contours, etc.
❑ Stage construction or detour plan for traffic on the structure.
NIA (number of lanes to remain open, Temp Railing, etc.)
❑ Stage construction or detour plan for the roadway below the structure.
NIA (falsework openings for each stage and any restrictions.)
❑ "As Built" plans for existing structures.
NIA
❑ Future widening plans of upper and lower roadway (verify with Route Concept Report).
NIA
® Site aerial photograph (at the proposed structure).
❑ Environmental and/or permit requirements (areas of potential impact, construction windows, etc.)
N/A
® Overhead and underground utility plans
❑ Any other information that you feel is necessary to complete the study. (Other concerns that may
affect the APS: local agency requirements such as aesthetics, improvements in vicinity of structure,
airspace usage, other obstructions, etc.)
OSFP
5/9/p ge 287
Consultant Prepared Advance Planning Study (APS) Checklist
Sheet 2 of 2
Part B Considerations during the APS design and cost estimate preparation
1. Has this project been discussed with: the OSFP Liaison Engineer? Yes ❑ No
the Caltrans District Project Manager? Yes ❑ No
the roadway consultant? Yes LQ No ❑
2. Have the Caltrans Structures Maintenance records been reviewed? Yes ❑ No ❑ NIA
If the records recommend any work for the structure, is it included in the APS? Yes Q No ❑ NIA
3. Are there special aesthetic considerations?
4. (Widenings and Modifications)
Has this project been reviewed for seismic retrofit requirements?
Are seismic retrofit requirements included in the APS?
Yes ❑ No
Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
5. Any special Railroad requirements? Yes ® No ❑
Shoofly required? Yes ® No ❑
Cost of shoofly included as a se arate item in the project cost estimate? Yes Z No ❑
6. Any special foundation requirements, including scour critical work, special excavation
such as Type A, Type D, and/or hazardous or contaminated material? Yes ❑ No ED
7. Any special construction requirements, including limited site accessibility or seasonal work?
Yes El No
8 Other items to be included in the cost such as slope paving, approach slabs, and/or
adjacent retaining walls? Yes ® No ❑
9. Remove existing bridge?
Total Deck Area: FT2
10. Any other unusual or special requirements?
Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
Yes ❑ No
11. Provide and attach a consultant prepared Design Memo to summarize and document any
important assumptions, discussions, decisions, unusual items, local agency requirements
such as aesthetics, improvements in vicinity of the structure, airspace usage,
other obstructions, or any items noted above. Summary attached? Yes ® No ❑
Designer.
Sam Xie
(Printed Name)
Designer's Signature:
Date:
June 10, 2015
OSFP
5/901ge 288
JACOBSCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ETIWANDA AVE. GRADE SEPARATION
SECTION 3 - ADVANCE PLANNING ESTIMATES
ADVANCE PLANNING STUDY
Page 289
0 GENERAL PLAN ESTINIAT12 0 AOVANCEi PLANNING ESTINIATIE
RCVD RY: IN EST:
OUT EST:
City of
BRIDGE: I-TIWANUAAVIS GRADISSEPARATION[A1tLnutivcll 811. No.: DISTRICT: PamhuCucununjta
TYPE: 110115 CONCRE-M. BUL11•TEE GIRDER RTE:
CU. CO:
EA: PAI:
LENGTH. MY MOTH: 84.(X) AREA (SF)= 30,41N1
DESIGN SECTION;
N OF STRUCTURES IN PROJECT: EST. NO.
PRICES BY: Su=nc M.m6a ad COST INDEX: 2013 CCD
PRICES CHECKED BY: DATE:
OVANTITIFS BYt tix— R1 x,l—f DATF-
IDN
CONTRACT ITEMS
TYPE UNIT
UANTITA'
PRICE
AMOUNT
192(9)3
STRUCTURE EXCAVATION (BRIDGE)
CY
2,904
$65.00
SIK2 _35.1X1
193103
STRUCTURE BACKFILL (BRIDGE)
CY
1305
364.(0
$90.311.68
490603
24" CIDIi CONCRETE PILING
H.
4,634
S1[M).04
5468.[MM1.IM1
494622
126" CIDII CONCRETE PILING
Ll-
634
S2.21M.00
$1,496,49MI,44
512291
FURNISH PRECAST PRESTRESSING CONIC BULB•T GIRDER
LA
55
$40,000.(0
$2.:0(1,400.10
5125(X1
IERECT PRECAST PRESTRESSING CONC GIRDER
EA
55
$5,()04.(X1
S2750M).10
310451
STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE FOOTING
CY
917
$3511.(X)
$321.4665.67
51(9)53
STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE
CY
5,978
$6()().00
33386.941.641
314(186
STRUCTURAL CONCRETE. APPROACH SLAB (TYPE N)
CY
200
S7(N).(X)
$14130MMMI
524102
BAR REINFORCING STEEL (BRIDGE)
1.11
2.5(0,1X0
$0.75
S1,875,(MX).[Xl
519095
JOINT SEAL ASSEMBLY (NIR 4")
1-1-
176
52.500)
$44,()40.()((
833142
CONCRETE BARRIER (TYPE 26 MODIFIED)
LF
1,200
$184.(X)
$216,100.00
Lv1RTMEN S,
ROUTING
I nes SrrnON
:. OfnCaOFnR1DUTIMSIM-NORT11
r FSm�cFSFRRItrI tleslnN RNIwu
1 OFFICEoFBRIDGE DESIiN SOM
5. IMFICCOFRRIDOCDFSIC,N WW
6. ocnm'OFRIIInauDusim sGIn1 mmCAIJFLRNIA
SUBTOTAL
TIME RE?1r1TED OVERHEAD
MOBILIZATION [ In % I
SUBTOTAL BRIDGE MEMS
CONTINGENCIL•S (@ 25%)53.328,892
BRIDGETOTAL COST
COST PERSQ. 1700T
BRIDGE RLMOVAL(CONTINGENCIES INCL.)
WORK BY RAILROAD OR UTILITY FORCEE5
GRANDTOTAL
BUDGLT L•STINIATE AS OF
S 10,394 553
$1.489.455
51.331557
$13,315 567
316.644.359
$330
$16.643.359
sE6,661,44p
Escalated Budget Estimate to Midpoint of Constructian •
EFcalatiun Rale Pff Year
Years Re and Escalalyd
NIidPOinl BRd •Ct Lst
l
3
Yvan Ik and Escalated
MidPnim ud rl BEat
3
3
Page 290
%IJACOBS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ETIWANDA AVE. GRADE SEPARATION
SECTION 4 - APS BRIDGE GENERAL PLANS
ADVANCE PLANNING STUDY
Page 291
II r
W a
R
3100M
I�
VI1 ,111 a
USERNAME
ii
z) 2:74:54 PY
A
VI
LAc
m
m
Q
ro
r
m
0
c
z
Q
A
0
z +
O
O
N
at
O
O
+
"- I =
m
I�
L
m ` --
z .,
W� I
I
Iv
ro I
IM
l
I
l
I
I
I
_ I
CD
Ul
z
1
Ln IW
N � �
n
I�
v
x
ro
r
_ m
Q C:l'I
+ C:2
C-7
TL -r
���IIII1 rT�
rTi-r
pi
rTti
a rTti
r`ti-r
C's � rrti
Q rlrti`r
_ rrti
, rti`r
rTi
r titer
etihTl
r
L<
� ro
m
a z
. fl
7
07
a
v
m
z
O
Ln
m
x
x
x
x_
m
07
w
N
O
o
x
mm
LYN
---
A
0
rn
,n
of
o-
o n
z
y r-
m
G)
o
>R
M
:RRA R/W
NSF R/MI
o
rn
I�.0
a
1
a
Cl
z
m
m
Co
+-
_
o
Wa
i
'
Z
a
in
w
i
+
i
0
CI
O
O
7
O
a
n
a
n
CD
+-
a
0
a
n
m
f
N
+
a
o
7
O
n•
-
ro0
0-
ro0
>M
>Mnmzm
Io m
nza
a
In�vC 70
1-
0 g
n
7
1 +
+
rn >
a o
-
-f A
o r
+
C
m
f CO
-
rm<v
A
n�
m
r
o
m
r N!ZIH-<
r. -O-
Zma
7
3
-h
O_.
y
C
:0
m
r
vm�
3
+
0
a
0
_
N O
o
o C -_
^
o
40
-1
c
3
!M
s
-4
r-nZ
V, -Iv v
a
to
m mro�
ray
n
o
.�
a
m
m
LA
�,
m z
a mv! n
z
Q m. -r'
w
a
0
w
+
"- I =
m
I�
L
m ` --
z .,
W� I
I
Iv
ro I
IM
l
I
l
I
I
I
_ I
CD
Ul
z
1
Ln IW
N � �
n
I�
v
x
ro
r
_ m
Q C:l'I
+ C:2
C-7
TL -r
���IIII1 rT�
rTi-r
pi
rTti
a rTti
r`ti-r
C's � rrti
Q rlrti`r
_ rrti
, rti`r
rTi
r titer
etihTl
r
L<
� ro
m
a z
. fl
7
07
a
v
m
z
O
Ln
m
x
x
x
x_
m
07
w
N
O
o
mm
---
A
0
rn
,n
of
m
o n
z
y r-
m
G)
o
>R
M
o
rn
a
v
z
m
P'oED
-C,
8 OAs
-
ow
Illigg °o
I
I
I
C
r �
1 ,
� 1 V
� � O
r R° to
mm o 0
I -
I � w
d
IN
� m
e�
� I o
\ z
or Zo
tA
I n
n ;o
b
N
r m
m M I 0-0 N vi
TIT Q z
to on
o I -C ,
z ``a m m
z
Z m
r- °J
Z ><
mm Q
----------
s I p
r � -
V3 rl
r �t �
' f
� i C
3 2
a
n — z
ap
ry
x r
1 m
o Im
1.
m r
z o m n
a I x o
,T m
�
Z
�c I cl m
00
O Q -4
r C-
L
LG
n
pr►-ia C o
OP, "<Z "R
F A s mmna a Z
0 zr > 0LA
p
C LA
a 0>(M p z
m_m
$ I I
-M-(m c
z
4 ao G�,..oap a
y
�m '-'Zm $
n I m 0 &
I` 'a 'a ..
�USERNAME - )Jungd DATE PLOTTED -) 5/11/2015 TME PLOTTED +) 2:34:15 PAI
n
:080
Z
0
r p a O
am�a
N Z c m
• Co. a
rri w
m
coma
o
cF*
p o O
�px
-'-0a
_nz
�zv
R;W�_j
-x
m m
m r,
a n
v m
Z
0
ut
n
a
r
m
Ir --1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
T'' 7
1
1
1
1
1
T --y
I ---i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
T--1
i
1
v a
a V1
-4 LA
Z
vm
O
<�
z
T T I
a
Mc
n
+
r
+ z
m
�
w mc:
x
v
C
enm
61
0 z
r
o v
�
a
-'
m
o
iw
Z
z
v
�
%c)
w
--------
m
m
- —
---- ---
- I -----------------
774
Rnr
4
--------
---------------------------
------------- - - ---- -----------------------------
- - -------------------------------------
-
---- -
ZE
r
O
-IN) ad
I
O
r
�p Zp
I
m
I� r
za -ro
rn
n
Z
-4
0
mao
a
a x
C
I
aN0
Z
m
¢a v0
00
a
mw MO
a
---------------------------------
- - -
- - -- ----
- -----^-------------
- - -
----
M
m ----
-
i
- ` N00°00'00"� •�
,
` -
-57+00
E
a-
. _
---------
-------------------------
-------------------------
------------
m
m
Z
�N ,F1�
m+ v+0
N
Z,
��
x
a m
nin ma
ZZO) -40
O
GI .i7
o
I
171
r
O nni
a
rn
t
r
m-------
Q----
------
-----------------------------
--�-------------------
- - ------
_R 7F
11
l I
,�
n
Riw
Z
0
r p a O
am�a
N Z c m
• Co. a
rri w
m
coma
o
cF*
p o O
�px
-'-0a
_nz
�zv
R;W�_j
-x
m m
m r,
a n
v m
Z
0
ut
n
a
r
m
Ir --1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
T'' 7
1
1
1
1
1
T --y
I ---i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
T--1
i
1
v a
a V1
-4 LA
Z
vm
O
<�
cr
I
T T I
Mc
o
C)
on
r
+ z
m
�
w mc:
x
=i=t=�=
enm
61
0 z
r
o v
o
a
-'
m
o
iw
Z
z
v
�
%c)
Z
0
r p a O
am�a
N Z c m
• Co. a
rri w
m
coma
o
cF*
p o O
�px
-'-0a
_nz
�zv
R;W�_j
-x
m m
m r,
a n
v m
Z
0
ut
n
a
r
m
Ir --1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
T'' 7
1
1
1
1
1
T --y
I ---i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
T--1
i
1
N m
o r
m
mN
a0 O
z �0
=
N 0
O z
W
0
rm L l
1
mm
no
mac=
MID
rnrx
m
G, -4
or a
rnr o
x
fR
LA
r.
a
n
fib
v a
a V1
-4 LA
Z
� m
O
n
m p
o
C)
r
A
m
�
�T
Ln o
61
0 z
,
rn
o v
o
a
-'
L
o
iw
Z
z
jZnr1
%c)
N m
o r
m
mN
a0 O
z �0
=
N 0
O z
W
0
rm L l
1
mm
no
mac=
MID
rnrx
m
G, -4
or a
rnr o
x
fR
LA
r.
a
n
fib
O
n
o
C)
A
�
w
m
m
a
n
z
%c)
m
m
1
JACOBS
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ETIWANDA AVE. GRADE SEPARATION
SECTION 5 - PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
ADVANCE PLANNING STUDY
Page 295
s
4-
PRELIMINARY
. -L _3
G:x�:«Fnr�-d-'r41�fiY.rL'r1-'riL'r1:-1!Su�ams '
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL AND
FOUNDATION REPORT
ETIWANDA AVENUE
GRADE SEPARATION
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED FOR:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729
PREPARED BY:
Ninyo & Moore
Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants
475 Goddard, Suite 200
Irvine, California 92618
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
VSOW0ara. 5". 200 - 1roun4 Ca doma92G;8 - pt-vt- 491753 7074 - FaxN91753.707t
Cj Irwt - LMqqm - Ran"CLL.&--Tp - oa%.4gt - Sar41«'a - sw W.W.10
le tir:. - ,rIV. - - ra.,« - N--im Vawy - Demy - rs1= - trls]r-
Page 296
Gc�tt.ttruc�+?.0 BMW
it) EIrsrc:"rrk md5Uik3t.s(Of MAJIN
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
Mr. Curt Billings
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729
Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical and Foundation Report
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
Dear Mr. Billings:
In accordance with your request and authorization, we have prepared this preliminary geotechni-
cal and foundation report for the proposed Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation project located in
Rancho Cucamonga, California. This report summarizes our findings and conclusions regarding
the geologic and geotechnical site conditions and provides preliminary foundation recommenda-
tions for the proposed grade separation.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project.
Sincerely,
NINYO & MOORE
icha/y ��
Putt, C.E.G
Senior Project Geologi:
Soumitra Guha, Ph.D., G.E.
Principal Engineer
EBP/MLP SG. CAP sc
r
SEs 2ngineer urt S. E.
Princip
Distribution: (1) Addressee (via e-mail)
475 C+oadara. 5`.s£ 200 • Gyre Catlwraa 92519 • PrXXV X9492 753 7070 • Fa; (Y49) 753-7071
Srr:'nN WAPc . lask44& - kanC+ CV3t"1 b i me:xr - Sanlrarkzm • '—,Vx: 3
W k'�'J.0 • RrWU - t1rWn - P.,rsatvatey • Cma - MPasn . "—%m
Page 297
Carol A. Price, C.E.Q
Principal Geologist
r
SEs 2ngineer urt S. E.
Princip
Distribution: (1) Addressee (via e-mail)
475 C+oadara. 5`.s£ 200 • Gyre Catlwraa 92519 • PrXXV X9492 753 7070 • Fa; (Y49) 753-7071
Srr:'nN WAPc . lask44& - kanC+ CV3t"1 b i me:xr - Sanlrarkzm • '—,Vx: 3
W k'�'J.0 • RrWU - t1rWn - P.,rsatvatey • Cma - MPasn . "—%m
Page 297
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
TABLE OF CONTENTS
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
Page
1. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................1
2. SCOPE OF SERVICES............................................................................................................1
3. SITE DESCRIPTION...............................................................................................................2
4. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION..............................................................................................3
5. SUBSURFACE EVALUATION AND LABORATORY TESTING......................................4
6. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS.................................................................4
6.1. Regional Geology.........................................................................................................4
6.2. Site Geology.................................................................................................................5
6.3. Groundwater.................................................................................................................5
7. FAULTING AND SEISMICITY..............................................................................
7.1. Strong Ground Motion..................................................................................................6
7.2. Surface Fault Rupture...................................................................................................7
7.3. Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement.......................................................7
8. CONCLUSIONS......................................................................................................................8
9. PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................9
9.1.
Earthwork.....................................................................................................................9
9.1.1. Construction Plan Review and Pre -Construction Conference ..........................10
9.1.2. Site Preparation.................................................................................................10
9.1.3. Excavation and Shoring....................................................................................11
9.1.4. Fill Material.......................................................................................................1
l
9.1.5. Fill Placement and Compaction........................................................................12
9.1.6. Slope Construction............................................................................................12
9.2.
Approach Embankments.............................................................................................12
9.3.
Abutments and Retaining Walls.................................................................................13
9.4.
Deep Foundations.......................................................................................................I4
9.4.1. Preliminary Axial Pile Capacity........................................................................14
9.4.2. Preliminary Lateral Capacity...........................................................................15
9.5.
Preliminary Pavement Design....................................................................................17
9.6.
Preliminary Corrosion Analysis................................................................................18
10. ADDITIONAL FIELD WORK AND LABORATORY TESTING......................................19
11. LIMITATIONS.......................................................................................................................19
12. REFERENCES................................................................................................ ...................21
Table
Table 1 Seismic Parameters for Maximum Credible Earthquakes...........................................6
Table2 Summary of Axial Capacities ............................. „ .....................................................14
101033OLI A M= Found:tim do: #& 4 awla
Page 298
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
Table 3
Lateral Load Capacity of 48 -inch -diameter CIDH He .................................................15
Figure 1
Table 4
Lateral Pile Capacity of 60 -inch -diameter CIDH Pile...................................................15
Geology
Table 5
- Lateral Load Capacity of 72 -inch -diameter CIDH Pile.................................................16
Figure 4
Table 6
- Lateral Load Capacity 14 -inch -square Driven Pile........................................................16
Site Acceleration Response Spectrum Curve
Table 7
- Lateral Load Group Reduction Factors..........................................................................17
Table 8
Preliminary Pavement Structural Sections.....................................................................17
Figures
Figure 1
- Site Location
Figure 2 --
Geology
Figure 3
Fault Locations
Figure 4
Peak Acceleration Contour
Figure 5
Site Acceleration Response Spectrum Curve
Appendices
Appendix A - Log of Test Borings
Appendix B - Laboratory Testing
:06033001 A Prd= N;M" . a dIC
V"wdF&*QQr$
Page 299
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation December 10, 2010
Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 208033002
1. INTRODUCTION
In accordance with your request and authorization, we have prepared this preliminary geotechni-
cal and foundation report for the proposed grade separation at the existing at -grade crossing of
Etiwanda Avenue and the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and Burlington
Northern Santa Fe rail lines (BNSF) in Rancho Cucamonga, California (Figure 1). The purpose
of our geotechnical evaluation was to assess the geologic and geotechnical site conditions based
on readily available published background documents, a site reconnaissance, a preliminary sub-
surface evaluation, and limited laboratory testing to provide preliminary geotechnical
recommendations for the project, including recommended foundation type and typical founda-
tion parameters. This report presents our preliminary findings, conclusions, and
recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of the proposed project.
2. SCOPE OF SERVICES
We developed our scope of services based on our understanding of the project and California De-
partment of Transportation (Caltrans) guidelines for the preparation of geotechnical and
foundation reports. The scope of our geotechnical services included the following:
• Project coordination, scheduling of field work, and review of readily available background
materials, including geologic maps and published literature, stereoscopic aerial photographs -
in -house information, and existing plans for nearby improvements provided by the City of
Rancho Cucamonga.
• A geotechnical site reconnaissance to select and mark the proposed boring locations and to
coordinate with Underground Service Alert for underground utility location.
• Acquisition of City of Rancho Cucamonga construction permit and street and lane closure
permit, to conduct a subsurface evaluation.
• Scheduling of traffic control in accordance with the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook
(W.A.T.C.H.) manual and City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements.
• Subsurface exploration consisting of the drilling, logging, and sampling of four exploratory
hollow -stem auger borings. Two borings were drilled to approximately 71'-: feet deep near
the SCRRA railroad lines, and one boring each was drilled to approximately 51 % feet near
the intersections at Whittram Avenue and Napa Street. The borings were logged by a repre-
sentative of our firm, and bulk and relatively undisturbed soil samples were collected at
.WW= R PreL% Fa=dmm d: c j *MP S *MW R
Page 300
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation December 10, 2010
Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 208033002
selected intervals for laboratory testing. The borings were backfilled with on-site soils and
patched with quick -set concrete.
• Laboratory testing performed on representative soil samples, including in-situ moisture con-
tent and dry density, percent passing the No. 200 sieve, consolidation, direct shear, soil
corrosivity, and resistance value (R -value).
Data compilation and geotechnical analysis of the information obtained from our back-
ground review, subsurface evaluation, and laboratory testing. Our geotechnical analyses
includes the evaluation of seismic design criteria, earthwork, temporary excavation and
shoring, preliminary foundation recommendations, groundwater conditions, anticipated set-
tlement and differential settlement, contusion potential of the soils at the bridge location, and
other preliminary design criteria for the bridge foundations.
• Preparation of this Preliminary Geotechnical and Foundation Report presenting our findings,
conclusions, and preliminary foundation recommendations for the subject project.
3. SITE DESCRIPTION
The subject site is located in the San Bernardino Valley region, approximately I mile east of In-
terstate 15 and approximately I3,4 miles north of Interstate 10 (Figure 1). Etiwanda Avenue is a
two-lane, undivided, north -south arterial that crosses two sub -parallel railroad tracks including a
mainline SCRRA track and a BNSF spur track to the north of the main line. The existing Eti-
wanda Avenue/SCRRA crossing is an at -grade intersection controlled by railroad traffic signals.
The SCRRA right-of-way is approximately 100 feet wide at the east side of Etiwanda Avenue.
On the west side of Etiwanda there is an approximately 100 feet wide SCRRA right-of-way and a
100 feet wide BNSF right-of-way where the spur track angles in a northwest direction, across
Etiwanda Avenue. The property located at the southeast quadrant of the railroad crossing is cur-
rently being used by a metal recycling business. The southwest quadrant is currently a retention
pond with bordering vegetation for the adjacent power plant. The properties located at the re-
maining two quadrants are occupied by commercial buildings with associated parking and
landscaping.
The project site coordinates are approximately 34.0930 degrees north latitude and approximately
-117.5238 degrees west longitude (Google Earth, 2010). The site terrain is relatively flat to gen-
tly sloping to the south with a ground surface elevation of approximately 1,133 feet above mean
201:x, -f. h ltelim famAftian d s %/l�/O�. �p�!'�
Page 301
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation December 10, 2010
Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 208033002
sea level (MSL) near Whittram Avenue to approximately 1,110 feet near Napa Street (Google
Earth, 2010). In general, vegetation is sparse adjacent to the railroad right-of-way. Landscaping
consisting of grass, low shrubs, and a few trees were observed on the properties at the four cor-
ners of the project site. Some of the major utilities located along Etiwanda Avenue include a 144 -
inch -diameter Metropolitan Water District (MWD) main line, a 3 -inch -diameter water line, sev-
eral gas lines up to 36 -inch -diameter, a 36 -inch sewer main line, and fiber optic lines.
4. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The city of Rancho Cucamonga plans to provide uninterrupted flow of vehicular and railroad
traffic at the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and the SCRRA and BNSF railroad lines by con-
structing a grade separation between the roadway and the railroad lines. Specific details
regarding the proposed improvements are not known at this time.
Based on our discussions with the city, we understand that two grade separation alternatives are
being considered: 1) constructing an overcrossing that will route Etiwanda Avenue traffic over
the rail lines; and 2) constructing an undercrossing that will route traffic under the rail lines. We
anticipate that bridge structures would be on the order of 20 to 25 feet high and supported by
driven, pre -stressed concrete piles and. -or cast -in -drilled -hale (CIDH) reinforced concrete piles.
Due to the presence of numerous utility lines within and adjacent to Etiwanda Avenue, we antici-
pate that constructing a bridge structure supported by a deep foundation system that will transfer
foundation loads beneath the existing utilities will be appropriate.
We anticipate that development of the proposed improvements will generally involve earthwork
associated with the construction of foundations, abutment embankments, retaining or mechani-
cally stabilized earth (MSE) walls, new pavements, drainage modifications, utilities, traffic
signaling, lighting, curbs, gutters, hardscape, and landscaping.
'_61033G0_' R Ptd m Found— 4=flmv, f No o.g
Page 302
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation December 10, 2010
Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 208033002
5. SUBSURFACE EVALUATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
Our subsurface evaluation at the site was performed on October 14 and 15, 2010, and consisted
of the drilling, logging, and sampling of four small -diameter borings to depths of up to approxi-
mately 71' z feet. The exploratory borings were drilled using truck -mounted drilling equipment
utilizing hollow -stem augers. The purpose of the borings was to evaluate the subsurface soil con-
ditions in the general location of the proposed grade -crossing and to collect bulk and relatively
undisturbed soil samples for laboratory testing. Logs and the approximate locations of the ex-
ploratory borings are presented on the Log of Test Borings (LOTB) sheet located in Appendix A.
Laboratory testing was performed on representative soil samples to evaluate in-situ moisture
content and dry density, percent passing the No. 200 sieve, consolidation potential, shear
strength, soil corrosivity (soil pH, electrical resistivity, water-soluble sulfate content, and chlo-
ride content), and R -value. The results of the moisture content and dry density tests are reported
on the LOTB sheet (Appendix A). The other laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B.
6. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The following sections describe geologic, soil, and groundwater conditions at the project site
based on our review of published background documents, site reconnaissance, and subsurface
evaluation.
6.1. Regional Geology
The proposed project is located within the Chino Basin, which is part of the Peninsular
Ranges geomorphic province of southern California (Norris and Webb, 1990). The province
is generally characterized by northwest -trending mountain ranges and structural basins sepa-
rated by sub -parallel fault zones. The site is located within the central portion of the Chino
Basin, east of the San Jose Hills and south of the east -west trending San Gabriel Mountains.
The regional geologic structure is dominated by active faults and fault zones such as the
Whittier fault zone (southwest), the San Jacinto fault zone (east), and the San Andreas fault
zone (northeast). The predominant major tectonic activity associated with these and other
Page 303
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
faults within this regional tectonic framework is right -lateral, strike -slip movement (Norris
and Webb, 1990).
6.2. Site Geology
Published geologic maps indicate that the near -surface earth materials Underlying the project
area consist primarily of early Holocene -age and late Pleistocene -age young alluvial fan de-
posits generally comprised of slightly to moderately consolidated silt and sand with boulders
(Morton, 2003). The geologic map for the site is shown on Figure 2.
Our subsurface evaluation indicates that the site is underlain by fill and alluvial deposits.
Shallow fill generally consisting of very loose to loose, silty sand was encountered below
the pavement sections in the four borings. The fill extended to depths ranging from ap-
proximately 4 to 10 feet.
Below the fill, alluvial sediments primarily consisting of loose to very dense, silty sand,
clayey sand_ and sand with silt were encountered to the total depths explored up to approxi-
mately 711.: feet. More detailed descriptions are presented on the LOTB sheet in Appendix A.
6.3. Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory borings during our subsurface evalua-
tion. Based on review of relatively recently published groundwater information, the depth to
groundwater in the vicinity of the site is reported to be between 400 and 450 feet below the
ground surface (Chino Basin Watermaster, 2006). It should be noted that fluctuations in the
level of groundwater at the subject site may occur due to variations in ground surface topog-
raphy, groundwater pumping, subsurface stratification, rainfall, irrigation practices. and
other factors which may not have been evident at the time of our evaluation. Shallow
perched groundwater conditions may be present in places and seepage should be anticipated.
101033002 It prim Ffta&.
5
Page 304
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
7. FAULTING AND SEISMICITY
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
Based on our background review, review of aerial photographs, and site reconnaissance, the
ground surface in the vicinity of the subject site is not transected by known active or potentially
active faults (Figure 3). The subject site is not located within a State of California Earthquake
Fault Zone (formerly known as an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone) (Hart and Bryant, 1997).
However, the subject site is considered to be in a seismically active area, as is much of southeast
California. Table I presents a list of selected known potentially active and active faults in the
area, approximate distance to these faults, and the Maximum Credible Earthquake magnitudes
associated with each fault.
The subject site is located approximately 3.8 miles southeast of the Redhill -Etiwanda Avenue
fault, approximately 5.1 miles south of the Sierra Madre fault zone, and approximately 5.3 miles
southwest of the San Jacinto fault (San Bernardino Section). Therefore, the potential for strong
ground motion at the project site is considered significant.
Table 1— Seismic Parameters for Maximum Credible Earthquakes
7.1. Strong Ground Motion
Considering the proximity of the site to active faults capable of producing a maximum mo-
ment magnitude of 6.0 or more, the project area has a high potential for experiencing strong
20!0])002 & Prdw faun&ucadx 6 A111070f PepaM
Page 305
Fault to Site
Maximum
Fault Name
Fault I.D.
Number
Distance 2
Fault Tj pe 2
Credible
(miles)
Earthquake
AjagWtUde2
Redhill -Etiwanda Avenue
228
3.8
R
6.4
Siena Madre
298
5.1
R
6.9
San Jacinto (San Bernardino Section)
229
5.3
RLSS
7.5
San Jacinto (San Bernardino Valley)
230
9.7
RLSS
7.5
San Andreas (San Bernardino Mountains)l
315
1 12.2
RISS
7.6
Notes:
Caltrans Deterministic Fault Database, 2007b
r Caltrans ARS Online Web Tool, 2009a
RLSS - Rigbt Lateral Strike Slip
R - Reverse
7.1. Strong Ground Motion
Considering the proximity of the site to active faults capable of producing a maximum mo-
ment magnitude of 6.0 or more, the project area has a high potential for experiencing strong
20!0])002 & Prdw faun&ucadx 6 A111070f PepaM
Page 305
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
ground motion. Based on the Caltrans Acceleration Response Spectra (ARS) (Caltrans,
2009a) and the Caltrans Deterministic Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) Map (Caltrans,
2007a), the design seismic event with respect to the proposed improvements should be an
earthquake associated with the Redhill -Etiwanda Avenue fault. The Caltrans Deterministic
PGA Map (Caltrans, 2007a) indicates that the grade separation site is mapped near the 0.3g
peak bedrock acceleration contour (Figure 4). Based on our evaluation using the Caltrans
ARS (Caltrans, 2009a) and the probabilistic PGA from the United States Geological Survey
(USGS, 2010) ground motion calculator (web -based), it is our opinion that a peak ground
acceleration of 0.54g is appropriate for the site. The design ARS curve evaluated for the site
is presented on Figure 5. The design ARS curve represents an equally probable response
spectrum in horizontal directions and applies to both the deterministic and probabilistic
spectra. The design ARS curve does not include potential site response in the vertical direc-
tion.
7.2. Surface Fault Rupture
Surface fault rupture is generally caused by relative displacement across a fault during an
earthquake. o active or potentially active faults are known to underlie the project site;
therefore, the potential for surface fault rupture is considered to be low.
7.3. Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement
Liquefaction is the phenomenon in which loosely deposited granular soils with clay contents
(particles less than 0.005 millimeters [mm]) of less than 15 percent, the liquid limit less than
35 percent, and the natural moisture content higher than 90 percent of the liquid limit and
located below the water table undergo rapid loss of shear strength when subjected to strong
earthquake -induced ground shaking. Ground shaking of sufficient duration results in the loss
of grain -to -grain contact due to a rapid rise in pore water pressure, causing the soil to behave
as a fluid for a short period of time. Liquefaction is known generally to occur in saturated or
near -saturated cohesionless soils at depths shallower than 50 feet. Factors known to influ-
ence liquefaction potential include composition and thickness of soil layers, grain size,
VW)X2 R Prdm Fmmdmm i AIeyo; *UWE
Page 306
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation December 10, 2010
Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 208033002
relative density, groundwater level, degree of saturation, and both intensity and duration of
ground shaking.
Published documents indicated that groundwater at the site is generally in excess of ap-
proximately 400 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater was not encountered to a depth
of approximately 71;2 feet in our exploratory borings at the time of drilling. Due to the
depth of the groundwater, it is our opinion that liquefaction and liquefaction -related seismic
hazards (e.g., dynamic settlement, ground subsidence, and/or lateral spreading) are not de-
sign considerations for the project
8. CONCLUSIONS
Based on our review of the geologic literature, subsurface evaluation, and laboratory test results,
it is our opinion that the proposed construction is feasible from a geotechnical perspective pro-
vided that the preliminary geotechnical recommendations presented in this report are considered
in the preliminary design of the project. In general, the following preliminary conclusions were
made:
• Due to potential settlement from relatively loose surficial soils and the presence of major
utilities along the project alignment, shallow footings are generally not recommended for the
roadway bridge structure or railroad bridge (depending on the grade -crossing alternative se-
lected). Consequently, we recommend that the proposed grade separation be supported on
deep foundations, such as driven or cast -in-place piles, at the abutment and bent locations.
Earth embankments for the bridge approaches, if proposed, may be on the order of 20 feet
high. Preliminary analysis indicates that initial settlement resulting from the construction of
these embankments is approximately 3 inches. Potential impact to existing utilities located
under these embankments should be evaluated and relocation of these utilities may need to
be considered if such settlement will cause damage. Further evaluation of the potential set-
tlement in the areas of the proposed embankments should be performed for the final
geotechnical.'foundation report. If relocation of existing utilities is not an option, earth em-
bankments may not be feasible.
• Excavations should be feasible with conventional_ heavy duty earthmoving equipment in
good working condition.
• Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory borings which extended to depths of
approximately 71',� feet. However, perched groundwater conditions and/or seepage could be
201033002 n erda 4. l yinp-4,vaure
Page 307
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation December 10, 2010
Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 208033002
encountered during the excavations for deep foundations and should be anticipated. Conse-
quently, if groundwater is encountered, the contractor should take appropriate measures
during construction to reduce the potential for sloughing of the drilled holes, including the
use of casing andi or drilling mud, and placement of the concrete utilizing tremie methods
Limited consolidation testing of the subsurface soils indicates that settlement may occur un-
der saturation in some areas. We recommend that additional consolidation testing be
performed as part of the final geotechnical -foundation report.
The subject site is not located within a State of Califomia Earthquake Fault Zone (Alquist-
Priolo Special Studies Zone), and based on our review of published geologic maps, there are
no known mapped active faults underlying the site. Therefore, the potential for surface fault
rupture at the site is considered to be low.
a The potential for seismically induced liquefaction is not a design consideration.
• Site improvements should be designed for a peak ground acceleration of 0.54g.
Based on the results of our preliminary laboratory corrosion tests, the site is considered non-
corrosive per Caltrans (2003) corrosion guidelines.
9. PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS
The following preliminary geotechnical recommendations are provided for consideration in the
preliminary design of the proposed grade crossing. Detailed geotechnical design and construction
recommendations should be provided once additional details regarding the proposed design are
developed and additional subsurface exploration is performed at the project site.
9.1. Earthwork
Earthwork at the site is anticipated to consist of excavations for deep foundations, removal
and recompaction to provide suitable support for retaining wall footings, backfilling behind
retaining walls and abutments, construction of approach embankments, and subgrade prepa-
ration for pavement. Earthwork should be performed in accordance with the requirements of
applicable governing agencies and the preliminary recommendations presented in the fol-
lowing sections.
'AU 3:0= R Prdua Fuuodmi. dx
Ayf llmL ffim a
Page 308
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
9.1.1. Construction Plan Review and Pre -Construction Conference
We recommend that the construction plans be submitted to Ninyo & Moore for review
to evaluate adherence to the recommendations provided in this report and future design -
level reports. We also recommend that a pre -construction conference be held with the
owner or agency representative, geotechnical consultant, civil engineer, structural engi-
neer, and contractor in attendance.
9.1.2. Site Preparation
Prior to performing site excavations, the surface areas should be cleared of existing
vegetation, surface obstructions, and other deleterious materials. Vegetation and debris
from the clearing operations should be disposed of at a legal dumpsite away from the
project area. Obstructions that extend below finish grade, if any, should be removed and
the resulting holes filled with compacted fill.
Considering the presence of relatively loose to medium dense fill and alluvial soils at
the site, we recommend that remedial grading be performed to establish competent
foundation conditions for the approach embankments and the areas of MSE and retain-
ing walls supported by spread footings, if proposed. The non -engineered fill soils
should be removed to underlying competent native alluvial soils. For preliminary plan-
ning purposes, where alluvial soils are encountered within the upper 5 feet of the
foundation subgrade, the alluvium should be removed to a depth of 5 feet below the
planned finish grade. The depths of remedial grading should be further evaluated during
the design phase of the project.
Remedial grading should consist of 1) removal of existing fill and alluvial soils to a
depth of 5 feet or more below the planned finish grade, and 2) replacement of excavated
materials with on-site or import fill compacted to 95 percent relative compaction as
evaluated by American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D 1557. The lateral
limits of remedial grading should extend a horizontal distance beyond the embankment
or MSE or retaining wall a distance equal to or greater than the depth of excavation.
XtAhx+RPrc=FouAu6adoc ]U �/y�s7_-, �*dura
Page 309
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
Areas to receive fill or other improvements should be scarified approximately 12
inches, brought to slightly over the laboratory optimum moisture content, and com-
pacted to 95 percent relative compaction as evaluated by ASTM D 1557.
9.1.3. Excavation and Shoring
We recommend that excavations be designed and constructed in accordance with Occu-
pational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations. These regulations
provide trench sloping and shoring design parameters for excavations up to 20 feet deep
based on the soil types encountered. For planning purposes, we recommend that the fol-
lowing OSHA soil classifications be used for temporary excavations and other
purposes:
Fill and Alluvial Soil Type C
Upon making the excavations, the soil classifications and excavation performance
should be evaluated in the field by the geotechnical consultant in accordance with
OSHA regulations. Recommendations for temporary shoring can be provided, if re-
quested.
9.1.4. Fill Material
In general, the existing on-site soils should be suitable for reuse as fill. If earthen em-
bankments are proposed, import soil is anticipated for construction of approach
embankments at the abutments. Import fill should consist of clean, granular material
that meets Caltrans Standard Specifications for structure backfill (Caltrans, 2006e). Soil
should be tested for corrosive properties prior to importation. We recommend that im-
ported materials be non -corrosive per Caltrans (2003) corrosion guidelines. It should be
understood that the impact of corrosive soil on the work can vary significantly due to
the variables involved in manufacturing of concrete during construction. Materials for
use as fill should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant prior to importing. The
contractor should be responsible for the uniformity of import material brought to the
site.
=013002 R ftd= Fomd.4= d=
HU
4wro- "are
Page 310
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
On-site and import fill material should be free of trash, debris, or other deleterious ma-
terial. Material for use as fill should not contain rocks or lumps larger than
approximately 3 inches in size.
9.1.5. Fill Placement and Compaction
Fill material should be placed and compacted in accordance with project specifications.
Fill should be tested for specified compaction by the geotechnical consultant and Cal-
trans guidelines and sound construction practice. Fill should be compacted to a relative
compaction of 95 percent in accordance with ASTM test method D 1557. Aggregate
base for the construction of the proposed pavement sections should also be compacted
to a relative compaction of 95 percent. Fill should be tested for specified compaction by
the geotechnical consultant. The lift thickness for fill soils will vary depending on the
type of compaction equipment used but should generally be placed in lifts not exceed-
ing 8 inches in loose thickness.
9.1.6. Slope Construction
We recommend that slopes for the project be constructed at inclinations no steeper than
2:1 (horizontal to vertical). The project plans and specifications should contain design
features to reduce the potential for erosion of the on-site soils both during and after con-
struction. Fill slopes should be constructed in a manner (e.g., overfilling and cutting to
grade) such that the recommended degree of compaction is achieved to the finished
slope face. Appropriate drainage devices should be provided to direct surface runoff
away from slope faces.
9.2. Approach Embankments
Embankment slopes, if proposed, should be stable against both deep-seated and surficial
failures at an inclination of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. To reduce the potential for
erosion, we recommend that slopes be planted with drought -tolerant vegetation as soon as
practicable after grading. Abutment slopes beneath the bridges may be paved to reduce the
potential for erosion.
ING33oa: R Prchm Fmmdm6w da
1?
Page 311
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
Based on our evaluation, settlement of granular embankment fill material under self weight
or the settlement of the recompacted foundation soils will be approximately 3 inches for an
embankment height of 20 feet. The majority of fill settlement will take place relatively
quickly during construction. Settlement monitoring of approach embankments should be
considered.
9.3. Abutments and Retaining Walls
Abutments and retaining walls may be designed in accordance with the Caltrans Standard
Plans (Caltrans, 2006d). We recommend that unrestrained (yielding) cantilever retaining
walls be designed in accordance with standard Caltrans Type 1, or equivalent, walls. In gen-
eral, based on our preliminary analysis, the subgrade soils should provide sufficient bearing
capacity to support these retaining walls. In areas where Ioose materials are encountered,
overexcavation and recompaction of the underlying soils may be appropriate. Further sub-
surface evaluation performed as part of the final geotechnical.'foundation report should
evaluate this issue.
Retaining walls should have non -expansive backfill and free -draining conditions. Measures
should be taken to reduce moisture build-up behind abutment walls. Abutment wall backfill
should meet the specifications for structure backfill (Caltrans, 2006e) for free -draining con-
ditions. Abutment walls should include free -draining backfill materials and perforated drains
as designed by the project civil engineer and should be constructed in accordance with
Bridge Detail 3-5 on Plan 130-3 of the Standard Plans (Caltrans, 2006d).
For dynamic analyses, an effective soil passive lateral resistance of 5 kips per square foot
(ksf) may be used for the abutment wall with a height of 51•i feet or higher. For abutment
walls with other heights, the passive lateral resistance may be calculated proportionally us-
ing the formula in accordance with the Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria (Caltrans, 2006c): '
Passive Lateral Resistance -.. (hbw, or hi,. 5.5) x 5 ksf
where, hbw abutment backwall height, hi„ = abutment diaphragm height.
?_d]] We -it PMim iowda;= d: 13 #/Algae,.wre
Page 312
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
9.4. Deep Foundations
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
We recommend that the bridge structure foundations consist of either CIDH reinforced -
concrete pile foundations or driven, pre -stressed, concrete pile foundations, or a combination
of both. Due to potential settlement from relatively loose surficial soils and the presence of
major utilities at the site, shallow footings are not recommended for the main structure. We
have assumed that the type of foundations at each bent, abutment, or wingwall location will
depend on the actual bridge design, loading demand, and utility obstruction constraints.
9.4.1. Preliminary Axial Pile Capacity
Preliminary axial pile capacities were analyzed using the SHAFT 5.0 computer program
(Ensoft, 2001) for CIDH piles and FHWA Driven 1.2 computer program (Blue -Six
Software, 2001) for driven piles. Soil strength parameters were estimated from our
sampler blow counts. Pile capacities were evaluated for 48 -inch, 60 -inch, and 72 -inch -
diameter, CIDH piles with pile lengths of 40 feet, 50 feet, and 50 feet, respectively. Pile
capacities were also evaluated for Caltrans -standard 100 -ton, 14 -inch -square driven
concrete piles with a pile length of 50 feet. Axial capacities were based on side friction
resistance; end bearing was not included in our analysis. Pile capacities were analyzed
with the pile cap at the ground surface. For preliminary planning purposes, the axial ca-
pacities for typical CIDH and driven piles are summarized in Table 2 below.
Table 2 — Summary of Axial Capacities
Pile Typdsize
Design
Length
(feet)
Design
Load
(bps)
Nominal Resistance
(kips)
Compression Tension
48 inches CIDH
40
240
480 192
60 inches CIDH
1 50
400
800 320
72 inches CIDH
50
470
940 376
14 inches Driven
1 50
200
400 160
Mote:
A factor of safety of 2.0 vias used in obtaining the design load from nominal resistance in compres-
sion.
1.4
*Fro, *ParB
Page 313
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
9.4.2. Preliminary Lateral Capacity
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
Lateral pile capacities were analyzed using the computer program LPILE Plus, Version
5.OM (Ensok 2010). Pile capacities were evaluated for 48 -inch, 60 -inch, and 72 -inch -
diameter CIDH piles with pile lengths of 40 feet, 50 feet, and 50 feet, respectively. Pile
capacities were also evaluated for Caltrans -standard 100 -ton, 14 -inch -square driven
concrete piles with a pile length of 50 feet. For preliminary planning purposes, results of
our analysis for free -head conditions are summarized in the following tables.
Table 3 - Lateral Load Capacity of 48 -inch -diameter CIDH Pile
Allowable Deflection (inches)
Free -Head Condition
0.25 0.50 1.00
Lateral Capacity, kis
58.7
86.8
145.4
Maximum Positive Moment, feet -kis
520.8
724.3
1,171.5
Maximum Negative Moment, feet -kis
1.8
3.0
5.8
Depth to Maximum Positive Moment, feet*
12.0
12.0
1 12.0
Depth to Maximum Negative Moment, feet*
36.0
36.0
35.5
Depth to First Point of Zero Deflection, feet*
20.0
20.0
20.5
Note:
*De th is measured from the bottom of pile cap (top of thepile).
of thepile).
Table 4 - Lateral Pile Capacity of 60 -inch -diameter CMIR Pile
Allowable Deflection (inches)
Free -Head Condition
0.25 0.50 1.00
Lateral Capacity, kis
104.0
148.1
238.9
Maximum Positive Moment, feet -kis
1,056.3
1,448.6
2,289,9
Maximtun Negative Moment, feet -kis
12.3
18.0
29.9
Depth to Maximum Positive Moment, feet*
13.5
13.5-T-14.0
Depth to Maximum Negative Moment, feet*
43.0
43.0
43.0
Depth to First Paint of Zero Deflection, feet*
22.5
22.5
23.5
Note:
*Depth is measured from the bottom of Eile cap (top
of thepile).
2=1]XII RhrimFcu I -.a6 -
is
.A,rhYWvv-*pdr@
Page 314
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
Table 5 - Lateral Load Capacity of 72 -inch -diameter CIDH Pile
Allowable Deflection (inches)
Free -Head Condition
0.25 USO 1.00
Lateral Ca aci kis
158.7
223.7
354.8
Maximum Positive Moment, feet -!cis
1,756.3
2.432.8
3,858.5
Maximum Negative Moment, feet -kis
0.0
0.0
0.0
DS2th to Maximum Positive Moment, feet*
15.0
15.0
1 16.0
Depth to Maximum Negative Moment, feet*
0.0
0.0
1 0.0
Depth to First Point of Zero Deflection, feet*
25.5
24.5
25.5
Note:
_*Depth is measured from the bottom of pile cap (top of the
pile).
Note:
*Depth is measured from the bottom of Eile cap (top
of the pile).
Table 6 - Lateral Load Capacity 14 -inch -square Driven Pile
Allowable Deflection (inches)
0.25
Free -Head Condition
0.50
1.00
Lateral Capacity, kis
4.7
6.7
9.8
Maximum Positive Moment, feel -kis
17.5
27.2
47.0
Maximum Ne alive Moment, feet -kis
0.6
1.0
2.4
Depth to Maximum Positive Moment, feet*
5.5
5.0
5.5
Depth to Maximum Negative Moment, feet*
17.0
16.5
16.0
Depth to First Point of Zero Deflection, feet*
10.5
9.5
9.5
Note:
*Depth is measured from the bottom of Eile cap (top
of the pile).
Maximum moments generated by the indicated deflections are based on geotechnical
considerations. We recommend that the maximum moment capacities of the piles be
evaluated by the structural engineer. Lateral capacities for pile lengths and embedment
conditions that are different from those assumed in our analyses may be different than
those indicated.
For lateral loading, piles in a group may be considered to act individually when the cen-
ter -to -center spacing is more than 3D (where D is the diameter of the pile) in the
direction normal to loading and more than 8D in the direction parallel to loading. The
following table presents the lateral load reduction factors to be applied for various pile
spacing for in-line loading.
:48633=1 It hVI a FaaadAcm doc
]6
Page 315
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
Table 7 Lateral Load Grouo Reduction Factors
Center -to -Center Pile
Spacing for In -Line Loading
Group Efficiency (Ratio of Lateral
Resistance of PIle In a
Group to Single Pile)
813
1.00
713
0.94
6D
0.88
5D
0,82
4D
0.76
3D
0.70
9.5. Preliminary Pavement Design
Based on communication with the City of Rancho Cucamonga, we understand the traffic in-
dex (TI) for Etiwanda Avenue is 9. Based on our limited laboratory testing, R -values of 62
and 81 were obtained from the pavement subgrade soils. A design R -value of 60 was used in
our analysis. We recommend that additional R -value testing be performed during the subse-
quent evaluation to prepare the final geotechnicaltfoundation report. Preliminary flexible
and rigid pavement design sections were evaluated in accordance with the California De-
partment of Transportation Highway Design Manual (2006f). The preliminary pavement
structural sections are summarized in the table below.
Table 8 — Preliminary Pavement Structural Sections
In order to provide suitable support for the proposed pavement areas, we recommend that
the subgrade soils be scarified approximately 12 inches, moisture conditioned to slightly
±nsosnooa It P3cft FouaUift d= 17 40W-fMatre
Page 316
Recommended Pavement
Sections
Traffic
Design
Flexible
Pavement
Rigid Pavement
Index
R value
AC/CL2AB
Full Depth AC
JPCP/AB
JPCP/LCB
(inches)
(inches)
(inches)
(Inches)
9
1 60
5.0 5.0
7.0
10.017.0
8.5'5.0
Notes:
AC Asphalt Concrete Type A
CL2AB Class II Aggregate Base
LCB Lean Concrete Base
JPCP - Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement
In order to provide suitable support for the proposed pavement areas, we recommend that
the subgrade soils be scarified approximately 12 inches, moisture conditioned to slightly
±nsosnooa It P3cft FouaUift d= 17 40W-fMatre
Page 316
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation
Rancho Cucamonga, California
December 10, 2010
Project No. 208033002
over optimum moisture content, and compacted to a relative compaction of 95 percent as
evaluated by ASTM 1557. Crushed aggregate base should conform to Section 26 of Caltrans
Standard Specifications (2006e). The crushed aggregate base material should be placed at a
relative compaction of 95 percent in accordance with ASTM D 1557. Asphalt concrete and
Portland cement concrete should conform to the Caltrans Standard Specifications (2006e).
We recommend that the paving operations be observed and tested by Ninyo & Moore.
9.6. Preliminary Carrosian Analysis
The corrosion potential of the on-site soil was evaluated for its effect on steel and concrete
structural members. The corrosion potential was evaluated using the results of limited labo-
ratory tests on samples obtained during the subsurface evaluation. Laboratory testing was
performed on representative soil samples to evaluate pH, minimum electrical resistivity, and
chloride and soluble sulfate content. The pH and minimum electrical resistivity tests were
performed in accordance with California Test (CT) 643, and sulfate and chloride tests were
performed in accordance with CT 417 and 422, respectively.
Test results indicate that the pH of the soils ranged from approximately 7.2 to 7.3, minimum
electrical resistivity ranged from approximately 2,010 to 6,300 ohm -cm, chloride contents
ranged from approximately 90 to 100 parts per million (ppm), and soluble sulfate contents
ranged from approximately 70 to 320 ppm. In accordance with Caltrans Corrosion Guide-
lines (2003) and Memo 3.1 of the Bridge Memo To Designers (Caltrans, 2005), a corrosive
site is an area where the soil contains more than 500 ppm of chlorides, more than 2,000 ppm
of sulfates, has a pH of less than 5.5, or an electrical resistivity of less than 1,000 ohm -cm.
Therefore, the project site is considered to be non -corrosive per Caltrans guidelines. Type II
cement may be used with a water -cement ratio of 0.50 or less for structures that will be in
contact with site soils.
201011.' '= R As!®F-undz= i _
18
'Y"""�D`'Y'"""' 0
Page 317
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation December 10, 2010
Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 208033002
10. ADDITIONAL FIELD WORK AND LABORATORY TESTING
This report is preliminary in nature and is intended for preliminary planning and design. FoIlow-
ing further development of the proposed grade separation design, we recommend that additional
subsurface evaluation be performed at the Iocations of the proposed abutments, bents, embank-
ments, and retaining walls. In addition, additional laboratory testing to further evaluate the soil
characteristics, consolidation potential, shear strength, R -value, and corrosivity should also be
performed.
11. LIMITATIONS
The field evaluation, Iaboratory testing, and geotechnical analyses presented in this preliminary
report have been conducted in general accordance with current practice and the standard of care
exercised by geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in the project area. Our conclu-
sions and recommendations are based on our review of readily available background materials,
including preliminary assessment of the observed conditions, proposed improvements, and field
evaluation in general accordance with Caltrans guidelines. No warranty, expressed or implied, is
made regarding the conclusions, recommendations, and opinions presented in this report. There
is no evaluation detailed enough to reveal every subsurface condition. Variations may exist and
conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction. Un-
certainties relative to subsurface conditions can be reduced through additional subsurface
exploration. Additional subsurface evaluation will be performed upon request. Please also note
that our evaluation was limited to assessment of the geotechnical aspects of the project, and did
not include evaluation of structural issues, environmental concerns, or the presence of hazardous
materials.
This document is intended to be used only in its entirety. No portion of the document, by itself, is
designed to completely represent any aspect of the project described herein. Ninyo & Moore
should be contacted if the reader requires additional information or has questions regarding the
content, interpretations presented, or completeness of this document.
:!]OG_ x Prchm E:: Ka 19 *05UD` f 8Ore
Page 318
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation December 10, 2010
Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 208033002
This report is intended for design purposes only. It does not provide sufficient data to prepare an
accurate bid by contractors. It is suggested that the bidders and their geotechnical consultant per-
form an independent evaluation of the subsurface conditions in the project areas. The
independent evaluations may include, but not be limited to, review of other geotechnical reports
prepared for the adjacent areas, site reconnaissance, and additional exploration and laboratory
testing.
Our conclusions, recommendations, and opinions are based on an analysis of the observed site
conditions. If geotechnical conditions different from those described in this report are encoun-
tered, our office should be notified, and additional recommendations, if warranted, will be
provided upon request. It should be understood that the conditions of a site could change with
time as a result of natural processes or the activities of man at the subject site or nearby sites. In
addition, changes to the applicable laws, regulations, codes, and standards of practice may occur
due to government action or the broadening of knowledge. The findings of this report may, there-
fore, be invalidated over time, in part or in whole, by changes over which Ninyo & Moore has no
control.
This report is intended exclusively for use by the client. Any use or reuse of the findings, conclu-
sions, and or recommendations of this report by parties other than the client is undertaken at said
parties' sole risk.
MaMI Its=fm&. *W7ya-*QW%
Page 319
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation December 10, 2010
Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 208033002
12. REFERENCES
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 1996, Standard Specifica-
tions for Highway Bridges.
American Concrete Institute, 2005, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete
(ACI 318-05) and Commentary (ACI 318R-05).
Blue -Six Software, 2001, FHWA Driven 1.2, A computer program to evaluate driven piles.
Boore, D.M., Joyner, W.B., and Fumal, T.E., 1997, Equations for Estimating Horizontal Re-
sponse Spectra and Peak Acceleration from Western North American Earthquakes: A
Summary of Recent Work, Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 68, No. 1, pp. 128-153.
Bortugno, E.J., and Spittler, T.G., 1986, Geologic Map of the San Bernardino Quadrangle, Cali-
fornia: United States Geologic Survey, Scale 1:250,000.
Bowles, J.E., 1988, Foundation Analysis and Design, Fourth Edition: McGraw-Hill Book Com-
Pany.
California Building Standards Commission, 2007, California Building Code (CBC), Title 24,
Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1998, Maps of Known
Active Fault Near -Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada: Interna-
tional Conference of Building Officials, dated February.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 2000, Guidelines for
Evaluating the Hazard of Surface Fault Rupture: Division of Mines and Geology Note 49.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2003b, Caltrans Supplement to FHWA Cul-
vert Repair Practices Manual, Design Information Bulletin 83-01, dated July 19.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2005, Bridge Memo to Designers Manual,
dated October 31.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2006a, Guidelines for Structures Foundation
Reports, Version 2.0, dated March.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2006b, Bridge Design Specifications Manual,
dated January 24,
California Departrnent of Transportation (Caltrans), 2006c, Seismic Design Criteria, Version 1.4,
dated June.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2006d, Standard Plans, dated July.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2006e, Standard Specifications, dated April.
laic; s_ o-,RPMmFoundahaa.:i 9I 1MP' d0re
Page 320
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation December 10, 2010
Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 208033002
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2006f, Highway Design Manual, updated
September 1.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2006g, Special Provisions.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2006h, Interim Highway Design Manual
Guidance, Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Structural Section Design Table 603.2,
Website: http:.'-wwwdot.ca.gov/hq-oppdimetrieinterim-hwy-design-guidance.htrn, ac-
cessed September 14.California Department of Transportation, 2009, Foundation Report
Preparation for Bridge Foundations, dated December.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2006i, Guidelines for Preparing Geotechnical
Design Reports, dated December.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2007x, Detenninistic PGA Map, dated Septem-
ber.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2007b, Deterministic Fault Database, undated.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2009a, ARS Online web tool, accessed Novem-
ber 29, 2010.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2009b, Seismic Design Criteria, Appendix B,
dated September.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2009c, Foundation Report Preparation for
Bridge Foundations, dated December.
California Department of Transportation, 2003x, Corrosion Guidelines, Version I.0, Division of
Engineering Services, Materials Engineering and Testing Services, Corrosion Technology
Branch, dated September.
California Geological Survey (CGS), 1998, Maps of Known Active Fault Near -Source Zones in Cali-
fornia and Adjacent Portions of Nevada: International Conference of Building Officials.
California Geological Survey (CGS), 2003, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment (PSHA)
Maps, World Wide Web, http: www.consmca.gov-cgs.-rghm/psha/index.htm.
California Geological Survey (CGS), 2008, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic
Hazards in California, CGS Special Publication 1 I la.
Cao, T., Bryant, W. A., Rowshandel, B., Branum, D., and Willis, C. J., 2003, The Re%ised 2002
California Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Maps: California Geological Survey: dated June.
Chino Basin Waterrnaster, 2006, Depth to Groundwater Contours, Chino Basin, Wildermuth En-
vironmental, Inc., dated Fall.
Coduto, D.P., 2001, Foundation Design: Principles and Practices, Second Edition, Prentice Hall.
County of San Bernardino, 2007, General Plan, prepared by URS, effective April 27.
•.'APM, Fmmdmlondoc 77 f%yon oore
Page 321
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation December 10, 2010
Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 208033002
ENSOFT, Inc., 2001, SHAFT (ver 5.0): A Program for the Study of Drilled Shafts Under Axial
Loads.
ENSOFT, Inc., 2010, LPILE Plus (ver 5.OM): A Program for the Analysis of Piles and Drilled
Shafts Under Lateral Loads.
Fife, D.L., D.A. Rodgers, CxW. Chase, R.H. Chapman, and E.C. Sprotte, 1976, Geologic Hazards
in Southwestern San Bernardino County, California: California Division of Mines and
Geology Special Report I I3.Google Earth, 2010, accessed on August 6.
Google Earth, 2010, accessed on December 1.
Hart, E.W., and Bryant, W.A., 1997, Fault -Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zone Maps: California De-
partment of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42, with
Supplements 1 and 2 added in 1999.
Jennings, C.W., and Bryant, W.A., 2010, Fault Activity Map: California Geological Survey, Cali-
fornia Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 6, Scale 1:750,000.
Martin, G.R., and Lew, M., 1999, Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Spe-
cial Publication 117 Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in
California: dated March.
Morton, D.M., 2003, Preliminary Geologic Map of the San Bernardino 30' x 60' Quadrangle,
San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California, Version 1.0, Open File Report (OFR)
03-418, United States Geological Survey.
Mualchin, L., 1996a, California Seismic Hazard Detail Index Map 1996: Scale l inch = 50 km,
dated July, revised March 15, 2006.
Mualchin, L., 1996b, A Technical Report to Accompany the Caltrans California Seismic Hazard
Map 1996 (based on maximum credible earthquakes): California Department of Trans-
portation Engineering Service Center, Office of Earthquake Engineering, Sacramento,
California, dated July (Rev. 1).
Mualchin, L., and Jones, A.L., 1992, Peak Acceleration from Maximum Credible Earthquakes in
California (Rock and Stiff -Soil Sites): California Division of Mines and Geology Open
File Report 92-1.
Ninyo & Moore, 2010, Proposal for Geotechnical Consulting Services, Etiwanda Grade Separa-
tion Project, Rancho Cucamonga, California, Project No. 207213001V, dated September
10.
Norris, R. M., and Webb, R.W., 1990, Geology of California, Second Edition: John Wiley &
Sons.
Peterson, M.D., Bryant, W.A., Cramer, C.H., Cao, T., Reichle, M.S., 1996, Probabilistic Seismic
Hazard Assessment for the State of California: California Department of Conservation
2010330W R Prdm Fw dw. d. 23 M/ o- mrs
Page 322
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation December 10, 2010
Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 208033002
Division of Mines and Geology Open File Report 96-08, and United States Department
of the Interior United States Geological Survey Open File Report 96-706.
Sadigh, K., Chang, C.Y., Egan, J.A., Makdisi, F., and Youngs, R.R., 1997, Attenuation Relations
for Shallow Crustal Earthquakes Based on California Strong Motion Data, Seismological
Research Letters, Volume 68, Number 1, dated January/February.
United States Geological Survey, 1966 (Photorevised 1981), Guasti, California Quadrangle Map,
7.5 Minute Series: Scale 1:24,000.
United States Geological Survey, 2010, Earthquake Ground Motion Parameter Java Application,
Java Ground Motion Parameter Calculator - Version 5.0.9a;
http:. earthquake.usgs.gov. researchthazmapsAesign/.
Ziony, J.L., and Yerkes, R.F, 1985, Evaluating Earthquake and Surface -Faulting Potential, in Zi-
ony, J.I., (ed.), Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angeles Region, An Earth -
Science Perspective: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 1360.
AERLAL PHOTOGRAPHS
Source Date Flight Numbers Scale
USDA 2-2-53 AXL-35K 109 to 111 1:20,000
10603300,RPre!=Poudufoad. 4 J A7yo- nose
Page 323
ar--
~
I :S��It
r`�'+�ic�fy���.r� l� I f'�'yi• � ''.,.iwy�
�T��lo�ow- � ;•
R-j
'14'Y_�'ry�
1f'
It �sM 0'-#� r ?V V., - F ppp
1. Y.f" c F qM^S3
��
i -" umu•, Y:1ilt �Y stFltti �;,'IIM�S�tx 6a '
Irl �{ IFFL nrn� VnsE �7 Ut+Sb� C "
10 RwIE
'� Y. � �' � �• Y.1 TS.•.,VS
.i013PNt ►1 �.� 1
f!0l 6Y3t130R N�
SITE a, ' s 1 11
1
L
u.,JI
f6
Ly
{
I
a
t.1.7
.1,739
... ..
ACA
fJ£!AY
K
I '
r/I K• DIY. IH0
J
1xlC.•!ll
BIN 7 }
S
Df K
rr
!*
F 1
I�
}7 IhC-1145 GU O-7 FOR 5A'1 A':Z R :Z4= -'D= COUN'., �.�_ �,.�_ arae ox---�1aH'
VALLEY BLVD
r4
3
y.
ar--
~
I :S��It
r`�'+�ic�fy���.r� l� I f'�'yi• � ''.,.iwy�
�T��lo�ow- � ;•
R-j
'14'Y_�'ry�
1f'
It �sM 0'-#� r ?V V., - F ppp
1. Y.f" c F qM^S3
��
i -" umu•, Y:1ilt �Y stFltti �;,'IIM�S�tx 6a '
Irl �{ IFFL nrn� VnsE �7 Ut+Sb� C "
10 RwIE
'� Y. � �' � �• Y.1 TS.•.,VS
.i013PNt ►1 �.� 1
f!0l 6Y3t130R N�
SITE a, ' s 1 11
1
L
u.,JI
f6
1
{
I
a
.1,739
... ..
IBI1f
I '
r/I K• DIY. IH0
Av 1
BIN 7 }
3
I�
}7 IhC-1145 GU O-7 FOR 5A'1 A':Z R :Z4= -'D= COUN'., �.�_ �,.�_ arae ox---�1aH'
VALLEY BLVD
r4
3
l#
vx mum
1
I' I!
Y
:C3T ►ru
=
cWtslO
a.+ta
.Git..lfii
ba t y.�Pa. i
.Yfi R[M1 r
LCYY
ar--
~
I :S��It
r`�'+�ic�fy���.r� l� I f'�'yi• � ''.,.iwy�
�T��lo�ow- � ;•
R-j
'14'Y_�'ry�
1f'
It �sM 0'-#� r ?V V., - F ppp
1. Y.f" c F qM^S3
��
i -" umu•, Y:1ilt �Y stFltti �;,'IIM�S�tx 6a '
Irl �{ IFFL nrn� VnsE �7 Ut+Sb� C "
10 RwIE
'� Y. � �' � �• Y.1 TS.•.,VS
.i013PNt ►1 �.� 1
f!0l 6Y3t130R N�
SITE a, ' s 1 11
APPROOMATE SCALE IN FEET
0 2400 4800
!+' M ALL 0 MOMS OilEC11pN3
AM LOCA-.GNS ARE +P API -MUM -E.
wp : RW LWt* RLW-6t9
PROJECT NO, DATE
W 208033002 12110 +
qN
SITE LOCATION FIGURE
ETIWANDA AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION
RANCHO CUCAMONCAI CALIFORNIA
Page 324
1
L
u.,JI
f6
1
{
I
a
.
FO
IBI1f
I '
r/I K• DIY. IH0
Av 1
3
I�
}7 IhC-1145 GU O-7 FOR 5A'1 A':Z R :Z4= -'D= COUN'., �.�_ �,.�_ arae ox---�1aH'
VALLEY BLVD
r4
3
APPROOMATE SCALE IN FEET
0 2400 4800
!+' M ALL 0 MOMS OilEC11pN3
AM LOCA-.GNS ARE +P API -MUM -E.
wp : RW LWt* RLW-6t9
PROJECT NO, DATE
W 208033002 12110 +
qN
SITE LOCATION FIGURE
ETIWANDA AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION
RANCHO CUCAMONCAI CALIFORNIA
Page 324
L
I
a
.
FO
;,ZFERrNCE
}7 IhC-1145 GU O-7 FOR 5A'1 A':Z R :Z4= -'D= COUN'., �.�_ �,.�_ arae ox---�1aH'
APPROOMATE SCALE IN FEET
0 2400 4800
!+' M ALL 0 MOMS OilEC11pN3
AM LOCA-.GNS ARE +P API -MUM -E.
wp : RW LWt* RLW-6t9
PROJECT NO, DATE
W 208033002 12110 +
qN
SITE LOCATION FIGURE
ETIWANDA AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION
RANCHO CUCAMONCAI CALIFORNIA
Page 324
K"
31
AW
f 5 .6 J'l 4 T`tir{1 QA
02 cift
\ 11 v
QA
+rte
OWN
OA
CIA
+, ah
! WA .1
REFERENCE- I.10RTON. OM 4^10 M ER F V.. , 2=03 u -.O -C' C YAP fi�, - . SAN EcRNARA NO ZXYCO' C4 A]P.AN'F.C. CA iF-DA a
LEGEND
� VERY YOUNG ALLUVIAL -FAN DEPOSITS
L.J (LATE HOLOCENE)
a t VERY YOUNG ALLUWAL-FAN DEPOSITS
UNIT 2
SCALE IN FEET -I YOUNG ALLUVIAL -FAN DEPOSITS
a1I UNIT 1
0 10,000 20,000 0 YOUNG EOUAN DEPOSITS
Nate AM MMEN31ON3. DAF-VON3 AND L=ATK N3 AAE APPFKX ASE
#1W7yo�/�aoe GEOLOGY _�. FIGURE
PROJECT NO. DATEti ETIWANDA AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION A
208033002 1 12110 I RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Page 325
Page 326
Etiwanda Avenue Grade Separation June 2015
Attachment G
Page 327
Highway User Involved
HIGHWAY -RAIL GRADE CROSSING
Rail Equipment Invoked
Crossing 2. Cantilever FLS 5. Hwy. traffic signals B. Stop signs 11. Other (specify)
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ACCIDENTIINCIDENT REPORT
17. Equipment 4. Cars) (moving) e. Other (specHy)
Code
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION (FRA)
Code(s) 1 01 1 1 1
OMB
Aaaroval No. 2130.0500
Name Of
A
Alahabedc Code
RR Acddentlinddent No
1. Reporting Railroad
Southern California Regional Rail Authority
1e, SCAX
113. 98121725
2. Other Railroad Involved in Train AccidenVlncldent
2a.
2b.
3, Railroad Responsible for Trade Maintenance
Southern California Regional Rail Authority
3e- SCAX
3d• 98121725
4. U.S. DOT-AAR Grade Crossing ID No
026151 P
5. Date of AceidenVinddent 12/17/98
6. Time of AcddenVlncidenl 07;00 PM
7. Nearest Railroad Stadon
8. Division
9 County
20b. Was there a hazardous materials release by
10. State Code
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
SYSTEM
SAN BERNARDINO
Abbr. 06 1 CA
11 -City (Hinacity) RANCHO CALIFORNIA::] 12.HighwavName orNa. F.TtWANnA AVV
4
MJ 13uhhe MP t.
Highway User Involved
33 Signaled Crossing
Rail Equipment Invoked
Crossing 2. Cantilever FLS 5. Hwy. traffic signals B. Stop signs 11. Other (specify)
13, Type C. Truck-tra8er F. Bus J. Other Motor Vehicle
Code
17. Equipment 4. Cars) (moving) e. Other (specHy)
Code
A. Auto D. Pick-up truck G. School Bus K. Pedestrian
Code(s) 1 01 1 1 1
1. Train (units pulling) 5. Car s (standing) A. Train pulling- RCL
2. Train (units pushing) e. Light loco(s) (moving) B. Train pushing- RCL
35. Location of Warning Code
B. Truck E. Van H. Motorcycle M. Other (specify)
A
3. Train(standing) 7. Light locos standing C. Train standing- RCL
1
14. Vehicle Speed 115 Direction (gaagraphkal)
Code
18. Posidon of Car Unit In Train
(est. mph at impact) 0 1. North 2. South 3 East 4, West
2
1
38. Drivees
16. Posidon 1. Stalled on crossing 3. Moving over crossing
Code
19. Circumstance 1. Rai) equipment struck highway user
Code
2. Stopped on Crossing 4.Trapped
2
2 Raii equipment struck by highway user
35
20a. Was the highway user and/or rail equipment involved
Code
20b. Was there a hazardous materials release by
Code
In the impact transporting hazardous materials?
q Old not stop 4
42, Driver Passed Standing Code
1. Highway User 2 Rail Equipment 3. Both 4. Neither
4
1. Highway User 2. Rail Equipment 3. Both 4. Neither
1, Yes 2. No 3. Unknown 2
cmc, quake utie name anu quanucy or me nazaraous matenal released, n any
21. Temperature 22. Visibi:ity (single entry) Code 23. Weather {single entry) Code
(specify Hminus) 55 eF 1. Dawn 2. Day 3 Dusk 4. Dark 1 4 1. Clear 2. Cloudy 3 Raln 4. Fog 5. Sleet S. Snow 1
24. Type of Equipment A Spec, MoW Equip 25, Track Type Used by Rall Code 26. Track Number or Name
Consist 1. Freight train 4. Work train 7. YardlSwitching Equipment Involved
(single entry) 2. Passenger train 5. Single car 8. Light loca(s) Code SINGLE MAIN
3. Commuter train 6 Cut of cars 9. Mainlinspect. car 1 3 1. Main 2. Yard 3. Siding 4. Industry I 1 TRACK
27. FRA Track 28. Number of 130. Consisl Speed (Recorded Kavailable) Cade 31. Time Table Direction Code
Class Locomotive Cars R, Recorded
4 Units J29.Numberof
6 E. Estimated 60 mph I E 1. North 2. South 3. East 4. West I 4
JZ. i ype ar 1. Liates 4 wog wags 7_ Crossbudks 10. Flagged by crew
33 Signaled Crossing
34. Whistle Ban Code
Crossing 2. Cantilever FLS 5. Hwy. traffic signals B. Stop signs 11. Other (specify)
Warning
1. Yes
Warning 3. Standard FLS 6. Audible 9. Watchman 12. None
20 see Warn min (1);
2. No
3, Unknown 2
Code(s) 1 01 1 1 1
1 1
35. Location of Warning Code
36. Crossing Warning Interconnected Code
37. Crossing Illuminated by Street Cade
1. Both Sides
with Highway Signals
Lights or Special Lights
2. Side of Vehicle Approach 1
1
1, Yes 2. No 3. Unknown
1. Yes 2. No 3, Unknown 2
38. Drivees
9. Driver's Code
40. Driver Drove Behind or In Front of Train Code
41. Driver Code
Age
Gander
and Struck or was Strunk by Second Train
1. Drove around or thru the gate 4. Stopped on crossing
35
1. Male 2
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown 2
1
2. Stopped and then proceeded 5. Other {specify)
2. Fen
q Old not stop 4
42, Driver Passed Standing Code
43. View of Track Obscured by (primary obshuctJon) Cade
Highway Vehicle
1. Permanent Structure 3. Passing Train S. Vegetation 7. Other (specify)
1, Yes 2. No 3. Unknown 2
2. Standing railroad equipment 4. Topography 6. Highway Vehicles S. Not Obstructed 8
Casualties to: Killed
44. Driver was Code 45, Was Driver in the Vehicle? Code
injured
1. Killed 2. Injured 3. Uninjured 1 1. Yes 2. Na
1
46. Highway -Rail Crossing Users
1
Q
47. Highway Vehicle Properly Damage
48. Total Number of Highway -Rail Cross/ Users
(est "Ar damage) 56,000
(include driver) 1
1
49, Railroad Employees
0
0
50, Total Number of People on Train
(include passengers and crew) 147
51. Is a Rail Equipment Accident i Code
Incident Report Being Filed
52. Passengers an Train
0
0
i. Yes 2. No I I
We. speaal 51uay Black 53b. Special Study Black
54. Narrative Description
DRIVER STOPPED VEHICLE ON TRACKS AND WAS STRUCK BY TRAIN 316.
55, Typed Name and Title 156. Signature
FORM FRA F 6180.57 • NOTE THAT ALL CASUALTIES MUST BE REPORTED ON FORM FRA F 6180.55A
57, Date
Page 328
HIGHWAY -RAIL GRADE CROSSING
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ACCIDENTIINCIDENT REPORT
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION (FRA) OMB Aoaroval No, 2130-0500
Name Of AlohabeUc Code RR AccldenUlnddent No
1. Reporting Railroad Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe Rwy Co. IATSFI 18 ATSF 1b. 031191201
2. Other Railroad Involved in Train Accident/Incident 2a 2b.
3. Railroad Responsible for Trade Maintenance Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe gwy Co. IATSFI 3a. ATSF 3b, 031191201
4. U.S. DOT-AAR Grade Crossing ID No. 0261551 P
5. Date of Accidentilnddent 11/21/91 6 Time of AcddenUlnddent 12:42 PM
7. Nearest Railroad Station 8 Division
_SAN
D. County
10. State Code
KAISER
13ERNARDINO
Abbr. 06 1 CA
11. City (Ifln a city) RANCHOCIJCAMONGA 12 Highway Name or No. ETIWANDA AVE ✓❑Public E3pnv.,w
Highway User Involved
Rail Equipment involved
13. Type C. Truck -trailer F. Bus J. Other tooter Vehicle Code
17. Equipment 4. Cars (moving) 8 Other (specify) Code
A Auto D. Pick-up truck G. School Bus K. Pedestrian A
1
1. Train (units pulling) 5. Cars; (standrng) A Train pulling- RCL
2. Train (units pushing) 6. Light loco(s) (moving) B Train pushing- RC.
B. Truck E. Van H. Motorcycle M Other (specify)
1
3. Trainstanding 7_ Light Inco(s)((standing) C Train standing. RCL
14. Vehicle Speed
15. Direction (gnographicaO Code
18. Position of Gar Unit in Train
(est mph at Impact) 40
I.North 2. South 3. East 4. West 2
1
16. Position 1. Stalled on crossing 3. Moving over crossing Code
19. Circumstance 1. Rall equipment struck highway user Code
2. Stopped on Crossing 4. Trapped 3
2 Rail equipment struck by highway a user
20a. Was the highway user andlor rail equipment Involved Code
lob Was there a hazardous materials release by Code
In the Impact transporting hazardous materials?
l.HighwayUser 2. Rail E ui ment 3. Both 4 Neither 2
1. Highway User 2 Rail Equipment 3. Both 4. Neither
20c. State the name and quantity of the hazardous material released, If any
21. Temperature
22. Visibility (stogie entry) Code
23. Weather (single entry) Code
(spsc&itminus) 78 °F
1. Dawn 2. Day 3. Dusk 4. Dark 1 2
1. Clear 2 Cloudy 3. Rain 4 Fog 5 Sleet 6- Snow 1
24. Type of Equipment A. Spec. MoW Equip
25, Track Type Used by Rall Code
28. Track Number or Name
Consist 1. Freight Vain 4. Work train 7. YardiSwitching
Equipment Involved
(single entry) 2. Passenger train 5. Single car B. Light locos) Code
3. Commuter train 6. Cut of cars 9. MainAnspect. car I 1
1. Main 2 Yard 3. Siding 4 Industry 1
MAIN
27. FRA Track
Number of
29. Number of
30 Consist Speed (Recorded Havailable) Code
31 Time Table Direction Code
Class
128.
LocomotiveCars
1
R. Recorded
4
Units 4
62
E. EsUmated d7 m h E
1. North 2 South 3 East 4 West 4
32. Type of 1. Gates 4. Wig wags 7. Crossbucks 10. Flagged by crew
33, Signaled Crossing
34 Whistle Ban Code
Crossing 2. Cantilever FLS 5. Hwy, traffic signals 8. Stop signs 11. Other (specify)
Waming
1. Yes
Warning 3. Standard FLS S. Audible 9. Watchman 12, None
20 sec warn min (1);
2. No
3. Unknown
Code(s) OI I I I
F 1
35. Location of Waming Code
35. Crossing Waning Interconnected Code
37. Crossing Illuminated by Street Code
1. Both Sides
with Highway Signals
Lights or Special Lights
2. Side of Vehicle Approach 1
2
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown 2
38. Driver's
39. Driver's Code
40. Driver prove Behind or in Front of Train Code
41. Driver Code
Age
Gender
and Struck or was Struck by Second Train
1. Drove around or thru the gate 4. Stopped on crossing
1. Male
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown 2
2. Stopped and then proceeded 5. Other (specify)
-
male
3. Did not stop 1
42. Driver Passed Standing Code
43. View of Trade Obscured by (primary obstruction) Code
Highway Vehicle
1. Permanent Structure 3. Passing Train 5. Vegetation 7. Other (specify)
1. Yes 2. No 3, Unknown 3
2. Standing railroad equipment 4. Topography 6. Highway Vehicles 8. Not Obstructed 8
44. Driver was Code
45. Was Driver in the Vehicle? Code
Casualties to:
Killed
Injured
1. Killed 2. Injured 3. Uninjured
1. Yes 2. No
2
1
4fi. Highway -Rall Crossing Users
p
1
47. Highway Vehicle Property Damage
48. Total Number of Highway -Ralf Crossing Users
(est dollar damage) $3,000
(include driver) 1
49. Railroad Employees
p
0
50, Total Number of People on Train
(indude passengers and crew)
51. Is a Rail Equipment Accident i Code
Incident Report Being Filed
52. Passengers an Train
0
0
1. Yes 2. No 2
53a. Special Study Block 53b. Special Study Block
54. Narrative Description
55. Typed Name and Title
58. Signature
57. Date
FORM FRA F 8180.57 • NOTE THAT ALL CASUALTIES MUST BE REPORTED ON FORM FRA F 6180.55A
Page 329
Highway User Involved
HIGHWAY -RAIL GRADE CROSSING
Rail Equipment Involved
Code
DEPARTMENT CIF TRANSPORTATICIN
ACCIDENTIINCIDENT REPORT
17, Equipment 4. Cer(s) (movinngg) 8, Other (specify)
1. Train 5. Cars
Code
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION (FRA)
(single entry) 2. Passenger train 5. Single car 8. Light loco(s) Code
(units pulling) (standFng) A. Train pulling- RCL
2. Train (units pushing) 6, Light low(s) (moving) B. Train pushing- RCL
OMB Aooroval No. 2130-0500
Name Of
27. FRA Track Number of29. Number of 30. Consist Speed (Recorded favailable) Code 31. Time Table Direction
Alphabetic Code RR Accidentlincident No
1. Reporting Railroad
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Rwy Co. IATSFI
. ATSF
lb -360790201
2. Other Railroad Involved in Train Accidentllncident
28.
2b.
3. Railroad Responsible for Track Maintenance
Atchlsoa To elta & Santa Fe Rwy Co. IATSFJ
3a• ATSF
3b.360790201
4. U.S. DOT-AAR Grade Crossing ID No.
026159 P
5. Date of Accidentllncidenl 07/07/90
6. Time of Accidentllncldent 03:40 AM
7. Nearest Railroad Station
8. Division
9 County
Code
20b. Was there a hazardous materials release by
10. State Code
ETIWANDA
SAN $ERNARDINO
Abbr. 06 CA
11. City (fine City) FONTANA
12. Hfnhwav Name er Nn. v •rrW A wrn • • vs
1 Yes 2. No 3 Unknown
I. e a kiv..
Highway User Involved
Rail Equipment Involved
Code
13. Type C. Truck -trailer F. Bus J. Other Motor Vehicle
Code
17, Equipment 4. Cer(s) (movinngg) 8, Other (specify)
1. Train 5. Cars
Code
A, Auto D. Pickup truck G. School Bus K. Pedestrian$
(single entry) 2. Passenger train 5. Single car 8. Light loco(s) Code
(units pulling) (standFng) A. Train pulling- RCL
2. Train (units pushing) 6, Light low(s) (moving) B. Train pushing- RCL
3. Commuter train 6. Cut of cars 9. MainJinspect. car I 1 1. Main 2, Yard 3. Siding 4. Industry I MAIN
B. Truck E. Van H. Motorcycle M. Other (specify)
27. FRA Track Number of29. Number of 30. Consist Speed (Recorded favailable) Code 31. Time Table Direction
3. Train standing 7. Light l000(s) ((standing) C. Train standing- RCL
]
14. Vehicle Speed 15. Direction (geographical]
Code
18. Position of Car Unit in Train
32. Type of 1. Gales 4. Wig wags 7. Crossbucks 10, Flagged by crew
(est mph at Impact) 0 1. North 2. South 3. East 4. West
Code
]
Warning 1. Yes
16. Position 1. Stalled on crossing 3. Moving over crossing
Code
19. Circumstance 1. Rail equipment struck highway user
Code
2. Stopiwed on Crossing 4. Trapped
1
2. Rail equipment struck by highway user
36 Crossing Warning Interconnected
20a. Was the highway user and/or rail equipment involved
Code
20b. Was there a hazardous materials release by
Code
in the Impact transporting hazardous materials?
2. Side of Vehlcie Approach 2
1. Highway User 2. Rail Equipment 3. Both 4. Neither
2
1. Highway User 2. Rail Equipment 3. Both 4. Neither
1 Yes 2. No 3 Unknown
zuc, trete the name and quantity or the hazardous material released, if any
21. Temperature 22. Visibility (single entry) Code 23. Weather (singie entry)
Code
(specfyfminus) 65 `F 1. Dawn 2. Day 3. Dusk 4. Dark 1 4 1. Clear 2. Cloudy 3. Rain 4, Fog 5. Sleet 6. Snow 1
1
24. Type of Equipment A. Spec. MoW Equip 25. Track Type Used by Rall Code 26. Track Number or Name
Consist 1, Freight train 4. Work train 7. YardlSwitching Equipment Involved
(single entry) 2. Passenger train 5. Single car 8. Light loco(s) Code
3. Commuter train 6. Cut of cars 9. MainJinspect. car I 1 1. Main 2, Yard 3. Siding 4. Industry I MAIN
27. FRA Track Number of29. Number of 30. Consist Speed (Recorded favailable) Code 31. Time Table Direction
Code
128.
Class Locomotive Cars R. Recorded
1
4 Units 4 55 E, Estimated 54 m h E 1. North 2. South 3. East 4. West
4
32. Type of 1. Gales 4. Wig wags 7. Crossbucks 10, Flagged by crew
33. Signaled Crossing 34. Whistle Ban
Code
Crossing 2. Cantilever FLS 5. Hwy. traffic signals 8. Slop signs 11. Other (specify)
Warning 1. Yes
Waming 3. Standard FLS 6. Audible 9 Watchman 12 None
2. No
20 sec warn min (1); 3. Unknown
Code(s) 01 03 1 06 07
35, Location of Wanting Code
36 Crossing Warning Interconnected
Code 37. Crossing Illuminated by Street
Code
1. Both Sides
with Highway Signals
Lights or Special Lights
2. Side of Vehlcie Approach 2
2
1 Yes 2. No 3 Unknown
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown
2
38. Driver's 39.0dwees Code
40. Driver Drove Behind or in Front of Train Code 41. Driver
Code
Age Gender
and Struck or was Struck by Second Train 1. Drove around or thru the gate 4. Stopped on crossing
1. Male
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknow 2 2. Stopped and then proceeded S. Other (specify)
3. Did not stop
4
42, Driver Passed Standing
Code 43. View of Track Obscured by (prfmary obshuctlon)
Code
Highway Vehicle
1. Permanent Structure 3. Passing Train 5, Vegetation 7. Other (specify)
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown
2 2. Standing railroad equipment 4. Topography 6 Highway Vehicles 8. Not Obstructed
g
Casualties to:
44. Driver was Code 45. Was Driver in the Vehicle?
Killed Injured
Code
1. Killed 2 Injured 3. Un njured 3 1, Yes 2. No
2
46. Highway -Rall Crossing Users
0
0
47 Rahway Vehicle Property Damage
48. Total Number of Highway -Rail Crossing Users
(est dollar damage) s0
(Include driven 0
49, Railroad Employees
0
0
50. Total Number of People an Train
(include passengers and crew)
51. Is a Rail Equipment Accident/
Incident Report Being Filed
Code
52. Passengers an Train0
0
1. Yes 2. No
2
53a, Special Study Block 53b Special Study Block
54. Narrative Description
55, Typed Name and Title 56. Signature 57. Date
FORM FRA F 618057 'NOTE THAT ALL CASUALTIES MUST BE REPORTED ON FORM FRA F 6180.55A
Page 330
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION IFRA)
HIGHWAY -RAIL GRADE CROSSING
ACCIDENTIINCI DENT REPORT
OMB Approval No. 2130-0500
Name Of
13 Type C. Truck -trailer F Bus J. Other Motor Vehicle
AlphabeUc Cade
RR AccldenUlncdent No
1. Reporting Re (road
Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe Rwy Co. [ATSF1
1a• ATSF
lb -361189201
2. Other Re (road Involved In Train Accident/Incident
2a.
2b.
3. Re (road Respons.bie for Trade Maintenance
Atchisen To eka & Santa Fe Rwy Co. 1ATSF1
3a. ATSF
3b. 361189201
4. U.S DOT-AAR Grade Crossing ID No.
026159 P 5. Date of AccidenUlncident 11/04/89
6. Time of Accidentllnddent 06:12 AM
7. Nearest Railroad Station
KAISERSAN
8. Division
9 County
BERNARDINO
10. State Code
Abbr. 06 CA
11. City (ff fn 9 00 RANCHO rt lCA mn NGA 12. HInhwav Name or No_ v rrW A ntn A Marc
i8. Position 1. Stalled on crossing 3. Moving over crossing
Mf M.r.i,.. Cin _-
Highway User Involved
23 Weather (single endry)
Rail Equipment Involved
(specifyifminus) 60 eF 1 Davin 2. Day 3 Dusk 4. Dark I 1
13 Type C. Truck -trailer F Bus J. Other Motor Vehicle
Code
17. Equipment 4. Cars (moving 8. Other (specify)
Code
A Auto D. Pick-up truck G School Bus K. Pedestrian
Equipment Involved
1. Train (units pulling) 5. Cars; (standing) A. Train pulling- RCL
2. Train (units pushing) 8, tight loco(s) (moving) B. Train pushing- RCL
(single entry) 2. Passenger train 5. Single car 8. Light loco(s) Code
B. Truck E. Van H Motorcycle M. Other (specify)
A
3 Train standing 7. Light locos (standing) C. Train standing_RCL
1
14. Vehicle Speed
15. Direction (geographicaq
Code
18. Position of Car Unit in Train
(est. mph at impaet) 4$
1. North 2. South 3. East 4 West
1 2
1
Crossing 2. Cantilever FLS 5. Hwy. traffic signals 8. Stop signs 11. Other (specify) Waning 1. Yes
i8. Position 1. Stalled on crossing 3. Moving over crossing
Code
19. Circumstance 1 Rail equipment struck highway user
Code
2 Stopped on Crossing 4. Trapped
3
2 Rail equipment struck N highway user
37, Crossing Illuminated by Street
20a. Was the highway user andfor rail equipment involved
Code
20b Was there a hazardous materials release by
Cade
In the Impact transporting hazardous materials?
2. Side of Vehicle Approach 2
2
1. Highway User 2 Rail Equipment 3. Both 4. Neither
4
1. Highway User 2. Rail Equipment 3. Both 4. Neither
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown
20c. State the name and quantity of the hazardous material released, if any
21. Temperature 22_ Visibility (single entryl Code
23 Weather (single endry)
Code
(specifyifminus) 60 eF 1 Davin 2. Day 3 Dusk 4. Dark I 1
1. Clear 2. Cloudy 3. Rain 4. Fog 5, Sleet 6. Snow 1
1
24. Type of Equipment A. Spac. MoW Equip
25. Track Type Used by Rail Code 26, Track Number or Name
Consist 1. Freight Dain 4. Work train 7. Yard/Switching
Equipment Involved
(single entry) 2. Passenger train 5. Single car 8. Light loco(s) Code
3. Commuter train 6 Cut of cars 9. MainAnspect car I 1 1
1. Maln 2 Yard 3. Siding 4. Industry 1 MAIN
27. FRA Track 29. Number of Consist Speed (Recorded # available) Code 31. Time Table Direction
Code
129.Numberof 130.
Class Locomotive Cars R. Recorded
4 Units 3 40 E. Estimated 55 m h E 1. North 2. South 3. East 4. West
4
32. Type of t. Gates 4. Wig wags 7. Crossbucks 10. Flagged by clew 33. Signaled Crossing 34. Whistle Ban
Code
Crossing 2. Cantilever FLS 5. Hwy. traffic signals 8. Stop signs 11. Other (specify) Waning 1. Yes
Waning 3. Standard FLS 6. Audible 9. Watchman 12 None 2. No
Code(s) 01 03 1 06 07 1 1 20 sec warn min (1); 3. Unknown
35. Location of Waning Code
38. Crossing Waning Interconnected Code
37, Crossing Illuminated by Street
Code
1. Both Sides
with Highway Signals
Lights or Special Lights
2. Side of Vehicle Approach 2
2
3- te Ride -of Vehicle Agnmarh1.
Yes 2. No 3 Unknown
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown
1
38. Driver's
9. Driver's Code
40. Driver Drove Behind or in Front of Train Code
41. Driver
Code
Age
Gender
and Struck or was Struck by Second Train
1. Drove around or thru the gate 4. Stopped on crossing
1. Male
I
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown 1
2
2. Stopped and then proceeded 5. Other (specify)2.
Female
3. Did not stop
1
42. Driver Passed Standing Code
43. View of Track Obscured by (primary obstruction)
Code
Highway Vehicle
1. Permanent Structure 3. Passing Train 5 Vegetation 7. Other (specify)
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown 2
2. Standing railroad equ pment 4 Topography 6. Highway Vehicles B. Not Obstructed
8
Casualties to Killed
44 Driver was Code 45. Was Driver In the Vehicle?
Injured
Code
1 Killed 2. Injured 3. Uninjured 1 1. Yes 2. No
2
46. Highway -Rail Crossing Users
1
0
47. Highway Vehicle Property Damage
48. Total Number of Highway -Rail Crossing Users
(est do lardamege) I S0
(include drived 1
49. Railroad Employees
0
0
50. Total Number of People on Train
(include passengers and crew)
51. Is a Rail Equipment Accident I
Incident Report Being Filed
Code
52. Passengers on Train
0
0
1. Yes 2. No
2
53a. Special Study Block 53b. Special Study Block
54. Narrative Description
55. Typed Name and Title 58. Signature ST Dale
FORM FRA F 6180.57 • NOTE THAT ALL CASUALTIES MUST BE REPORTED ON FORM FRA F 6180.55A
Page 331
HIGHWAY -RAIZ GRADE CROSSING
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ACCIDENTIINCIDENT REPORT
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION (FRA)
CIMR Annrcwal Nn 91'4n.nsnn
Name Of Alohabetic Code RR Aceden!llnddent No
1. Reporting Railroad Amtrak 1ATK la. ATK lb. 442487A
2. Other Railroad Involved in Train Accident/Incident 2s. ATSF 2b.310487203
3, Railroad Responsible for Track Maintenance Atchison ToDeka & Santa Fe Rwy Co. IATSFI 39. ATSF 3b.310487203
4. U.S. DOT -PAR Grade Crossing ID No. 026151 P
5. Date of Accidentllncident 04124187 6, Time of AcddenUlncident 06:13 AM
7. Nearest Railroad Station
8. Division
9. County
10. State Code
SAN BERNARDINO
SAN BERNARDINO
Abbr• 06 1 CA
11. City (If in a city) ETIWANDA
12. Highway Name or No. ETI%VANDA AVE Q✓ Public ❑ Pnvatc
Highway User Involved
Rail Equipment Involved
13. Type C. Truck -trailer F. Bug J. 011ier Motor Vehicle Code
17. Equipment 4. Cars {mavi�rg) 6. Other (specify) Code
1. Train (units pulling) S. Cars; (star ding) A. Train RCL
A Auto D. Plck-up truck G. School Bus K. Pedestrian
A
pulling-
2. Train (units pushing) 6. Light loco(s) (moving) B. Train pushing- RCL
B. Truck E. Van H. Motorcycle M. Other (specilyJ
3. Train (standing) 7. Light loco(s) (standing) C. Train standing- RCL I
14. Vehicle Speed
15, Direction (geographical) Code
18. Position of Car Unit in Train
(est. mph at impact) 0
1 1. North 2. South 3. East 4. West 3
1
16, Position 1. Stalled on crossing 3. Moving over crossing Code
19, Circumstance 1. Rail equipment struck highway user Code
2. Stopped on Crossing 4. Trapped 1
2. Rall equipment stack by highwayhighwiy user
20s. Was the highway user and/or rail equipment involved Code
20b. Was there a hazardous materials release by Cade
In the impact transporting hazardous materials?
1. Highway User 2. Rai[ Equipment 3. Both 4. Neither 4
1. Highway User 2. Rail Equipment 3, Both 4. Neither
20c. State the name and quantity of the hazardous material released, If any
21. Temperature 22. Visibility (single entry) Code
23. Weather (single entry) Code
(specllyllminus) 60 °F 1. Dawn 2. Day 3. Dusk 4. Dark I 1
1. Clear 2. Cloudy 3, Rain 4 Fog S. Sleet e. Snow 1
24. Type of Equipment A. Spec. MoW Equip
25, Track Type Used by Rall Code
26. Track Number or Name
Consist 1. Freight train 4. Work train 7. Yard/Switching
Equipment involved
(single entry) 2. Passenger train 5. Single car 8. Light loco(s) Code
3. Commuter train 6. Cut of cars 9. MainAnspect. car I2
1, Main 2. Yard 3. Sid.ng 4. Industry 1
MAIN
27. FRA Track
28. Number of
Number of
Consist Speed (Recorded Havailable) Code
31. Time Table Direction Code
Class
Locomotive
1
129. 130.
Cans
R, Recorded
4
Units 2
11
E. Estimated 3S m h E
1. North 2- South 3. East 4. West 4
32, Type of 1. Gates 4. Wg wags 7. Crossbur ks 10. Flagged by crew
33, Signaled Crossing
34, Whistle Ban Code
Crossing 2. Cantilever FLS 5. Hwy. traffic signals 8 Slop signs 11. Other (specify)
Warning
1. Yes
Warning 3 Standard FLS 6 Audible 9 Watchman 12 None
2. No
3. Unknown
Code(s) 1 11 1 1 1
1 1
35. Location of Warning Code
36 Crossing Warning Interconnected Code
37. Crossing Illuminated by Street Code
1. Both Sides
with Highway S,gnals
Lights or Special Lights
2. Side of Vehicle Approach
1 1
3
3. Onno le Side of Vehicle Annmach
1, Yes 2. No 3 Unknown
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown 3
38. Driver's
30. DrIver's Code
40 Driver Drove Behind or in Front of Train Code
41. Driver Code
Age
Gender
and Struck or was Struck by Second Train
1. Drove around or thru the gale 4. Slopped on crossing
I. Male
1. Yes 2 No 3 Unknown 2
2. Stopped and then proceeded 5. Other (specify)
4
42. Driver Passed Standing Code
43. View of Track Obscured by {prtmary obstrucNonJ Code
Highway Vehicle
1. Permanent Structure 3. Passing Train 5. Vegetation 7. Other {specify)
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown 2
2. Standing railroad equipment 4. Topography 6. Highway Vehicles 8, Not Obstructed 8
44 Driver was Code
45. Was Driver in the Vehicle? Code
Casualties to:
Killed
Injured
1. Killed 2 Injured 3 Uninjured
1, Yes 2. No
46. Highway -Rall Crossing Users
0
0
47. Highway Vehicle Property Damage
48. Total Number of Highway -Rall Crossing Users
(est. doilardamage) 55,000
(include driver) 0
49. Railroad Employees
0
0
50 Total Number of People on Train
(include passengers and crew)
51. Is a Rail Equipment Accident I Code
Incident Report Being Filed
52. Passengers on Train0
0
1. Yes 2. No 2
53a. Special Study Block 53b Special Study Block
54. Narrative Description
55. Typed Name and Title
56, Signature
57. Date
FORM FRA F 8180 57 • NOTE THAT ALL CASUALTIES MUST BE REPORTED ON FORM FRA F 6180.55A
Page 332
HIGHWAY -RAIL GRADE CROSSING
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ACCIDENTIINCIDENT REPORT
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION (FRA) OMB Aooroval No 2130 05nn
Name Of Alphabetic Code RR Accidentllncident No
1. Reporting Railroad Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe Rwy Co. [ATSFI 10. ATSF lb 310487203
2. Other Railroad Involved In Train Accidentllncident Amtruh IATK 1 2a. ATK 2b -042487A
3, Railroad Responsible for Track Maintenance Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe Rwy Co. IATSFI 3a. ATSF 31)• 310487203
4. U.S. DOT-AAR Grade Crossing ID No. 026151 P
5. Date of Accidentllnkddent 04/24/87 6. Time of Acddentnnddent 06:13 AM
7. Nearest Railroad Station 8. Division 9. County
I I
10. State
Code
ETIWANDA ORANGE
Abbr. 06
1 CA
11. City (ffin a city) ANAHEIM 12. Highway Name or No. MAIN (ETIWANDA AVE) 2]Pubh, ❑i nvaw
Highway User involved
Rail Equipment Involved
13. Type C. Truck -trailer F. Bus J. Other Motor Vehide Code
17. Equipment 4. Ca a (movinF) 8 Other (specify)
1. Train 5.
Code
A. Auto D. Pick-up truck G. School Bus K. Pedestrian
(units pulling) CaIs� (standing) A. Train pulling- RCL
2. Train (units pushing) 6. Light loco(s) (moving) B. Train pushing- RCL
B. Truck E. Van H. Motorcycle M. Other (specify) A
3. Train standing 7. Light loco(s) standing) C. Train standin - RCL
1
14. Vehicle Speed
15. Direction (geographical) Code
18, Position of Car Unit in Train
(est. mph at Impact) 0
1. North 2. South 3. East 4. West
1
16. Position 1. Stalled on crossing 3. Moving over crossing Code
19. Circumstance 1. Rail equipment struck highway user
Code
2. Stopped on Crossing 4. Trapped 1
2. Rail equipment struck by highway user
20a. Was the highway user and/or rail equipment involved Code
20b. Was there a hazardous materials release by
Code
in the Impact transporting hazardous materials?
1. Highway User 2. Rail Equipment 3. Both 4. Neither 4
1. Highway User 2 Rail Equipment 3 Both 4. Neither
20c. State the name and quantity of the hazardous material released, if any
21. Temperature
22. Visibility (single entry) Code
23. Weather (single entry)
Code
(specity if minus) 70 OF
1. Dawn 2. Day 3. Dusk 4. Dark I 1
1. Clear 2, Cloudy 3. Rain 4. Fog 5. Sleet 6 Snow
1
24. Type of Equipment A. Spec, MoW Equip
25. Track Type Used by Rail Code
26 Trade Number or Name
Consist 1. Freight train 4. Work train 7, Yard/Switching i
Equipment Involved
(single entry) 2. Passenger train 5. Single car B. Light locos) Code
3. Commuter train 6. Cut of cars 9. MelnAnsped. car 1 2
1. Main 2. Yard 3, Siding 4 Industry 1
MAIN
27. FRA Track
26. Number of 29. Number of
30. Consist Speed (Recorded N available) Cade
31. Time Table Direction
Code
Class
Locomotive Cars
1 1
R. Recorded
S
Units 2 11
E. Estimated M
1 North 2 South 3. East 4. West
4
32. Type of 1. Gates 4. Wig wags 7. Crossbucks 10. Flagged by crew
33. Signaled Crossing
34. Whistle Ban
Code
Crossing 2. Cantilever FLS 5. Hwy traffic signals S. Stop signs 11. Other (specfly)
Warning
1. Yes
Waming 3. Standard FLS 6. Audible D. Watchman 12. None
20 sec warn min (1);
2. No
3. Unknown
Codes) 01 03 06
35. Location of Warning Code 38 Crossing Warning Interconnected Code 37. Crossing Illuminated by Street
Code
1, Both Sides with Highway Signals Lights or Special Lights
2. Side of Vehicle Approach3
2 2
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown 1. Yes 2, No 3, Unknown
38. Driver's 9. Driver's Code 40. Driver Drove Beh'nd or In Front of Train Code 41. Driver
Code
Age Gender and Struck or was Struck by Second Train 1. Drove around or thru the gate 4. Stripped on crossing
1. Male 1. Yes 2 No 3. Unknown 2 2. Stopped and then proceeded 5, Other (specify)
4
42. Driver Passed Standing Code
43 View of Track Obscured by (primary obstruction)
Code
Highway Vehicle
1. Permanent Struclkee 3. Passing Train S. Vegetation 7. Other (specify)
1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown 2
2 Standing railroad equipment 4. Topography 6. Highway Vehicles 8. Not Obstructed
8
Casualties to
Killed
injured
44.
44. Driver was Code
45. Was Driver in the Vehicle?
Code
Kh;ed 2. Injured 3. Uninjured 2
1. Yes 2, No
2
46, Highway -Rall Crossing Users
0
1
47 Highway Vehicle Property Damage
48. Total Number of Highway -Rall Crossing Users
(est dollardama 9e) SO
(include driver) 2
49. Railroad Employees
0
0
50. Total Number of People on Train
(include passengers and crew)
51. Is a Rail Equipment Accident 1
Incident Report Being Filed
Code
52. Passengers on Train
0
0
1. Yes 2. No
2
53a. Special Study Block 53b. Special Study Block
54, Narrative Descriotlon
55. Typed Name and Title
56. Signature 57. Date
FORM FRA F 8180 57 • NOTE THAT ALL CASUALTIES MUST BE REPORTED ON FORM FRA F 6180 55A
Page 333
HIGHWAY -RAIL GRADE CROSSING
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ACCIDENVINCIDENT REPORT
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION fFRAf OMB Approval No 2130.0500
Name Of Alphabetic Code RR Accident/Incident No
1. Reporting Railroad Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe Rwy Co. LATSFI 1e, ATSE ib, 310184203
2. Other Railroad Involved In Train Accident/Incident 2s. 2b
3. Railroad Responsible for Track Maintenance Atchisaq Topeka & Santa Fe Rwy Co. IATSFI 38. ATSF 3b.310184203
4, U.S. OOT -MR Grade Crossing I D No. 026151 P 5. Date of Acddent/Inddent 01/16/84 B. Time of Accident/Incident 06:15 PM
7. Nearest Railroad Station S. Dlvislan
9 County
10, State
Cade
ETIWANDASAN
112.HighwayNameorNo.
BERNARDINO
Abbr, 06
CA
11. CitY (ifin a chY) FONTANA ETIWANDA AVE QPublic Qprivaw
Highway User involved
Rail Equipment Involved
13, Type C. Truck -trailer F. Bus J. Other Motor Vehicle Code
17. Equipment 4. Cars (moving) S. Other {specify)
Cade
A Auto D. Plck-up truck G School Bus K. Pedestrian
A
I.Train (units pulling) 5. Cars; (standing) A. Train putting- RCL
2. Train (units pushing) S. Light loco(s) (moving) B. Train pushing- RCL
B. Truck E. Van H. Motorcycle M. Other (specify)
3. Train (standing) 7. Light locos (standing)C. Train standing- RCL
I
i4. Vehicle Speed
15 Direction (9eo9mPhican Code
18. Position of Car Unit in Train
(est mph at impact) ]p
1 North 2. South 3 East 4. West 1
1
15, Position I. Stalled on crossing 3. Moving over crossing Code
19. Clrcumstance 1, Rail equipment struck highway user
Code
2. Stopped on Crossing4 Trapped 3
2. Rail equipment struck by highway user
20a. Was the highway user and/or rail equipment Involved Cade
20b. Was there a hazardous materials release by
Code
In the Impact transporting hazardous materials?
1. Highway User 2. Rall Equipment 3. Both 4. Neither 4
1. highway User 2. Rail Equipment 3, Both 4, Neither
20c. State the name and quantity of the hazardous material released. if any
21, Temperature
22. Visibility (single entry) Code
23. Weather (single entry)
Code
(spec&ifminus) 65 °F
1. Darn 2. Day 3 Dusk 4 Dark 1 2
1. Clear 2. Cloudy 3 Raln 4. Fog 5. Sleet 0. Snow
2
24. Type of Equipment A Spec. MaW Equip
25. Track Type Used by Rail Code
26. Track Number or Name
Consist 1, Freight train 4. Work train 7. Yard/Switching
Equipment Involved
(single entry) 2. Passenger train 5. Single car 8. Light loco(s) Code
3, Commuter train 6 Cut of cars 9. MainAnspect car I
1. Main 2. Yard 3. Siding 4. Industry I
MAIN
27. FRA Track 28 Number of 29, Number of 30 Consist Speed (Recorded If avaJlable) Code 31. Time Table Direction
Code
Class Locomotive Cars R. Reoorded
1 1
5 Units 2 7 E. Estimated 20 mph I E 1. North 2. South 3. East 4. West
4
32, Type of 1. Gales 4. Wig wags 7. Crossbucks 10. Flagged by crew 33. Signaled Crossing 34, Whistle Ban
Code
Crossing 2. Cantilever FLS 5. Hwy, traffic signals 8 Stop signs 11, Other (specfly) Warning 1. Yes
Warning 3 Standard FLS 6 Audible 9. Watchman 12. None 2. No
Code(s) 1 01 1 03 1 1 1 1 20 sec warn min (1); 3. Unknown
35. Location of Warning Code 38 Crossing Warning Interconnected Code 37. Crossing Illuminated by Street
Code
1. Both Sides with Highway Signals Lights or Special Lights
2. Side of Vehicle Approach I 2
1. Yes 2, Na 3 Unknown 1 Yes 2. No 3. Unknown
3
38. Driver's 9. Drivers Code 40. Driver Drove Behind or in Front of Train Code41. Driver
Code
Age Gender and Struck or was Struck by Second Train 1crossing
. Drove around or thru the gate 4. Stopped on
1. Male 1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown ] 2. Stopped and then proceeded 5. Other (speciW
Did not ston
1
42. Driver Passed Standing Code 43 View of Track Obscured by (pdmary obskmVion)
Code
Highway Vehicle 1 Permanent Structure 3. Passing Train S. Vegetation 7. Other (speci6o
1. Yes 2, No 3. Unknown 2 2. Standing railroad equipment 4. Topography 6. Highway Vehicles S. Not Obstructed
8
44 Driver was Code 45, Was Driver in the Vehicle?
Casualties to Killed Injured
Code
1 Kired 2 Injured 3 Uninjured 3 1 Yes 2 No
1
48. Hlgtmray-Rall Crossing Users
0
0
47 Highway Vehicle Property Damage
48, Total Number of Highway -Rall CrossingUsers
(est. dollar damage) 5500
(include driwed I
49. Railroad Employees 0 0 50. Total Number of People on Train 51. Is a Rail Equipment Accident t
Code
52. Passenger: on Train 0 0 (Include passengers and dew) Incident Report Being Filed
1. Yes 2 No
2
53a, Special Study Block 53b. Special Study Block
54. Narrative Description
55. Typed Name and Title 56 Signature 57 Date
FORM FRA F 61 BO 57 • NOTE THAT ALL CASUALTIES MUST BE REPORTED ON FORM FRA F 6180.55A
Page 334
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors FROM: City of Rancho Cucamonga
County of San Bernardino P. O. Box 807
385 N. Arrowhead, 2nd Floor Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
San Bernardino, CA 92415
Project Title: Etiwanda Grade Separation Project
Project Location Specific: Etiwanda Ave. from Napa St. to Whittram Ave.
Project Location - County: San Bernardino
Description of Nature, Purpose, and Beneficiaries of Project: Railroad grade separation project
that eliminates an existing grade crossing to improve mobility, safety, and level of service at the
Southern California Regional Rail Authority railroad corridor.
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Rancho Cucamonga
Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: Curt Billings, City of Rancho Cucamonga
Exempt Status: (Check one)
_ Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268);
_ Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a));
_ Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c)
Categorical Exemption. Section 15301 - Existing Facilities
X Statutory Exemptions. Section 15282(g)
Reasons Why Project is Exempt: Grade separation project will eliminate an existing grade
crossing.
Lead Agency Contact Person: Curt Billings, Associate Engineer
Area Code/Telephone/Extension: (909) 774-4069
Signature:
Title: Planning Director
Date: 6/6/18
ATTACHMENT 3
Page 335
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council / President and Members of the Board of
Directors
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Robert Ball, Fire Marshall
Candyce Burnett, City Planner
Michelle Cowles, Management Aide
Albert Espinoza, Assistant City Engineer
Michael Frasure, Building and Safety Services Manager
Minerva Gamboa, Business License Coordinator
Tamara Layne, Finance Director
Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner
Cheryl Roberts, Battalion Chief
Ivan Rojer, Fire Chief
Julie Sowles, Library Director
Brian Sternberg, Assistant Library Director
Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
SUBJECT: RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL/FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER NEW AND AMENDED FEES FOR
VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS (FIRE DISTRICT, FINANCE, LIBRARY
SERVICES, BUILDING AND SAFETY, ENGINEERING AND PLANNING) AND
FIRST READING AND INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 931.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council and Fire Protection District Board take the following actions:
1. Conduct a joint public hearing on the proposed new and amended fees;
2. As the Fire Board, adopt a Resolution to repeal and adopt user fees for the Fire District;
3. As the City Council, conduct first reading of the attached ordinance entitled "An Ordinance of
The City of Rancho Cucamonga, Amending the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Update the
Appointment of an Administrative Hearing Officer, Permit, Fee and Appeal Requirements for
Taxicab Services, Sales of Goods or Merchandise from Vehicles and Charitable and Noncharitable
Solicitation Permits and Making Findings in Support Thereof"; and
4. As the City Council, adopt a Resolution to establish user fees for Finance, Library Services,
Building and Safety Services, Engineering Services and Planning.
BACKGROUND:
Cities can impose fees under the authority granted by California Government Code Section 66000 et.
seq, including the requirement to hold at least one public hearing as part of a regularly scheduled meeting
to allow for public comment on its proposed fees. Fees can be imposed in order to recover costs
Page 336
associated with the provision of specific services benefiting the user, thereby reducing the use of General
Fund monies for such purposes. The City of Rancho Cucamonga typically revisits these fees on at least
an annual basis in order to ensure that fees are appropriately adjusted as operational costs incrementally
increase overtime.
This report covers requests for revisions to fees for the following: Fire District, Finance, Library Services,
Building and Safety Services, Engineering Services and Planning. The corresponding cost analysis
worksheets were placed on file in the City Clerk's office on May 24, 2018.
ANALYSIS:
FIRE DISTRICT
The Fire District proposes to revise the Special Services Fees, the Development Services Fees, and
Technology Fee; and establish fees for the All Risk Training Center Services.
Special Services
The Fire District last adjusted fees for Special Services in 2010. These services include cost recovery for
emergency apparatus and personnel responding to fire alarms and DUI incidents, response to mitigate
hazardous chemicals or material incidents, and response to fires caused by intentional negligence. The
response cost recovery is based on an hourly rate with a minimum charge of 1/2 -hour that is assessed per
response and apparatus. Because that fee study was conducted eight (8) years ago, it was determined
that these Special Services Fees were outdated and there was a need for a current fee study. The
revisions to the Special Services Fees allow the Fire District to increase our cost recovery from an
average of 75% to the fully burdened cost.
Development Services Fees
The Fire District is adopting select development services fees to be consistent with the City's updated fire
related development user fees. These fees are for services normally performed by the Building and
Safety Services Department but can occasionally be performed by Fire District Staff utilizing the same
rate structure. Examples include fire sprinkler systems, high pile storage and fire alarm and sprinkler
monitoring systems.
All -Risk Training Center
With the opening of the All Risk Training Center, the Fire District has developed a user fee schedule to
address its classroom and specialized use opportunities. The Fire District utilized 2018 Fees and
Charges Schedule provided by Community Services as a template, along with the Cost Analysis
Worksheet provided by Finance.
The All Risk Training Center "2018 Fees & Charges Schedule" document defines user group categories,
as well as rental fee information and policies. Classroom and conference room rental fees are listed for
each group category. In addition, specialized rentals involving the training tower, house, props and
equipment are listed separately. These costs are comparable to Community Services' facility rentals and
those of other public training facilities and include consideration of purchase, operations, and maintenance
costs. The Fire District will study actual operations and maintenance costs this upcoming fiscal year, along
with internal and external usage of the Training Center, to confirm that the established fees are achieving
the intended cost recovery, and will recommend adjustments in the future as appropriate.
As labor effort and costs associated with the provision of services fluctuates over time, a significant
element in the development of fees is the flexibility to remain current. To allow fees to stay current over
time, Staff recommends an annual automatic adjustment based upon published information relative to
Page 337
costs to provide services.
Technology Fee
In 2012, the Fire Board approved the implementation of a technology fee for Fire Prevention Bureau
services to offset the costs associated with software and hardware associated with land development and
fire inspection services. The original study recommended a technology fee of 7%, however staff
recommended and Council approved a 4.5% technology fee. In 2015, the technology fee was increased
from 4.5% to 5% to reduce the initial payback time of the land development software system. However, the
annual maintenance costs for that system and the upgrades in hardware requirements are outpacing the
funds collected through the technology fee. Staff recommends increasing the technology fee from 5% to
7% for all Fire Prevention Bureau user fees.
FINANCE
The Finance Department Proposes to update several fees and add a new fee related to business
licensing functions.
Sales of Goods or Merchandise from Vehicles Permit
Currently, a business that is vending tangible items from a vehicle is required to apply for a Sales of
Goods from Vehicles Permit from the Business Licensing Division. The current fee is $50 for the first
permit and $25 for each additional permit for applicants from the same business for both the initial
application and any renewals. The Business Licensing Division is proposing a $150 fee for each new
application and a $100 fee for each renewal application. The proposed fee covers staff time spent
communicating with the applicant as well as the time it takes staff to process the application.
Solicitation Permit
Currently, a business that is going door to door soliciting per the Solicitation Definition as provided in
Chapter 9.31 is required to apply for a Solicitation Permit from the Business Licensing Division. The
current fee is $50 for the first permit and $25 for each additional permit for applicants from the same
business. The Business Licensing Division is now proposing a fee of $150 and a $100 fee for each
renewal application. Staff also proposes to revise the fee for additional permits to match the fee for the
initial permit.
Appeal Procedure Fee
The Business Licensing Division currently does not have an appeal fee in place and is proposing a
nonrefundable fee of $200 for an Appeal Procedure for any person appealing the denial of their
Solicitation, Sales of Goods or Merchandise from Vehicle, or Taxicab Permit. This fee is consistent with
appeal fees charged by other departments, such as Community Improvement.
To support the proposed fee changes, an update to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is needed to
remove fees specifically referenced in the code and direct that fees shall be adopted by resolution of the
City Council, which is the City's typical practice. An ordinance is attached for consideration.
LIBRARYSERVICES
Second Story Room Rental Fees
In February of 2017, the Library Services Department completed tenant improvements to the second floor
of the Paul A. Biane Library at Victoria Gardens. This resulted in the renovation of 8,135 sq. ft. of space
which now includes the STEM Lab, Art Studio, Workshop, Kitchenette and Open Exhibit area. Later that
year, Gyroscope Inc., a museum design firm, assisted with the creation of a business plan that included
the development of these areas into a fully functional discovery space with examples of the types of
Page 338
services typically offered by children's museums. This plan includes offering Second Story spaces as
public rentals that will generate revenue and offset costs for facilities maintenance, equipment replacement
and staffing needed to coordinate programs, activities and events that take place on the Second Story.
Room rentals will provide the ability to offer additional services to the residents of Rancho Cucamonga
and to other communities throughout the region. These services may include birthday party rentals, school
field trips and corporate trainings.
Second Story rental fees are new for 2018 and based on a comprehensive cost analysis completed by
staff. Rental fees differ according to the individual/organizational type, facility space, operating hours and
equipment/technology needs. For example, a non-profit civic or athletic organization will be eligible for a
discounted rental fee, but a commercial business or profit-making organization would be required to pay
the full hourly rental rate. Spaces are also valued based on size and the amount of people they can
accommodate. In addition, regular operating hours differ from premium hours based on the availability of
staff and the demand for space. Also taken into consideration are additional staffing costs related to
special set-up requirements or extra assistance that might be needed during a rental. Fees related to
processing rental applications or the coordination of alcohol service will be charged in addition to the hourly
room rental fee. Rental fees for the Second Story are consistent with those currently being charged by the
City of Rancho Cucamonga at other facilities.
Non -Pick Up Hold Fee
The Library Services Department currently applies a $.50 fee for holds on materials that do not get picked
up within seven days after a patron is notified that an item(s) is being held at the Library. This fee is
charged for each item that remains on the hold shelf past this time. The Library Services Department is
proposing to remove this fee to provide greater access to materials and improved customer service. I n the
past year, the Library made less than $800 collecting this fee, which does not account for the cost of staff
time required to input these fees into patron accounts.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
The City last adopted a comprehensive fee study for user fees for Building and Safety Services and
Planning in 2012. Since that time, the City has made cost of living adjustments to the original calculations
and made minor fee updates as needed on an annual basis, but has largely maintained the fee structure
that had been adopted. By late 2017 both departments identified the need for an updated comprehensive
fee study. The City contracted with NBS in early 2018 for a comprehensive fee study to review the current
fees for both Building and Safety and the Planning Departments.
The analysis completed by NBS for each department includes: 1) establishing a fully burdened hourly rate;
2) determining the average labor time per fee and 3) determine the total cost of service per fee.
While the purpose of the study was to determine the full cost to the City of providing the service, the City
ultimately decides what level of cost recovery is desired through the fee schedule, up to the full cost. Staff
reviewed the results of the study and refined the final proposed fees taking into consideration the degree
of overall fee change and, where appropriate, comparisons to local jurisdictions. This review resulted in
fee recommendations that in some cases are lower than the full cost recovery estimated by NBS. This is
part of the City's effort to support the business community by reducing barriers to entry into the local
marketplace and ensuring Rancho Cucamonga remains competitive with other local jurisdictions.
As labor effort and costs associated with the provision of services fluctuates over time, a significant
element in the development of fees is the flexibility to remain current. To allow fees to stay current over
time, staff recommends an annual automatic adjustment based upon published information relative to
costs to provide services. Beginning on July 1, 2019, Community Development fees outlined in the
resolution will be adjusted based on the Employee Cost Index for State and Local Government
Employees, Total Compensation, during the 12 month period ending on December 31st of the
Page 339
immediately preceding year, as released by the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics.
This is consistent with the City's past practice in this regard. The following is a summary of the key fee
changes:
General Plan Maintenance Fee
State law requires that every city and county adopt and maintain an up-to-date comprehensive General
Plan to guide the community's future growth and development. Without a valid General Plan, the City can
be legally restricted from making land use changes and approving new development projects, including
functions such as amending the development code, issuing land use and building permits, and taking other
actions on planning and building applications.
Updating the General Plan and implementing it is an unfunded State mandate. As such, State law
recognizes that the City Council may establish fees to support work including, but not limited to, the
adoption and administration of the General Plan, but that the "fees shall not exceed the reasonable cost of
providing the service for which the fee is charged" (Government Code Section 66016).
Staff has estimated that the cost for the next General Plan update and implementation including consultant
costs and staff time is $4 million. The next General Plan update is expected to be more extensive that the
update completed in 2010 and will include a new state required element, Environmental Justice, as well as
a Housing Element update. The proposed fee will help defray the costs of updating and implementing the
General Plan, as well as preparing implementation programs necessary to make the appropriate findings
and determinations required in the development process. Staff is recommending that the General Plan
Maintenance Fee be set at 10% of selected Planning and Building fees identified in the fee study.
Technology Fee
I n 2012, the City Council approved the implementation of a technology fee for Community Development
services to offset the costs associated with software and hardware associated with land development and
fire inspection services. The original study recommended a technology fee of 7%, however staff
recommended and Council approved a 4.5% technology fee. In 2015, the technology fee was increased
from 4.5% to 5% to reduce the initial payback time of the land development software system. However, the
annual maintenance costs for that system and the upgrades in hardware requirements are outpacing the
funds collected through the technology fee. Staff recommends increasing the technology fee from 5% to
7% for all Building and Safety, Engineering, Planning user fees.
Building and Safety Services Fees
Building and Safety Services last performed a fee study and developed new user fees in 2012. Since then
the manner in which we process plans and permits and the way that developers and builders submit plans
and maneuver through projects has changed. In order to create a more equitable approach, Building and
Safety has separated interior improvements and shell buildings in a more accurate and flexible way to
meet the multiple ways properties are developed and improved. As some fees increased, others were
reduced such as residential permit fees including single family homes, condominiums and apartments.
Some previous fees both for the Building & Safety Department and the Fire Department have been
collapsed, folded, or eliminated in order to evolve to a new streamlined manner of applying fees for plan
check and inspection services. Conversely, a few new fees have been added as residents and businesses
have required certain types of services such as "change of address" and "Occupancy Inspections". Some
of the common permit types that local businesses and homeowners often obtain are recommended for fee
reductions in an attempt to relieve some of the cost burden and to encourage those property owners to
obtain a building permit. A few of these permits which have lower fees than recommended by the fee
consultant are those fees for block walls, fences, interior remodels, and cabanas.
Page 340
Overall, through the proposed fee updates, Building and Safety has increased from an average 94% cost
recovery to an estimated 98% cost recovery.
Planning Department Fees
Based on the fee study analysis, current planning fees are significantly under -recovered. The fee study
concluded that that current recovery rate for Planning Department development services is 44%. As this
level of cost recovery is not sustainable or advisable, a considerable number of fees are recommended to
increase to move toward an 81 % cost recovery. Staff also identified work tasks related to the processing
of development applications for which work was being performed and a fee was not charged. Of the 66
fees analyzed in the study, 4 fees are decreasing, 52 fees are increasing and 10 fees are new.
Staff also took the opportunity in the study to rename, reorganize and clarify fees to better align with
development patterns. Many existing fees have been subcategorized based on the size of the project
(number of dwelling units or square feet) or the approving authority (administrative approval versus
Planning Commission approval) to ensure that fees commensurate with the scale of the project and the
work tasks necessary to review the project. For example, a design review application was previously
charged the same fee whether the project consisted of five homes or fifty homes. Now, the fee is
segmented based on small (5-10 units), medium (11 — 25 units) or large (26+ units) projects. Another
example is the minor exception application, which now has a lower fee if it qualifies for administrative
approval and a higher fee when it requires Planning Commission approval, as additional work tasks are
required to process the application. Of the 66 fees analyzed, 13 fees have been subcategorized. These
include:
• Certificate of Appropriateness
• Conditional Use Permit
• Conditional Use Permit Modification
• Design Review
• Hillside Design Review
• Landscape Plan Review
• Minor Design Review
• Minor Exception
• Site Development Review
• Temporary Use Permit
• Tentative Tract Map
• Time Extension
• Tree Removal Permit
We also added ten new fees for services which we have not been recovering our costs. These include:
• Business License Review
• Courtesy Review
• Landscape Plan Review
• Public Noticing
• Environmental Review— CEQA Exemption
• Lot Line Adjustment
• Massage Business Permit —Annual Review
• Technical Report Review
• 3rd and Subsequent Submittal Review
• Additional Hearing Required
The majority of planning fees are "fixed fees". These are utilized where the cost of service is typically
more predictable. As part of this study, we identified 13 services staff recommends be shifted from fixed
fees to deposit based fees. These services were identified because the amount of time and cost can vary
Page 341
greatly depending upon circumstances. For all deposit based fees, the Planning Department will have the
applicant complete a processing agreement, acknowledging the deposit and that they will be charged the
actual time and materials costs for the work performed. They will also agree to provide additional deposits,
if the costs exceed the initial deposit collected. Staff will report monthly on hours expended to the project
applicant and the Finance Department to charge the fully burdened hourly rate identified in the fee study
against the deposit. Fees recommended to transition from a fixed fee to deposit type include:
• Annexation
• Adult Entertainment Permit
• Development Agreement (new agreement or modification)
• Development Code Amendment
• Environmental Review— Initial Study/Negative Declaration/Mitigated Negative Declaration
• Environmental Impact Report
• General Plan Amendment
• Hillside Design Review (2 units or more)
• Specific Plan or Community Plan (new or modification)
• Master Plan (new or modification)
• Tribal Consultation
Engineering Services Fee
At this time, an adjustment is recommended to the fee for On -Site Water & Sewer. This service entails the
plan check review of On -Site Water & Sewer Plans per sheet. The plans will be reviewed by staff and
comments/red-lines will be provided back to the engineer submitting the plans. This fee will be transitioned
from the Building & Safety Department to Engineering Services. The fee was previously calculated per
acreage and now will be calculated per sheet.
EFFECTIVE DATE OF FEES
User fees proposed will become effective based on the schedule below:
• Fire District fees will be effective August 6, 2018, 60 days from the adoption of the resolution.
• Finance fees will be effective concurrent with the effective date of the proposed ordinance.
• Library fees will be effective July 1, 2018.
• Engineering fees will be effective August 6, 2018, 60 days from the adoption of the resolution.
• Building and Safety Fees, Planning Fees, the General Plan Maintenance Fee and the Technology Fee
for City and Fire will be effective January 1, 2019.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Pursuant to State Law, this item was advertised twelve (12) days in advance as a public hearing in the
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper. Those individuals and/or agencies that have on file with the City
Clerk's Office a request to receive written notice of new or increased fees were sent a copy of the public
hearing notice. These included the Building Industry Association, Southern California Edison and
Southern California Gas Company.
Building and Safety, Engineering and Planning provided copies of the Building and Planning fee study and
conducted meetings with the following groups: The Building Industry Association, the Rancho Cucamonga
Chamber of Commerce, The Lewis Group, Van Daele Homes and DR Horton. This provided groups
most impacted by the fee changes proposed for Community Development an opportunity to ask questions
and provide comment. After receiving concerns regarding the initial required deposit amounts for some
Planning applications, staff has modified several initial deposit amounts to lower them and reduce the initial
fee burden for some applications.
We also contacted the Southern California chapter of the National Association for Industrial and Office
Page 342
Parks (NAIOP), who requested a copy of the fee study but did not request a meeting and provided no
comment.
FISCAL IMPACT:
By consistently examining user fees annually, these updates provide additional revenue per fiscal year to
offset the City's costs. Based on the fee study, fees collected for Building and Safety and Planning are
estimated to increase by $675,000 per year, depending on the level of activity. Estimates for other
departments will depend on the volume of activity in each given area.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Not applicable.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Fire District Fee Resolution
Attachment 2 - Ordinance
Attachment 3 - City Fee Resolution
Page 343
RESOLUTION NO. FD 18 -XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT,
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING,
REVISING, AND UPDATING VARIOUS FEES.
WHEREAS, The Government Code allows the Fire Protection District to establish fees
and charges for services, provided such fees and charges do not exceed the estimated
reasonable cost to the District in providing the service to which the fee or charge applies.
WHEREAS, Data indicating the estimated or actual cost to provide each service, for which
the fees and charges set forth herein apply, was made available to the public at least ten (10)
days prior to the date of the public hearing.
WHEREAS, On June 6, 2018 the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Board
conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing concerning the proposed fees and service
charges, as required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection
District hereby finds and resolves as follows:
SECTION 1: The Fire District Board hereby specifically finds that the fees and charges
set forth do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee
or charge is levied or the actual cost recovery of the materials, products, and/or use of equipment
and/or facilities.
SECTION 2: The Board hereby repeals Special Service Fees identified in Section 2 of
Resolution FD 10-018 and adopts new Special Services fees identified in Exhibit A effective 60
days from the adoption of this resolution.
SECTION 3: The Board hereby repeals Development Service Fees identified in
Resolution FD 13-032 and adopts new Development Service Fees identified in Exhibit B effective
60 days from the adoption of this resolution. The fees set forth in this section shall be adjusted
annually, commencing on July 1, 2019, and each year thereafter, without further action of the City
Council, based on the Employee Cost Index for State and Local Government Employees, Total
Compensation, during the 12 -month period ending on December 31st of the immediately
preceding year, as released by the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics and
rounded to the nearest whole dollar. If this index is discontinued, a replacement index, as
determined by the City Council, shall be utilized.
SECTION 4: The Board hereby adopts fees for services performed at the All Risk
Training Center identified in Exhibit C effective 60 days from the adoption of this resolution.
SECTION 5: The Board herby repeals Resolution FD 16-007 and establishes the
Technology Fee for all applicable Fire District permit and inspection fees of 7% effective January
1, 2019. The collection of the Technology Fee may be waived at the discretion of the Board, in
accordance with Resolution No. FD 13-032.
Page 344
SECTION 6: The Secretary to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall
certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Page 345
Exhibit A
SPECIAL SERVICE FEES
Fee Name and Description
Fee Amount
Special Services Fees are based on an hourly rate with a minimum charge of 1/2 hour;
assessed per response, per apparatus. Such service includes cost recovery for emergency
apparatus and personnel responding to fire alarm systems where no fire or smoke
conditions exist and manual fire alarm devices produce unnecessary response, response to
fire setter (juvenile or adult) and DUI incidents, response to mitigate hazardous chemials or
material incidents and response to fires caused by intentional negligence, and special
activities where apparatus and crews are assigned to events that require the services at
permitees expense.
Engine Company per hour
Battalion Chief per hour
Fire Investigator per hour
$ 365
$ 175
$ 180
Special resources
Actual cost
Materials, supplies and special extinguishing agents
Actual cost
Miscellaneous Fees and Charges
Mileage
Current IRS Rate
File research and requested reports
Actual hourly cost
Fire District padlocks
Actual cost
Signs and Placards
Actual cost
Page 346
Exhibit B
FIRE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FEE SCHEDULE
Fee
Fee Unit /
Fee Name and Description
Notes
Amount [3],
Type
[4]
Fire Sprinkler Systems for New Construction
per floor or
$ 459
1-20 Heads
system
21-100 Heads
per floor or
$ 787
system
101-200 Heads
per floor or
$ 918
system
201-350 Heads
per floor or
$ 1,050
system
per floor or
$ 1,246
351+ Heads
system
Fire Sprinkler Systems (Production - SFR Tract
[1], [2]
Homes and Multi -Family)
per floor or
$ 262
1-20 Heads
system
per floor or
$ 525
21-100 Heads
system
per floor or
$ 590
101-200 Heads
system
per floor or
$ 656
201-350 Heads
system
per floor or
$ 787
351+ Heads
system
Fire Sprinkler Tenant Improvements (Commercial)
[1], [2]
1-4 Heads
per floor or
$ 394
system
per floor or
$ 525
5-20 Heads
system
per floor or
$ 656
21-100 Heads
system
per floor or
$ 787
101-200 Heads
system
per floor or
$ 918
201-350 Heads
system
351+ Heads
per floor or
$ 1,181
system
Hydraulic Calculation
per remote
[2]
$ 131
area
Private Underground Fire Service
per outlet/
First 1-5
$ 656
hydrant riser
$ 262
Each Additional
per outlet/
hydrant riser
Page 347
Fee Name and Description
Public Underground Fire Service
First 1-5
Each Additional
Deluge / Pre -Action
Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Fee
Amount [3],
[4]
DCDA./$
hydrant
656
DCDA./
hydrant
$ 262
per valve
$ 918
Fire Pump
per pump
$ 984
Gravity
per tank
$ 787
Pressure
pertank
$ 787
Call I, II, & III Stand Pipe
per outlet
$ 262
Fire Alarm and Sprinkler Monitoring System
0-15 Devices
per system
$ 722
16-50 Devices
per system
$ 984
51-100 Devices
per system
$ 1,246
101-500 Devices
per system
$ 1,903
each additional 25 Devices
per system
$ 157
Clean Agent Gas Systems
each
$ 918
Dry Chemical Systems
each
$ 787
Wet Chemical / Kitchen Hood
each
$ 525
Foam Systems
each
$ 525
Misc. FD Access
per hour
$ 131
Refrigerant Monitoring System
each
$ 787
High Pile Storage
500 - 25,000 scl ft
each
$ 918
25,001-100,000 sq ft
each
$ 1,181
Each additional 100,000 scl ft
each
$ 262
Life Safety and FPP
per hour
$ 131
Hazardous Material Inventory Statement (HMIS)
per hour
$ 131
Hazardous Material Management Plan (HMMP)
per hour
$ 131
Re -Inspection Fee
per hour
$ 131
Notes
[1] For all multi -story projects, the fire sprinkler fee is calculated
per floor based on the number of heads on that floor and the
number of hydraulic calculation areas.
[2] Please add the fee for each Hydraulic Calculation area from the
Miscellaneous Fire Sprinkler and Underground Work to each
floor/per head fees to estimate the total plan check and permit
fees.
[3] The listed fees cover typical projects. The fees for certain
unique projects will be determined on a case-by-case basis by the
Building & Safety Services Director. It will be based on the
overhead cost and the time of service provided at the hourly rate.
[4] The Total Fee breakdown consist of a Technology Fee plus Plan
Review & Inspection Fees (57% Plan Review + 43% Inspection).
Page 348
EXHIBIT C
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District
All Risk Training Center
2018 Fees & Charges Schedule
1
Page 349
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District
All Risk Training Center
2018 Fees and Charges Schedule
fTABLE OF CONTENTS
FACILITY USER GROUP CLASSIFICATION CHART AND DESCRIPTION ............................ 3
GENERAL FEES FOR FACILITY USE..................................................................................... 4
Operating & Extended Hours use.....................................................................................................4
ApplicationFee................................................................................................................................4
FireDistrict Staff Fees.....................................................................................................................4
RentalDeposits...............................................................................................................................4
OvertimeFee...................................................................................................................................4
Cancellation/Re-scheduling Fees.....................................................................................................4
RefundPolicy..................................................................................................................................5
All Risk Training Center Classrooms................................................................................................5
Tower & House Training Grounds/Facilities.....................................................................................5
Facility Miscellaneous Equipment Use Fees....................................................................................5
ServiceFees...................................................................................................................................5
PaymentTransaction Fee................................................................................................................5
CLASSROOM & CONFERENCE ROOM RENTAL FEES ........................................................ 6
TOWER, HOUSE, PROP & EQUIPMENT FEES....................................................................... 6
FILMING RENTAL FEES.......................................................................................................... 7
SERVICE FEES AND DEPOSITS............................................................................................. 7
061
Page 350
Group
Qualifying
Type of Function
Specifications
Organizatio
Outside Governmental
Meetings/Classes/Events that
The following applies to Governmental agencies having an
Agencies - RC Resident
directly serve the Rancho
approved, written partnership with the Fire District. Priority
Benefit Use — function
Cucamonga community.
shall be given to Meetings/Classes/Events that directly
1
provides a direct benefit to
If an outside Government Agency
impact public safety.
RC Residents.
requests facility use for a purpose
that does not provide a direct
benefit to RC residents, they will be
classified as Group 2 user.
Non-profit civic, athletic,
Meetings/Classes/Events that
Compliance with City Non -Profit Eligibility Policy is required
social organizations,
directly serve the Rancho
to receive Group 2 status. Meetings/Classes/Events that
2
churches and public and
Cucamonga community. In the case
are non-profit must comply with all professional service
private schools based in
of Outside Government Agency use,
agreement requirements as determined by the Fire
Rancho Cucamonga. Outside
Meetings/Classes/Events that serve
District. Priority shall be given to Meetings/Classes/Events
Governmental Agencies that
the public at large, but do not provide
that directly impact public safety.
do not directly benefit the
a direct benefit to RC residents.
Rancho Cucamonga
community.
3 Outside for-profit Meetings/Classes/Events that Events/ Functions that are for profit must comply with all
organizations that benefit provide a direct benefit to professional service agreement requirements as
public safety. public safety. determined by the Fire District.
Rancho Cucamonga Fire
Meetings/Classes/Events which
No rental fees are required for the Fire District for official
Fire
Protection District
are directly hosted and
business. Equipment requested at additional expense to
coordinated by the Fire District for
the Fire District will be recovered from the requesting
official business.
Department.
City of Rancho Cucamonga &
Meetings/Classes/Events which
No rental fees are required for the City or RCPD when
Rancho Cucamonga Police
are directly hosted and
for official use. Equipment requested at additional
City/
Department.
coordinated by the City or RCPD.
expense to the Fire District will be recovered from the
RCPD
requesting Department. Priority shall be given to
Meetings/Classes/Events that directly impact public
safety.
Page 351
GENERAL FEES FOR FACILTY USE
All Fire District All Risk Trainina Center Fees:
All Fire District All Risk Training Center Fees will be deposited into the Fire District Fund 281, unless stated otherwise.
Fire District classes are structured on a cost -covering basis, and fees based upon the market rate of similar classes offered
in the industry.
All Risk Training Center Facility Rentals General Information:
Operating Hours Use — Rental usage during weekday open hours with regularly scheduled staff.
Extended Hours Use — Rental usage - beginning Thursday 6:00 pm, all day Friday, Saturday, Sunday and
designated holidays. Requires a four (4) hour minimum charge.
Application Fee:
A non-refundable application fee of $25.00 will be applied to every facility rental request, except those users that are exempt
from rental fees as specified in the facility reservation policy. This fee is collected in addition to the facility rental deposit and
will be retained upon return of the rental deposit.
Fire District Staff Fees:
No staff personnel are included in the rental fees, staff may be required depending on the type of event, as determined by
the Fire District.
$34.00 per hour for one dedicated Fire District Classroom Facility Staff
$72.00 per hour for one dedicated Fire District Facility Staff (Tower & House use)
$20.00 per hour for Fire District Staff acting as event support for the day of event hours only, during
regular operating hours
Facility Maintenance Staff — As determined by the City Public Works Department.
Rental Deposits:
A Rental Deposit is charged for all rentals, except those users that are exempt from rental fees, as specified in the facility
reservation policy at City facilities and will be returned as long as there is no damage to the facility, no overage of time and
the renter has been compliant with the rental policies of the Fire District.
An Additional Rental Deposit may be required according to event/rental requirements and the Fire District's risk assessment.
Overtime Fee:
For rentals that go over in time from their rental contract and/or are requesting an early entry on the day of, a fee will be
assessed equal to the rental fee to be calculated at a rate of time -and -a -half plus staff costs.
Cancellation / Rescheduling Fees:
In the event the renter requests a cancellation or rescheduling of their rental event after 7 calendar days from the time of
the approval of the Permit, a cancellation or rescheduling fee is withheld from any fees paid and/or the rental deposit as
follows:
$25 for small room rentals
$50 for medium room rental
$75 for full classroom rental
$100 for the Training Tower or House
$200 for both the Training Tower and House
11
Page 352
Refund Policy:
Refunds of facility rental fees (excluding the Application and Cancellation Fee) will be processed as follows for all facilities:
30 or more calendar days prior to scheduled rental event — full refund of rental fees, equipment fees and rental
deposit
15-29 calendar days prior to scheduled rental event — full refund of rental fees, equipment fees and full forfeiture
of rental deposit*
2 to 14 calendar days prior to scheduled rental event — 50% refund of all rental and equipment fees and full
forfeiture of rental deposit*
Less than 2 calendar days prior to scheduled rental event — Forfeiture of all fees - rental and equipment fees and
rental deposit* and application fee.
Tower and House Training Grounds/Facilities:
60 or more calendar days prior to scheduled rental event — full refund of rental fees, equipment fees and rental
deposit
30 to 59 calendar days prior to scheduled rental event — 50% refund of all rental and equipment fees and full
forfeiture of rental deposit*
Less than 30 calendar days prior to scheduled rental event — Forfeiture of all fees - rental and equipment fees and
rental deposit* and application fee.
*If deposit exceeds estimated amount of rental fees, then 100% of rental and equipment fees will be forfeited and the
balance will be refunded.
Facility Miscellaneous Eguinment Use Fees:
NOTE: Not all items may be available
Item:
Portable Public -Address System
Microphone
Linen Rentals
Service Fees:
Item:
Deputy Sheriff
Private Security
Facility Maintenance Staff
Payment Transaction Fee:
Fee:
$50.00
$25.00 each
Established per use; based on selection
Fee:
As charged by Sheriff's Department
As determined by service contract
As determined by City Public Works Department
No payment transaction fees will be charged at this time. All payments must be paid by check directly to the
Fire District.
Page 353
ALL RISK TRAINING CENTER RENTAL FEES
TRAINING CENTER CLASSROOMS & CONFERENCE ROOM
Operating Hours
Extended Hours
Room Name
Group1
Group 2
p
Group 3
Room Name
Group 1
p
Group 2
p
Group 3
Room
Size
Rental
Deposit
Alta Loma
$15.00/hr
$20.00/hr
$30.00/hr
Alta Loma
Tower
$275
$303.00
$364.00
N/A
Classroom
$90 full day
$120 full day
$180 full day
Classroom
$17.00/hr
$22.00/hr
$33.00/hr
Medium #50
$50.00
(TC#1)
Forklift
$15.00
$18.00
(TC#1)
Forklift
$18.00
$21.00
$24.00
N/A
Cucamonga
$12.00/hr
$16.00/hr
$25.00/hr
Cucamonga
$14.00/hr
$18.00/hr
$28.00/hr
Medium #40
$50.00
Classroom
$72 full day
$96 full day
$150 full day
Classroom
Smart Class A
$143.00
$157.00
$189.00
N/A
(TC#2)
room
(TC#2)
room
Full Classroom
$25.00/hr
$33.00/hr
$50.00/hr
Full Classroom
$28.00/hr
$37.00/hr
$55.00/hr
Large #90
$75.00
(TC#1 & 2)
$150 full day
$198 full day
$300 full day
(TC#1 & 2)
Room
$115.00
$126.00
$152.00
Foothill
$15.00/hr
$20.00/hr
$30.00/hr
Conference
No use
No use
No use
Small #10
$25.00
Conference
$90 full day
$120 full day
$180 full day
Room #10
Room
Room
Ventilation Roof
Ventilation Roof
TRAINING CENTER
TOWER, HOUSE, PROPS & EQUIPMENT
Operating Hours
Extended Hours
PROP Name
Group 1
Group 2
Group 3
Room Name
Group 1
Group 2
Group 3
Room Size
Rental
Deposit
Tower- Full
Access &Use
$250.00
$275.00
$331.00
Tower
$275
$303.00
$364.00
N/A
$100.00
House- Full
Access & Use
$150.00
$165.00
$198.00
House
$165
$182.00
$217.00
N/A
$100.00
Forklift
$15.00
$18.00
$22.00
Forklift
$18.00
$21.00
$24.00
N/A
No deposit
Flashover Prop
$130.00
$143.00
$172.00
Flashover Prop
$143.00
$157.00
$189.00
N/A
$100.00
Smart Class A
$130.00
$143.00
$172.00
Smart Class A
$143.00
$157.00
$189.00
N/A
$100.00
room
room
Class A Burn
Class A Burn
N/A
Room
$105.00
$115.00
$138.00
Room
$115.00
$126.00
$152.00
$100.00
Class B Burn
$52.00
$57.00
$68.00
Class B Burn
$57.00
$63.00
$75.00
N/A
$50.00
Room
Room
Ventilation Roof
Ventilation Roof
Prop- charge per
$20.00
$22.00
$26.00
Prop- charge per
$22.00
$24.00
$29.00
N/A
$50.00
roof prop
roof prop
Vent -Over -Fire
Vent -Over -Fire
Roof Prop/Room
$115.00
$127.00
$152.00
Roof Prop/Room
$127.00
$140.00
$167.00
N/A
$100.00
Breach Wall
$20.00
$22.00
$26.00
Breach Wall
$22.00
$24.00
$29.00
N/A
$50.00
Collapse Wall
$50.00
$55.00
$66.00
Collapse Wall
$55.00
$61.00
$73.00
N/A
$50.00
Forcible
Entry
$25.00
$28.00
$34.00
Forcible
Entry
$28.00
$31.00
$37.00
N/A
$50.00
*Please note: additional staff, materials and propane fees will be incurred based on use.
Page 354
ALL RISK TRAINING CENTER FILMING RENTAL FEES
General Still Photography Minimum of $150.00 to $500.00 per day, depending on photography
(Not for Commercial/For profit purposes) requirements, plus actual costs for Fire District services.
Commercial/For Profit Filming
Minimum of $1,000-$4,000 per day, depending on filming
requirements, plus actual costs for Fire District services.
Commercial/For Profit Still Photography
Minimum of $25041,000 per day, depending on filming requirements,
plus actual costs for Fire District services.
Film Permit
Film Permit application process and fees are subject to the Planning
Department's criteria and current fees.
Lighting Fee
Actual Costs
ALL RISK TRAINING- SERVICE FEES AND DEPOSITS
Miscellaneous Fees & Charges
Additional Move -in / Move -out Days
50% of daily event rental rate
Minimum of $25.00 to $1,000.00 per day, depending upon
* Deposit
Meeting/Class/Event rental requirements. At the discretion of the
Fire District, an additional Deposit may be required depending upon
event/rental requirements and the Fire District's liability exposure.
Applicant is required to pay all Meeting/Class/Event related expenses
including personnel, equipment and materials and other related
Meeting/Class/Event Expenses
costs. In some instances, events at the Training Center may incur
additional fees that are assessed separately from the Police
Department, the Building and Safety Division and the Fire District for
security services, inspections and/or permits.
*Additional Damage deposits may be required by the Fire District. Amount to be determined based on use/wear
and tear potential.
Page 355
ORDINANCE NO. XXX
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
AMENDING THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE
TO UPDATE THE APPOINTMENT OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARING OFFICER, PERMIT, FEE AND APPEAL
REQUIREMENTS FOR TAXICAB SERVICES, SALES OF
GOODS OR MERCHANDISE FROM VEHICLES AND
CHARITABLE AND NONCHARITABLE SOLICITATION
PERMITS AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 1. 12.150 is hereby amended as follows:
"The city manager shall establish procedures for the selection of administrative
hearing officers. In no event, however, shall the same person who issued an
administrative citation, nuisance abatement notice, weed abatement notice, or invoice
for abatement services; participated in a decision to deny any permit; or any person
who has been adverse to the recipient of the appealed notice in any other legal or
administrative proceeding, be the administrative hearing officer."
SECTION 2. Section 8.30.110 is hereby amended as follows:
"Any person denied a permit pursuant to this chapter may appeal such denial to the
city manager, or his or her designee pursuant to section 1.12.150, by filing a written
request for an administrative hearing with the city clerk within ten days after service of
notice of the finance director's decision. Upon receipt of a timely appeal, the aggrieved
party shall be given notice of a hearing to be held before the city manager, or his or
her designee, within 30 days of the date of said notice. The city manager, or his or her
designee, shall bear the burden of proof and the appellant shall pay a non-refundable
fee in an amount established by resolution of the city council for such appeal. The city
manager, or his or her designee, shall render a decision within a reasonable amount
of time not to exceed 60 days of the conclusion of the hearing. The decision of the city
manager, or his or her designee, shall be final."
SECTION 3. Section 8.40.030 is amended as follows:
"B. The finance director shall be authorized to investigate the truth of the facts set forth
in the application. Each application shall be approved or denied within a reasonable
amount of time.
C. Permit Denial. Any permit applied for under the provisions of this chapter may be
denied for any of the following causes:
a. Fraud, misrepresentation, or false statement contained in the
application for a permit;
Ordinance No. xxx — Page 1 of 3
Page 356
b. Conviction of a misdemeanor or felony involving fraud, theft,
dishonesty, or injury to any person within the previous ten years, or
revocation of any permit to sell goods or services to the public within
the previous five years, or any misdemeanor or felony for which the
applicant is required to register pursuant to Penal Code § 290;
c. Failure to comply with the requirements of this chapter; or
d. Conviction within the previous 12 months, resulting from any
violation of this chapter.
D. Appeal Procedure. Any person aggrieved by a denial of a solicitation permit may
appeal such denial to the city manager, or his or her designee pursuant to section
1.12.150, by filing a written request for an administrative hearing with the city clerk
within ten days after service of notice of the finance director's decision. Upon receipt
of a timely appeal, the aggrieved party shall be given notice of a hearing to be held
before the city manager, or his or her designee, within 30 days of the date of said
notice. The city manager, or his or her designee, shall bear the burden of proof and
the appellant shall pay a non-refundable fee in an amount established by resolution of
the city council for such appeal. The city manager, or his or her designee, shall render
a decision within a reasonable amount of time not to exceed 60 days of the conclusion
of the hearing. The decision of the city manager, or his or her designee, shall be final.
E. Each permitee shall notify the finance director, in writing, within ten business days
of any change in the required application information."
SECTION 4. Section 9.31.020(D) is amended as follows:
"Permit filing fee. At the time of filing the application for a permit under this section, a
non-refundable fee in an amount established by resolution of the city council shall be
paid to the finance director to cover the cost of investigation of the facts stated therein,
and the cost of the identification card required to be carried by each solicitor. Such fee
shall be paid by each business entity applicant on behalf of each person who shall
actually solicit."
SECTION 5. Section 9.31.020(H) is amended as follows:
"Appeal procedure. Any person aggrieved by a denial of a noncharitable solicitation
permit may appeal such denial to the city manager, or his or her designee pursuant to
section 1.12.150, by filing a written request for an administrative hearing with the city
clerk within ten days after service of notice of the finance director's decision. Upon
receipt of a timely appeal, the aggrieved party shall be given notice of a hearing to be
held before the city manager, or his or her designee, within 30 days of the date of said
notice. The city manager, or his or her designee, shall bear the burden of proof and
the appellate shall pay a non-refundable fee in an amount established by resolution of
the city council for such appeal. the city manager, or his or her designee, shall render
a decision within a reasonable amount of time not to exceed 60 days of the conclusion
of the hearing. The decision of the city manager, or his or her designee, shall be final."
Ordinance No. xxx — Page 2 of 3
Page 357
SECTION 6. Section 9.31.030(8) 1 is amended as follows:
"No person shall solicit, or permit or cause any other person to solicit on said person's
behalf, where it is represented that any proceeds of such solicitation are to be used
for charitable purposes, or otherwise engage in any "solicitation for charitable
purposes" or "sales solicitation for charitable purposes," as those terms are defined in
Business and Professions Code § 17510.2, or any successor provision thereto,
without first obtaining and being the holder of a valid charitable solicitation permit
issued by the finance director."
SECTION 7. Section 9.31.030(8) 2 is added as follows and items 2 through 8 in
subsection B shall be re -numbered as 3 through 8:
"Permit Filing Fee: At the time of filing the application for a permit under this section,
a non-refundable fee in an amount established by resolution of the city council shall
be paid to the finance director to compensate the city for the actual costs of the permit
and identification cards required to be in the possession of each solicitor at all times
while soliciting, and the cost of administering this chapter."
SECTION 8. Section 9.31.030(E) is amended as follows:
"Appeal Procedure. Any person, business entity or organization aggrieved by a denial
of a charitable solicitation permit may appeal such denial to the city manager, or his or
her designee pursuant to section 1.12.150, by filing a written request for an
administrative hearing with the city clerk within ten days after service of notice of the
finance director's decision. Upon receipt of a timely appeal, the aggrieved party shall
be given notice of a hearing to be held before the city manager, or his or her designee,
within 30 days of the date of said notice. The city manager, or his or her designee,
shall bear the burden of proof and no the appellate shall pay a non-refundable fee in
an amount established by resolution of the city council for such appeal. The city
manager, or his or her designee, shall render a decision within a reasonable amount
of time not to exceed 60 days of the conclusion of the hearing. The decision of the city
manager, or his or her designee, shall be final."
SECTION 9. The City Council declares that, should any section, subsection,
subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance for any reason is held to be
invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby
declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, subdivision,
sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections,
subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
SECTION 10. Neither the adoption of this Ordinance nor the repeal of any other
Ordinance of this City shall in any manner affect the prosecution for violations of ordinances,
which violations were committed prior to the effective date hereof, nor be construed as a waiver
of any penalty or the penal provisions applicable to any violation thereof.
SECTION 11. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall
cause it to be published in the manner required by law.
Ordinance No. xxx — Page 3 of 3
Page 358
RESOLUTION NO. 18-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FEES FOR SERVICES
PERFORMED BY FINANCE, LIBRARY SERVICES, BUILDING
AND SAFETY, ENGINEERING, AND PLANNING.
A. Recitals.
1. The California Government Code allows the City to establish fees and charges for
municipal services, provided such fees and charges do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost
to the City in providing the service to which the fee or charge applies.
2. Data indicating the estimated or actual cost to provide each service, for which the fees
and charges set forth herein apply, was made available to the public at least ten (10) days prior
to the date of the public hearing.
3. On June 6, 2018, City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly
noticed public hearing regarding the adoption of fees for services performed by Finance, Library
Services, Building and Safety Services, Engineering Services and Planning.
B. Resolution.
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga finds and resolves as follows:
SECTION 1: On June 6, 2018, the City Council hereby specifically finds that all the facts
set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
SECTION 2: The City Council hereby specifically finds that the fees and charges set forth
do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee or charge
be levied.
SECTION 3: The City hereby adopts the following fees for services performed by the
Finance Department relating to Business License Functions. All previously established fees for
fees listed below are hereby repealed concurrently with the effective date of the revised fees:
Title
Description
Fee
Appeal hearing fee for denial
Appeal Fee
of permits in Chapters 8.30,
$200
8.40 and 9.31
Charitable Solicitation Permit — New
Processing of Solicitation
and Renewal
Permit pursuant to Section
$50
9.31.030
Processing of Solicitation
Solicitation Permit - New
Permit pursuant to Section
$150
9.31.020
Processing of Solicitation
Solicitation Permit - Renewal
Permit renewal pursuant to
$100
Section 9.31.020
Sales of Goods or Merchandise
Processing of permit pursuant
$150
from Vehicle Permit - New
to Chapter 8.40
Page 359
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 18 -
FEES FOR VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS AND SERVICES
June 6, 2018
Page 2
Title
Description
Fee
Sales of Goods or Merchandise
Processing of permit renewal
$100
from Vehicle Permit - Renewal
pursuant to Chapter 8.40
$25.00
SECTION 4: The City hereby adopts the following fees for services performed by the
Library Services Department, effective July 1, 2018. The previously established Non -Pick Up Hold
Fee is hereby repealed effective July 1, 2018:
Title
Description
Fee
Second Story Room
This fee is established to cover staff time to process
Rental Application
each rental application for use of Second Story
$25.00
Fee
spaces.
Second Story
This fee is established to cover staff time required to
Alcohol
coordinate serving alcohol during rentals on the
$50.00
Administration Fee
Second Story.
Staff Hourly Rate-
This fee shows an hourly rate if additional library staff
$25.00
Library Technician
is needed to assist with rentals at the level of Library
Per Hour
Technician.
Staff Hourly Rate-
This fee shows an hourly rate if additional library staff
$20.00
Library Assistant I
is needed to assist with rentals at the level of Library
Per Hour
Assistant I.
Open Exhibit &
This rental fee covers staff time and related costs
$195.00
Kitchenette
required to coordinate the rental of the Open Exhibit
Per Hour
and Kitchenette.
Art Studio
This rental fee covers staff time and related costs
$70.00
required to coordinate the rental of the Art Studio.
Per Hour
Workshop
This rental fee covers staff time and related costs
$70.00
required to coordinate the rental of the Workshop.
Per Hour
Stem Lab
This rental fee covers staff time and related costs
$70.00
required to coordinate the rental of the STEM Lab.
Per Hour
This rental fee covers staff time and related costs
Kitchenette
required to coordinate the rental of the Kitchenette in
$40.00
combination with another room during regular and
Per Hour
premium hours.
Open Exhibit &
This rental fee covers staff time and related costs
Kitchenette-
required to coordinate the rental of the Open Exhibit
$255.00
Premium Hours
and Kitchenette during premium hours on Fridays and
Per Hour
Saturdays.
Art Studio -Premium
This rental fee covers staff time and related costs
$90.00
Hours
required to coordinate the rental of the Art Studio
Per Hour
duringpremium hours on Fridays and Saturdays.
Workshop -Premium
This rental fee covers staff time and related costs
$90.00
Hours
required to coordinate the rental of the Workshop
Per Hour
duringpremium hours on Fridays and Saturdays
Page 360
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 18 -
FEES FOR VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS AND SERVICES
June 6, 2018
Page 3
Title
Description
Fee
STEM Lab -Premium
This rental fee covers staff time and related costs
$90.00
Hours
required to coordinate the rental of the STEM Lab
Per Hour
durin premium hours on Fridays and Saturdays.
This $.50 fee is charged for library items on hold that
Non -Pick Up Hold
are not picked up by patrons for more than seven
$0.00
Fee
days after notification. It is proposed that this fee be
removed.
SECTION 5: The City hereby repeals all fees for Building and Safety services listed in
Resolutions 12-196, 14-003 and 16-004 and adopts all fees in Exhibit A for services performed
by the Building and Safety Division effective January 1, 2019.
SECTION 6: The City hereby repeals all fees for Planning Department services listed in
Resolutions 12-196, 14-003, 16-004, 16-199 and 17-112 and adopts fees in Exhibit B for services
performed by the Planning Department effective January 1, 2019.
SECTION 7: The City hereby amends Resolution 12-196 and adopts the following fees for
services performed by the Engineering Services Department subject to the current technology fee
of 5% effective 60 days from the adoption of this resolution, consistent with State Law:
Title
Description
Fee
On -Site Water/Sewer
Plan check for on-site water
$1,079 per sheet
and sewer plans
SECTION 8: The City hereby amends Resolution 16-004 and increases the Technology
Fee for all applicable Building and Safety Services Department, Engineering Department and
Planning Department Fees from 5% to 7% effective January 1, 2019.
SECTION 9: The City hereby adopts a General Plan Maintenance Fee of 10% of the fee
amount for all applicable Building and Safety Services and Planning Fees as identified in Exhibits
A and B effective January 1, 2019.
SECTION 10: The fees set forth in Sections 5, 6 & 7 shall be adjusted annually,
commencing on July 1, 2019, and each year thereafter, without further action of the City Council,
based on the Employee Cost Index for State and Local Government Employees, Total
Compensation, during the 12 -month period ending on December 31st of the immediately
preceding year, as released by the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics and
rounded to the nearest whole dollar. If this index is discontinued, a replacement index, as
determined by the City Council, shall be utilized.
SECTION 11: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Page 361
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee Fee Name
No.
Fee Unit
Type
(U
z
Fee Amount
new Processing Fee
Residential - Routed
[21
$ 262
Residential - Non -routed
[21
$ 66
Commercial - Routed
[�1
$ 328
Commercial - Non -routed
[�1
$ 131
COMMERCIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION, ADDITIONS, AND TENANT IMPROVMENTS
(Includes all associated MEP's)
A Class
1
With food and/or drink
500
base fee up to
$ 1,318
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 2
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
$ 1,764
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 23.09
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
$ 2,342
5,000 s.f.
each add'I 10012.86
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
or
10,000
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 2,984
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 29.84
s.f.
2
Without food and/or drink
500
base fee up to
$ 1,056
500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
22.96
2,500
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 1,515
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
2,500 s.f.
each add'I 100
$ 28.34
5,000
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 2,223
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 8.92
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
$ 2,670
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 26.70
s.f.
3
With food and/or drink over 300
2,000
base fee up to
$ 1,961
2,000 s.f.
5of21
Page 362
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
No.
Fee Name
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
Fee Unit
Type
each add'I 100
(U
z
Fee Amount
$ 15.42
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
$ 3,194
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
Q An
$
s.f.
20,000
base fee up to
$ 4,034
20,000 s.f.
each add'I 10020.17
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
ir
Without food and/or drink over 300
s.f.
4
2,000
base fee up to
$ 1,449
2,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 14.60
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
$ 2,617
10,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
20,000
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 3,457
20,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 17.28
s.f.
B Class
1
Office and Public Buildings
500
base fee up to
$ 806
500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
.18
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
$ 990
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 23.09
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
$ 1,567
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
$ 1,882
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 18.82
s.f.
2
Service
500
base fee up to
$ 1,069
500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
9.18
2,500
s.f.
$ 11253
base fee up to
2,500 s.f.
6of21
Page 363
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
No.
Fee Name
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
Fee Unit
Type
each add'I 100
W
z
Fee Amount
$ 17.84
S.f.
5,000
base fee up to
$ 1,699
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 33.97
S.f.
3
Medical
500
base fee up to
$ 1,646
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 28.87
S.f.
2,500
base fee up to
$ 2,223
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 33.59
S.f.
5,000
base fee up to
$ 3,063
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 61.26
S.f.
4
Restaurant
500
base fee up to
$ 1,318
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 22.31
S.f.
2,500
base fee up to
$ 1,764
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 38.05
S.f.
3,500
base fee up to
$ 2,145
3,500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
AmIli
Laboratories
S.f.
5
500
base fee up to
$ 1,909
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 12.46
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
$ 2,158
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 25.72
S.f.
5,000
base fee up to
$ 2,801
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 56.02
S.f.
7of21
Page 364
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee Fee Name
No.
E Class
Fee Unit
Type
W
z
Fee Amount
1
Day Care / Private School
500
base fee up to
$ 1,725
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 34.77
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
$ 2,420
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 25.72
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
$ 3,063
5,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
14.17
10,000
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 3,772
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 37.72
s.f.
F Class
1
Industrial / Manufacturing F1/F2
2,500
base fee up to
$ 1,462
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 0
s.f.
base fee up to
10,000
$ 1,882
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 5.77
s.f.
20,000
base fee up to
$ 2,460
20,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 12.30
s.f.
H Class
1
H1, H2, H3, H4, H5
2,500
base fee up to$
2,748
2,500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
12.95
10,000
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 3,719
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 12.33
s.f.
20,000
base fee up to
$ 4,953
20,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 24.76
s.f.
I Class
1 All I classifications
8of21
Page 365
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
Fee Name
500
Fee Unit
.-
base fee up to
(U
Fee Amount
$ 1,646
500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
32.15
2,500
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 2 289
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 25.72
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
$ 2,932
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 16.79
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
$ 3,772
10,000 s.f.
each add'I 10037
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
ir 72
s.f.
M Class
1
Retail
500
base fee up to
$ 806
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 15.75
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
$ 1,121
2,500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
7.70
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
$ 1,699
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 1.44
s.f.
50,000
base fee up to
$ 2,276
50,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 1.42
s.f.
100,000
base fee up to
$ 2,984
100,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
98
s.f.
S Class
1
S1/S2 Warehouses
10,000
base fee up to
$ 846
10,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
0.66
s.f.
50,000
base fee up to
$ 1,108
50,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 0.12
s.f.
9of21
Page 366
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
Fee Name
250,000
Fee Unit
.-
base fee up to
W
Fee Amount
$ 1,357
250,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
0.17
500,000
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 1777
500,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 0.10
s.f.
1,000,000
base fee up to
$ 2,263
1,000,000 S.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 0.23
s.f.
2
S1 Mini Storage / Parking Garages (open or closed)
2,500
base fee up to
$ 1,003
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$6.82
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
$ 1,515
10,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
.77
s.f.
20,000
base fee up to
$ 2,092
20,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 10.46
s.f-
3
S1 Repair Garage
500
base fee up to
$ 1,462
500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
42.64
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
$ 2,315
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 23.09
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
$ 2,893
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 57.85
s.f.
Shells only- Types I-V not including buildout
10,000
base fee up to
$ 2,145
10,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
2.12
s.f.
base fee up to
50,000
$ 2,994
50,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 0.38
s.f.
10 of 21
Page 367
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
Fee Name
250,000
Fee Unit
.-
base fee up to
(U
Fee Amount
$ 3,755
250,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
0.34
500,000
S.f.
base fee up to
$ 4,604
500,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 0.20
S.f.
1,000,000
base fee up to
$ 5,628
1,000,000 S.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 0.56
S.f.
RESIDENTIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION
(Includes all associated MEP's)
R Class
1
R1/R2
500
base fee up to
$ 1,479
500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
38.05
2,500
S.f.
base fee up to
$ 2,240
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 22.04
S.f.
10,000
base fee up to
$ 3,893
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereofA
each add'I 100
nn
$
S.f.
50,000
base fee up to
$ 5,888
50,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
100,000
S.f.
base fee up to
$ g 145
100,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
RI/R2 Major Remodels
500
S.f.
2
base fee up to
$ 1,427
500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
2,500
S.f.
base fee up to
$ 2,450
2,500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
13.65
10,000
S.f.
base fee up to
$ 3,473
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 4.20
S.f.
11 of 21
Page 368
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
Fee Name
50,000
Fee Unit
.-
base fee up to
W
Fee Amount
$ 5,153
50,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
100,000
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 7 462
100,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
.46
s.f.
3
R2 Production Rate
2,500
base fee up to
$ 1,007
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 9.80
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
$ 1,742
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 5.51
s.f.
20,000
base fee up to
$ 2,293
20,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
11.46
s.f.
4
R2.1
500
base fee up to
$ 1,925
500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
24.93
2,500
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 2,424
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 22.04
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
$ 4,077
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
A 00
$
s.f.
50,000
base fee up to
$ 6,071
50,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
A�
100,000
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 8,066
100,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$
s.f.
5
R3
500
base fee up to
$ 1,613
500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
43.30
s.f.
12 of 21
Page 369
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
Fee Name
2,500
Fee Unit
.-
base fee up to
W
Fee Amount
$ 2,479
2,500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
45.14
5,000
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 3,607
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 14.70
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
$ 4,342
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 43.42
s.f.
6
R3 Production Rate
500
base fee up to
$ 1,009
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 31.49
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
$ 1,639
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 16.79
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
$ 2,059
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 13.65
s.f.
base fee up to
10,000
$ 2,741
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
10,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
$ 27.41
R3.1 Change of Occupancy (Build -Out Only)
500
s.f.
7
base fee up to
$ 1,295
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
500 s.f.
each add'I 100
$ 22.31
2,500
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 1,742
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 28.34
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
$ 2,450
5,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
3.67
10,000
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 2,634
10,000 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
26.34
s.f.
13 of 21
Page 370
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
8
Fee Name
R3 Accessory Dwelling Unit
Fee Unit
.-
(U
Fee Amount
500
base fee up to
$ 1,350
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ '
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
$ 2,216
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 88.65
s.f.
9
R4
500
base fee up to
$ 1,925
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 24.93
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
$ 2,424
2,500 s.f.
each add'I 100
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
22.04
10,000
s.f.
base fee up to
$ 4,077
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 4.99
s.f.
50,000
base fee up to
$ 6,071
50,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 3.99
s.f.
100,000
base fee up to
$ 8,066
100,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 8.07
s.f.
MINOR IMPROVEMENTS/ MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
1 Antenna
$ 587
2 New Cell tower w/equipment shelter
Ili
$ 1,839
3 Cell Site modification (hourly)
$ 469
4 Tent or awning w/sides- 200-400 sq ft
Ili
$ 190
5 Tent/awning - 401 + sq ft
Ili
$ 250
6 Balcony/Deck - first 500 sq ft
Ili
$ 587
7 Balcony/Deck - each additional 500 sq ft
Ili
$ 403
8 Demolition Residential
$ 578
9 Demolition multi family/commercial
$ 394
10 Shoring
[2]
$ 210
11 Wall opening (windows/doors) new/altered
Ili
$ 390
12 Dock levelers
Ili
$ 460
13 Block wall 3-6 ft high - 1st 100 linear ft.
Ili
$ 350
14 Each add'I 50 linear ft
Ili
$ 92
15 Masonry pilasters -1-10
Ili
$ 157
14 of 21
Page 371
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
No.
16
17
Fee Name
Fence(wood, wrough iron, chain link) over 6' high
Fire place- masonry
Fee Unit W
Type z
[1]
[1]
Fee
$
$
Amount
350
643
18
Fire place prefab metal
$
447
19
Flagpole over 20' high
[1]
$
368
20
Garage First 500 sq ft
$
771
21
Garage each additional 500 sq ft
$
282
22
Patio cover -1st 500 sq ft
[1]
$
364
23
Patio cover- each additional 500 sq ft
[1]
$
184
24
Patio cover - pre-engineered 1st 500 sq ft
$
407
25
Patio cover- pre-engineered- each additional 500 sq ft
[1]
$
249
26
Patio enclosure First 500 sq ft
[1]
$
521
27
Patio enclosure- each additional 500 sq ft
$
249
28
Patio enclosure- pre-engineered- first 500 sq ft
[1]
$
433
29
Patio enclosure - pre-engineered- each additional 500 sq ft
[1]
$
249
30
Septic pre -inspection
[2]
$
184
31
Relocate building
$
981
32
Retaining wall- 1st 100 linear ft
[1]
$
350
33
Retaining wall- each additional 50 linear ft
[1]
$
66
34
Retaining wall over 6' high - hourly
[1]
$
456
35
Barn/storage shed up to 500 sq ft
[1]
$
679
36
Barn/storage shed each additional 500 sq ft
[1]
$
249
37
Interior remodel (residential) first 500 sq ft
[1]
$
450
38
Interior remodel (residential) - each additional 500 sq ft
[1]
$
315
39
Light Standards - first 5
[1]
$
626
40
Light Standards - each additional
[1]
$
46
41
Mobile home- Not in MH Park
$
983
42
Temporary Building/Trailer
[2]
$
626
43
Demising wall 1-100 linear feet- commercial
[1]
$
718
44
Demising wall each additional 100 linear ft.
[1]
$
157
45
Partition wall 1-50 linear feet- commercial
[1]
$
429
46
partition wall each additional 50 linear feet
[1]
$
157
47
Signs- Blade, channel letter, directional (structural)
[1]
$
341
48
Signs- Monument Signs (structural and electrical)
[1]
$
499
49
Signs - Wall signs- (structural and electrical)
[1]
$
407
50
Skylights / Smoke Hatches 1- 10
[1]
$
499
51
Pre fab spa/hot tub
$
394
52
Stairs- each flight / story
[1]
$
429
53
Storage racks and catwalks -1st 500 sq ft
[1]
$
630
54
Storage racks and catwalks- 501 sq ft -250,000 sq ft
[1]
$
1,260
55
Storage racks and catwalks- over 251,000 sq ft
[1]
$
1,889
56
Mezzanines and Equipment Platforms - 0-500sq ft
[1]
$
849
57
Mezzanines and Equipment Platforms - 501-5000 sq ft
[1]
$
1,142
58
Mezzanines and Equipment Platforms - 5001 + sq ft
[1]
$
1,391
59
Vinyl lined or fiberglass swimming pool- Residential
[1]
$
670
15 of 21
Page 372
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
No.
60
Fee Name
Gunite swimming pool/spa - residential
Fee Unit W
Type z
[1]
$
Fee Amount
919
61
Commercial swimming pool
[1]
$
1,400
62
Utility Connection
$
138
63
Tile Lift and Re-lay- first 3500 sq ft
$
482
64
Tile Lift and Re-lay- Each additional 3500 sq ft
$
262
65
Re -roofing - first 3500 sq ft residential
[1]
$
456
66
Re -roofing - each additional 3500 sq ft
$
184
67
Re -roofing - first 50,000 commercial
$
364
68
Re -roofing - each additional 50,000 commercial
$
138
69
Roof framing (replacement) - 1st 1,000 sq ft residential
[1]
$
341
70
Roof framing (replacement) each additional 500 sq ft
[1]
$
338
71
Roof coating- Commercial
$
521
72
Roof coating- Residential
$
272
73
Room addition- up to 500 sq ft
[1]
$
902
74
Room addition- each additional 500 sq ft
[1]
$
429
75
Spray booth first 500 sq ft
[1]
$
1,112
76
Spray booth -each additional 500 sq ft
[1]
$
446
77
Sauna- pre -fabricated
$
348
78
Siding, stucco, brick or stone veneer first 500 sq ft
$
350
79
Siding, stucco, brick or stone veneer each additional 500 sq ft
$
249
80
Solar/photovoltaic up to 10 Kw - Residential
[1]
$
145
81
Solar/photovoltaic-10.1- 30 Kw -Residential
[1]
$
552
82
Solar/photovoltaic 30.1 + kw Residential
[1]
$
775
83
Solar/photovoltaic - 0-50 kw Commercial
[1]
$
981
84
Solar/photovoltaic - 51+kw Commercial
[1]
$
1,427
85
Residential Solar power storage system
[1]
$
315
86
Solar power storage system Commercial
[1]
$
1,020
87
Insulation / drywall- first 500 sq ft
$
350
88
Insulation / drywall- each additional 500 sq ft
$
150
89
Percolation inspection (septic)
[2]
$
184
90
ADA or Seismic review (hourly)
[2]
$
184
91
Cabana - outdoor living area with walls
[1]
$
600
92
Fuel dispensing system
$
1,331
93
Above ground tanks
$
1,331
94
Carport- 1st 500 sq ft
[1]
$
450
95
Carport - each additional 500 sq ft
[1]
$
250
96
Structural Calculation review (hourly)
[2]
$
97
Re -inspection Fee (hourly)
[2]
$
131
98
Plan Check (hourly)
[2]
$
131
99
Inspection (hourly)
[2]
$
92
100
Hourly review by Engineer
$
101
Outsourced Plan Check
new
City Facilitation of Consultant
$
new
Contractor
Actual Cost
16 of 21
Page 373
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee Fee Name Fee
No.
new Change of Address
City Review
Unit (U Fee
Type z
[2]
$
Amount
525
Recording and Mapping
$
393
new
Occupancy Inspection
[2] $
237
new
Sewer and Water
$
354
Hourly Minimum includes processing
$
367
MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING
Mechanical
1
HVAC system- residential
$
262
2
Exhaust hood, vent fan, ventilation system, Heating unit, compressor, or
Evaporative cooler Residential/commercial each
$
250
3
Package unit or split system- residential
$
197
4
Ductwork only
$
131
5
Freezer/cooler-1st 500 sq ft commercial
$
416
6
Freezer/cooler- 501-50,000 sq ft commercial
$
810
7
Freezer/cooler- 51,000 + sq ft commercial
$
1,007
8
type II hoods or other ventilation system - commercial
$
548
9
Exhaust Hood -Type I -commercial
$
744
10
Dust Collection System- commercial
$
1,357
11
Cooling tower or heat exchange- commercial
$
878
Plumbing
1
Sewer /water service connection- residential
$
164
2
Plumbing or gas fixtures -first 5 fixtures residential
$
197
3
Plumbing or gas fixtures -each additional residential
$
33
4
Private sewage disposal system (new/altered- each residential)
$
394
5
Re -piping up to 20 fixtures - residential
$
262
6
Water service line- residential
$
164
7
Backflow preventer- first 5 residential
$
197
8
Backflow preventer- each additional
$
13
9
Water heater - each residential
$
131
10
Tankless water heater- residential
$
197
11
Graywater system - residential
$
131
12
Solar water system - residential
$
328
13
Repair- Drain line, sewer line, water service or gas line- Residential
$
131
14
Sewer connection - commercial
$
262
15
Plumbing or gas fixtures- first 5 commercial
$
394
16
Plumbing or gas fixtures- each additional commercial
$
164
17
Private sewage disposal system- commercial
$
394
18
Grease interceptor- commercial
$
328
19
Repair drain line, sewer line, water service or gas line- commercial
$
262
20
Water heater- commercial
$
262
21
Tankless water heater - commercial
$
328
17 of 21
Page 374
Exhibit A
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
No.
22
Fee Name
Backflow preventer- commercial
Fee Unit W Fee Amount
Type z
$
262
23
Solar water system - commercial
$
787
24
Graywater system - commercial
$
197
25
Medical Gas system
$
951
Electrical
1
Outdoor events- carnival rides, electric generators
[2] $
328
2
Meter pedestal
$
164
3
Temporary power pole meter panel (each)
$
197
4
Temporary power pole- distribution panel (each)
$
66
5
Receptacle, switch, lighting fixtures - first 10
$
197
6
Receptacle, switch, lighting fixtures -each additional fixture
$
33
7
Appliances, apparatus- residential
$
197
8
Appliances, apparatus- Commercial
$
197
9
Motors, generators- residential
$
197
10
Motors, generators, transformer- commercial
$
328
11
Electrical service less than 400 amp - commercial
$
262
12
Electrical service panel 401 amp -1200 amp- commercial
$
459
13
Electrical service panel over 1200 amp- commercial
$
656
14
Conduits for future use up to 500'
$
164
15
Conduits for future use each add'I 500'
$
66
MEP
MISCELLANEOUS
1
MEP fee (hourly) includes re -inspection fee
$
131
2
MEP Plan check (hourly)
$
131
3
MEP Plan check by engineer
$
-
[Notes]
[1i If structural calculations are submitted a calculation review will be assessed in addition to the base
fee.
18 of 21
Page 375
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
Fee Name
No.
Fee Unit
Type
z
Fee Amount
FIRE CONSTRUCTION FEE SCHEDULE
1
Fire Sprinkler Systems for New Construction
[2]
1-20 Heads
per floor or
$ 459
21-100 Heads
system
$ 787
per floor or
system
101-200 Heads
per floor or
$ 918
201-350 Heads
system
$ 1,050
per floor or
system
per floor or
351+ Heads
$ 1,246
Fire Sprinkler Systems (Production - SFR Tract
system
2
[2]
Homes and Multi -Family)
1-20 Heads
per floor or
$ 262
21-100 Heads
system
per floor or
$ 525
101-200 Heads
system
per floor or
$ 590
system
per floor or
201-350 Heads
$ 656
system
351+ Heads
per floor or
$ 787
system
3
Fire Sprinkler Tenant Improvements (Commercial)
[2]
1-4 Heads
per floor or
$ 394
system
5-20 Heads
per floor or
$ 525
system
per floor or
21-100 Heads
$ 656
system
101-200 Heads
per floor or
$ 787
system
per floor or
201-350 Heads
$ 918
system
351+ Heads
per floor or
$ 1,181
system
19 of 21
Page 376
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee
Fee Name
No.
Miscellaneous Fire Sprinkler and Underground Work
Fee Unit
Type
z
Fee Amount
4
Standard Hourly Rate
minimum
$ -
5
Hydraulic Calculation
per remote
area
[21$
131
6
Dry Pipe Valve
per valve
$ -
7
Private Underground Fire Service
First 1-5
Each Additional
per outlet/
hydrant riser
$ 656
per outlet/
hydrant riser
$ 262
8
Public Underground Fire Service
First 1-5
DCDA./
hydrant
$ 656
Each Additional
DCDA./
hydrant
$ 262
9
Deluge / Pre -Action
per valve
$ 918
10
Fire Pump
per pump
$ 984
11
Gravity
per tank
$ 787
12
Pressure
pertank
$ 787
13
Call I, II, & III Stand Pipe
per outlet
$ 262
14
Fire Alarm and Sprinkler Monitoring System
0-15 Devices
per system
$ 722
16-50 Devices
per system
$ 984
51-100 Devices
per system
$ 1,246
101-500 Devices
per system
$ 1,903
each additional 25 Devices
per system
$ 157
Miscellaneous Fire Systems, Equipment and Tanks
15 Standard Hourly Rate
minimum
$ -
16 Clean Agent Gas Systems
each
$ 918
17 Dry Chemical Systems
each
$ 787
18 Wet Chemical / Kitchen Hood
each
$ 525
19 Foam Systems
each
$ 525
20 Misc. FD Access
per hour
[s]
$ 131
20 of 21
Page 377
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Building and Safety Related Services and Activities
Fee Fee Unit
Fee Name
No. Type
21 Refrigerant Monitoring System each
Fee Amount
Z
$ 787
Reports
22
High Pile Storage
500 - 25,000 scl ft
each
$ 918
25,001- 100,000 scl ft
each
$ 1,181
Each additional 100,000 scl ft
each
$ 262
23
Life Safety and FPP
Hazardous Material Inventory Statement (HMIS)
per hour
$ 131
24
per hour
$ 131
25
Hazardous Material Management Plan (HMMP)
per hour
$ 131
26
Re -Inspection Fee
per hour
[5] $ 131
[Notes]
For all multi -story projects, the fire sprinkler fee is calculated
[1] per floor based on the number of heads on that floor and the
number of hydraulic calculation areas.
Please add the fee for each Hydraulic Calculation area from the
[Z] Miscellaneous Fire Sprinkler and Underground Work to each
floor/per head fees to estimate the total plan check and permit
fees.
The above fees cover typical projects. The fees for certain
unique projects will be determined on a case-by-case basis by
[3] the Building & Safety Services Director. It will be based on the
overhead cost and the time of service provided at the hourly
rate.
[4] The Total Fee breakdown consist of a Technology Fee plus Plan
Review & Inspection Fees (57% Plan Review +43% Inspection).
[5] Not subject to the General Plan Maintenance Fee
21 of 21
Page 378
Exhibit B
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Planning Related Services and Activities
Fee
Fee Name
No.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT FEES
Fee Type
(Flat
Deposit
a i Fee/Deposit
zo
Amount
1
Adult Entertainment Permit
DEPOSIT
$
10,000
2
Annexation
DEPOSIT
$
15,000
3
Appeal of a Planning Commission decision
FLAT
$
2,595
4
Appeal of Planning Director decision
FLAT
$
1,364
5
Business License Review
FLAT
[41 $
71
6
Certificate of Appropriateness
Residential
FLAT
$
2,277
All Others
FLAT
$
6,543
7
Conditional Use Permit
Administrative Approval
FLAT
$
3,716
PC Approval
FLAT
$
6,570
8
Conditional Use Permit - Modification
Administrative Approval
FLAT
50% of the
original fee
PC Approval
FLAT
$
3,390
9
Courtesy Review
FLAT
$
550
10
Design Review
Single Family Residential
5 - 10 Units
FLAT
$
14,131
11- 25 Units
FLAT
$
18,660
26+ Units
FLAT
$
26,432
Multi -Family Residential
2- 10 Units
FLAT
$
14,263
11- 75 Units
FLAT
$
19,127
75+ Units
FLAT
$
28,389
Commercial Uses
0 - 50,000 Square Feet
FLAT
$
13,742
50,001- 150,000 Square Feet
FLAT
$
18,962
150,001+ Square Feet
FLAT
$
29,091
Industrial Zones
0 - 150,000 Square Feet
FLAT
$
13,283
150,001- 300,000 Square Feet
FLAT
$
17,165
300,001+ Square Feet
FLAT
$
22,389
Mixed Use Zones
Combined cost based on land uses
FLAT
$
29,091
30% discount if residential, office, and
commercial are included in one
development
FLAT
$
20,363
11
Design Review - Modification
FLAT
Ill 50% of original
application
12
Development Agreement
DEPOSIT
$
50,000
13
Development Agreement -Modification
DEPOSIT
$
15,000
14
Development Code Amendment
DEPOSIT
$
10,000
15
Entertainment Permit
FLAT
$
7,408
16
Entertainment Permit- Modification
FLAT
$
3,701
17
Entertainment Permit -Annual Renewal
FLAT
$
550
18
Environmental/CEQA Review - Exemption
FLAT
$
88
19
Environmental Review IS/ND/MND
1of21
Page 379
Exhibit B
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Planning Related Services and Activities
Fee
Fee Name
Performed by City Staff
Fee Type
(Flat
D -
DEPOSIT
a J
$
D -
10,000
City Attorney Fee
DEPOSIT
[Zi
Actual Cost
Submitted by Developer, subject to peer review
City Administrative Processing Fee
DEPOSIT
$
2,000
Consultant Cost
DEPOSIT
Actual Cost
City Attorney Fee
DEPOSIT
[21
Actual Cost
City Facilitation of Consultant
City Administrative Processing Fee
DEPOSIT
$
4,000
Consultant Cost
DEPOSIT
Actual Cost
City Attorney Fee
DEPOSIT
[21
Actual Cost
20
Environmental Impact Report
City Administrative Processing Fee
DEPOSIT
$
45,000
Consultant Cost
DEPOSIT
Actual Cost
City Attorney Fee
DEPOSIT
[21
Actual Cost
21
Film Permit
FLAT
[41
$
300
22
General Plan Amendment
DEPOSIT
$
15,000
23
Government Referral
FLAT
$
24
Hillside Design Review
FLAT
1 Unit
FLAT
$
7,959
2 - 4 Units
DEPOSIT
$
12,000
5+ Units
DEPOSIT
$
20,000
25
Home Occupation Permit
FLAT
[41
$
88
26
Land Use Verification Report
FLAT
[41
$
706
27
Landmark Application
FLAT
$
-
28
Landscape Plan Review - New Development
Reviewed by City Staff
FLAT
$
1,432
City Facilitation of Consultant
City Administrative Processing Fee
FLAT
$
309
Consultant Cost
FLAT
Actual Cost
29
Large Day Care Permit
FLAT
$
750
30
Lot Line Adjustment
FLAT
$
795
31
Massage Business Permit
FLAT
$
3,142
32
Massage Business Permit—Ancillary
FLAT
$
1,041
33
Massage Business Permit—Annual Renewal
FLAT
$
550
34
Mills Act Application
FLAT
$
35
Minor Design Review
Residential
FLAT
$
3,131
Commercial / Industrial
FLAT
$
4,859
36
Minor Design Review- Modification
FLAT
$1,500
Residential
$2,500 Other
37
Minor Exception
Administrative Approval
FLAT
$750
Residential
$2,487 Other
PC Approval
FLAT
$
4,013
38
Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program
FLAT
$
883
39
Pre Application Review - Planning Commission
FLAT
$
3,500
40
Preliminary Review
FLAT
$
4,200
2of21
Page 380
Exhibit B
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Planning Related Services and Activities
Fee
41
Fee Name
Public Convenience or Necessity (ABC License)
Fee Type
(Flat
D-
FLAT
a i
$
D -
3,688
42
Public Noticing
[31
Staff Time
FLAT
$
176
Advertising - Actual Cost
FLAT
$
542
Subtotal
$
718
43
Sign Permit
FLAT
[41
$
212
44
Similar Use Determination
FLAT
$
3,956
45
Site Development Review
Residential
FLAT
$
650
Commercial / Industrial
FLAT
$
1,956
46
Specific/Community - New
DEPOSIT
$
25,000
47
Specific/Comm unity Amendment
DEPOSIT
$
10,000
48
Master Plan - New
DEPOSIT
$
25,000
49
Master Plan Amendment
DEPOSIT
$
10,000
50
Street Name Change
FLAT
$
7,697
51
Technical Report Review
City Administrative Processing Fee
FLAT
$
1,413
Consultant Cost
FLAT
Actual Cost
52
Temporary Use Permit
[41
Model Home Sales Office/ Temporary Offices
FLAT
$
2,751
All Others
FLAT
$
525
Non -Profit
FLAT
$
185
53
Tentative Parcel Map
FLAT
$
6,509
54
Tentative Parcel Map - Review for Substantial
Conformance (Modification)
FLAT
$
2,972
55
Tentative Tract Map
5 - 10 lots
FLAT
$
8,565
11- 25 lots
FLAT
$
10,568
26+ lots
DEPOSIT
$
15,000
56
Tentative Tract Map - Review for Substantial
Conformance (Modification)
FLAT
$
4,956
57
Time Extension
Administrative Approval
FLAT
$
2,210
PC Approval
FLAT
$
7,402
58
Trail Easement Vacation
FLAT
$
5,905
59
Tree Removal Permits
Single Family Residential
Live Trees
FLAT
$
175
Dead Trees (No Charge)
FLAT
$
-
Multi-Family/Commercial/Industrial
Administrative Approval up to 4 trees
FLAT
$
812
Administrative Approval 5 or more trees
FLAT
$
1,466
New Development
1- 10 trees
FLAT
$
1,872
11- 20 trees
FLAT
$
2,667
21+ trees
FLAT
$
3,638
60
Tribal Consultation
DEPOSIT
$
1,500
61
Uniform Sign Program
FLAT
[41
$
3,938
3of21
Page 381
Exhibit B
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Fees for Planning Related Services and Activities
Fee
Fee Name
62 Uniform Sign Program Modification
Fee Type
(Flat
D-
FLAT
a J
[4]
D -
$ 1,780
63 Variance
FLAT
$ 4,311
64 Zoning Map Amendment
FLAT
$ 11,048
new 3rd and Subsequent Submittal Review
FLAT
$1,426 or 20%
of the original
application fee,
whichever is
less.
new Additional Hearing Required (per hearing)
FLAT
$ 2,119
REFUNDABLE DEPOSITS
1
On -Site Subdivision sign cash deposit per sign
DEPOSIT
[41
$ 706
2
Off -Site Subdivision sign cash deposit per sign
DEPOSIT
[4]
$ 706
3
Notice of Filing Sign (per sign)
DEPOSIT
[4]
$ 971
4
Temporary Use Permit Mode[ Home Restoration
Deposit
DEPOSIT
[41
$ 883
Fees for development entitlements or services not listed will
be determined on a case-by-case basis by the Planning
Director. It will be based on the fully burdened hourly rate
and the time of service provided.
Applications requiring three or more entitlements from the fee list
will use the fee schedule to establish a deposit amount.
[Notes]
[1] Set per City policy/ NBS did not evaluate.
[2] City Attorney fee charged based on actual cost.
Advertising fee is charged per advertisement. Where advertising in
[3] the newspaper is not required, but only mailers are required, only
staff time will be charged.
[4] Not subject to the General Plan Maintenance Fee
4of21
Page 382
1NBS'
helping communities
fund tomorrow
City of Rancho Cucamonga
User Fee Study
Final Report
May 14, 2018
32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Toll free: 800.434.8349 Fax: 951.296.1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ExecutiveSummary.......................................................................................................................................1
Outcomes..................................................................................................................................................1
ReportFormat...........................................................................................................................................
2
Section 1— Introduction and Fundamentals.................................................................................................3
Scopeof Study...........................................................................................................................................3
Methodsof Analysis..................................................................................................................................
3
Costof Service Analysis.........................................................................................................................3
FeeEstablishment.................................................................................................................................5
Cost Recovery Evaluation......................................................................................................................6
DataSources.............................................................................................................................................
7
Section2 — Planning Fees..............................................................................................................................9
Costof Service Analysis.............................................................................................................................
9
FeeEstablishment...................................................................................................................................10
CostRecovery Evaluation........................................................................................................................10
Section 3 — Building and Safety Fees..........................................................................................................12
Costof Service Analysis...........................................................................................................................12
FeeEstablishment...................................................................................................................................13
Cost Recovery Evaluation........................................................................................................................13
Section 4 — General Plan Maintenance Surcharge......................................................................................15
Costof Service Analysis...........................................................................................................................15
FeeEstablishment...................................................................................................................................15
Cost Recovery Evaluation........................................................................................................................17
Section5 — Conclusion................................................................................................................................19
Appendices
Cost of Service Analysis (Fee Tables)
Planning Appendix A.1
Building and Safety Appendix A.2
Building and Safety— Fire Fees Appendix A.3
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga TOC
Prepared by NBS
Executive Summary
NBS performed a User Fees and Charges Study (Study) for the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City). The purpose of this
report is to describe the Study's findings and recommendations, which intend to defensibly update and establish
user and regulatory fees for service for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.
California cities impose user fees and regulatory fees for services and activities they provide through provisions of
the State Constitution. First, cities may perform broad activities related to their local policing power and other
service authority as defined in Article XI, Sections 7 and 9. Second, cities may establish fees for service through the
framework defined in Article XIIIC, Section 1. Under this latter framework, a fee may not exceed the estimated
reasonable cost of providing the service or performing the activity. For a fee to qualify as such, it must relate to a
service or activity under the control of the individual/entity on which the fee is imposed. For example, the
individual/entity requests service of the municipality or his or her actions specifically cause the municipality to
perform additional activities. In this manner, the service or the underlying action causing the municipality to
perform service is either discretionary and/or is subject to regulation. As a discretionary service or regulatory
activity, the user fees and regulatory fees considered in this Study fall outside requirements for imposition of taxes,
special taxes, or fees imposed as incidences of property ownership.
The City's chief purposes in conducting this Study were to ensure that existing fees do not exceed the costs of
service and to provide an opportunity for the City Council to re -align fee amounts with the adopted cost recovery
policies.
Outcomes
This Study examined user and regulatory fees managed by the following City departments and programs:
• Economic and Community Development Department — Planning Division
• Economic and Community Development Department — Building and Safety Division
The Study identified approximately $2.7 million currently collected per year from fees for service, versus $4.1 million
of eligible costs for recovery from fees for service. The following table provides a summary of results for each
service area studied:
As shown, the City is recovering approximately 66% of costs associated with providing user and regulatory fee
related services. Should the Council elect to adopt fee levels at 100% of the full cost recovery amounts determined
by this Study, an additional $1.4 million in costs could be recovered. However, as discussed in Section 1 of this
report, there are reasons for adopting a fee at less than the calculated full cost recovery amount. As such, City staff
provided initial recommended fee amounts for consideration. If Council elects to adopt fee levels at staff's initial
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NBS
1
recommendations, an additional $938,000 in costs could be recovered, or an 88% cost recovery outcome for
services provided.
Report Format
This report documents analytical methods and data sources used throughout the Study, presents findings regarding
current levels of cost recovery achieved from user and regulatory fees, discusses recommended fee amounts, and
provides a comparative survey of fees to neighboring agencies for similar services.
• Section 1 of the report outlines the foundation of the Study and general approach.
• Sections 2 and 3 discuss the results of the cost of service analysis performed, segmented by category of
fee and/or department. The analysis applied to each category/department falls into studies of: the fully
burdened hourly rate(s), the calculation of the costs of providing service, the cost recovery policies of each
fee category, and the staff -recommended fees for providing services.
• Section 4 discusses the General Plan Maintenance funding and surcharge calculation.
• Section 5 provides the grand scope conclusions of the analysis provided in the preceding sections.
• Appendices to this report include additional analytical details for each department or division studied.
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NBS
2
Section 1— Introduction and Fundamentals
Scope of Study
The following is a summarized list of fees for each City department or program studied:
• Economic and Community Development Department - Planning:
o Environmental / CECA Review
o Conditional / Special Use Permits
o Tentative Parcel / Subdivision Maps
o Site Development Plans
o Other types of Planning entitlements and permits
o Cyclical General Plan maintenance, update, and implementation
• Economic and Community Development Department — Building and Safety:
o Building Permits and Plan Checks
o Miscellaneous minor residential permits
o Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical Permits
o Fire Alarm Systems
o Fire Sprinkler Systems
The fees examined in this Study specifically excluded utility rates, development impact fees, and special
assessments, all of which fall under distinct analytical and procedural requirements different from the body of
user/regulatory fees analyzed in this effort. Additionally, this Study and the excluded facility and equipment rental
rates, as well as most of fines and penalties that may be imposed by the City for violations to its requirements or
code. (The City is not limited to the costs of service when charging for entrance to or use of government property,
or when imposing fines and penalties.)
Methods of Analysis
There are three phases of analysis completed for each City department or program studied:
1) Cost of service analysis
2) Fee establishment
3) Cost recovery evaluation
Cost of Service Analysis
This cost of service analysis is a quantitative effort that compiles the full cost of providing governmental services
and activities. There are two primary types of costs considered: direct and indirect costs. Direct costs are those
that specifically relate to the activity in question, including the real-time provision of the service. Indirect costs are
those that support provision of services in general, but cannot be directly assigned to the fee for service in question.
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga 3
Prepared by NBS
Components of the full cost of service include direct labor costs, indirect labor costs, specific direct non -labor costs
where applicable, allocated non -labor costs, and allocated Citywide overhead. Definitions of these cost
components are as follows:
• Labor costs — Salary, wages and benefits expenses for City personnel specifically involved in the provision of
services and activities to the public.
• Indirect labor costs — Personnel expenses supporting the provision of services and activities. This can include
line supervision and departmental management, administrative support within a department, and staff
involved in technical activities related to the direct services provided to the public.
• Specific direct non -labor costs — Discrete expenses incurred by the City due to a specific service or activity
performed, such as contractor costs, third -party charges, and very specific materials used in the service or
activity. (In most fee types, this component is not used, as it is very difficult to directly assign most non -labor
costs at the activity level.)
• Allocated indirect non -labor costs — Expenses other than labor for the departments involved in the provision
of services. In most cases, these costs are allocated across all services provided by a department, rather than
directly assigned to fee categories.
• Allocated indirect organization -wide overhead — These are expenses, both labor and non -labor, related to
agency -wide support services. Support services include general administrative services such as City Council,
City Manager, City Clerk, City Attorney, Human Resources, Finance, etc. An agency's support services
departments assist the direct providers of public service. The amount of costs attributable to each department
or program included in this Study were sourced from a separate Cost Allocation Plan, provided by the City.
All cost components in this Study use annual (or annualized) figures, representing a twelve-month cycle of expenses
incurred by the City in the provision of all services and activities agency -wide.
Nearly all of the fees under review in this Study require specific actions on the part of City staff to provide the
service or conduct the activity. Because labor is the primary underlying factor in these activities, the Study
expresses the full cost of service as a fully burdened cost per labor hour. NBS calculates a composite, fully
burdened, hourly rate for each department, division, program, or activity, as applicable to the specific organization
and needs of each area studied. The rate serves as the basis for further quantifying the average full cost of providing
individual services and activities.
Deriving the fully burdened labor rate for each department, and various functional divisions within a department,
requires two figures: the full costs of service and the number of hours available to perform those services. The full
costs of service are quantified through the earlier steps described in this analysis. NBS derives the hours available
from a complete listing of all personnel employed by the City.
A full-time employee equates to 2,080 hours per year of regular time. Using this as an initial benchmark of labor
time, the Study removes the average employee's eligible annual leave from the total number of regular paid hours
to generate the total number of available labor hours for each City department or program. These available hours
represent the amount of productive time available for providing both fee -recoverable and non -fee recoverable
services and activities. The productive labor hours divided into the annual full costs of service equals the composite
fully burdened labor rate. Some agencies also use the resulting rates for other purposes than setting fees, such as
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NBS
4
when the need arises to calculate the full cost of general services, or structure a cost recovery agreement with
another agency or third party.
Fully burdened labor rates applied at the individual fee level estimate an average full cost of providing each service
or activity. This step required the development of staff time estimates for the services and activities listed in the
City's fee schedule. In some fee programs, the City's time tracking records were useful in identifying time spent
providing general categories of service (e.g. plan review, inspection, public assistance, etc.). However, the City does
not systematically track activity service time for all departments or all fee services provided. Consequently,
interviews and questionnaires were used to develop the necessary data sets describing estimated labor time. In
most cases, City staff estimated the average amount of time (in minutes and hours) it would take to complete a
typical occurrence of each service or activity considered by examining each required task necessary to provide the
service. Every attempt was made to ensure that each department having a direct role in the provision of each
service or activity provided a time estimate.
It should be noted that the development of these time estimates was not a one-step process: estimates received
were carefully reviewed by both consultant and departmental management to assess the reasonableness of such
estimates. Based on this review, the City reconsidered its time estimates until both parties were comfortable that
the fee models reasonably reflected the average service level provided by the City. Then, staff's time estimates
were applied to the appropriate fully burdened labor rate to yield an average full cost of the service or activity.
The average full cost of service is just that: an average cost at the individual fee level. The City does not currently
have the systems in place to impose fees for every service or activity based on the actual amount of time it takes
to serve each individual. Moreover, such an approach is almost universally infeasible without significant — if not
unreasonable — investments in costly technology. Much of the City's fee schedule is composed of flat fees, which
by definition, are linked to an average cost of service; thus, use of this average cost method is the predominant
approach in proceeding toward a schedule of revised fees. Flat fee structures based on average costs of service are
widely applied among other California municipalities, and it is a generally accepted approach. (Refer to the
subsection below regarding "Fee Establishment" for further discussion.)
Subsequent chapters and the appendices of this report discuss the completed cost of service analysis developed
for each department or division.
Fee Establishment
Because most of the City's fees are flat fees, they correspond directly to the average full cost of service result. For
the few activities where estimating an average was impossible — due to the highly variable nature of the service —
use of fully burdened hourly rates coupled with time tracking is the preferred fee structure. (In other words, the
City would impose a fee per hour of staff time, requiring some degree of time estimation or outright time -tracking
at the case level.)
Establishing fees also includes a range of considerations, as described below:
• Addition to and deletion of fees — The Study's process provided each department the opportunity to
propose additions and deletions to their fee schedules, as well as rename, reorganize, and clarify fees
imposed. Many such revisions better conform fees to current practices, as well as improve the calculation of
fees owed by an individual, the application of said fees, and the collection of revenues. In other words, as
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NBS
staff is more knowledgeable and comfortable working with the fee schedule, the accuracy achieved in both
imposing fees on users and collecting revenues for the City is greater. Beyond this, some additions to the fee
schedule were simply identification of existing services or activities performed by City staff for which no fee is
currently charged.
• Revision to the structure of fees — In most cases, the current structure of fees did not change; the focus is to
recalibrate the fee amount to match the costs of service. In several cases, however, fee categories and fee
names were simplified or re -structured to increase the likelihood of full cost recovery, or to enhance the
fairness of how the fee applies to various types of fee payers.
• Documentation of tools to calculate special cost recovery — The City's fee schedule should include the list of
fully burdened rates developed by the Study. Documenting these rates in the fee schedule provides an
opportunity for the City Council to approve rates for cost recovery under a "time and materials" approach. It
also provides clear publication of those rates, so fee payers of any uniquely determined fee can reference the
amounts. The fee schedule should provide language that supports special forms of cost recovery for
activities and services not contemplated by the adopted master fee schedule. These rare instances use the
published rates to estimate a flat fee, or bill on an hourly basis, at the discretion of the director of each
department.
Cost Recovery Evaluation
The NBS fee model compares the existing fee for each service or activity to the average full cost of service quantified
through this analysis. A cost recovery rate of 0% identifies no current recovery of costs from fee revenues (or
insufficient information available for evaluation). A rate of 100% means that the fee currently recovers the full cost
of service. A rate between 0% and 100% indicates partial recovery of the full cost of service through fees. A rate
greater than 100% means that the fee exceeded the full cost of service.
User fees and regulatory fees examined in this Study should not exceed the full cost of service. In other words, the
cost recovery rate achieved by a fee should not be greater than 100%. In most cases, imposing a fee above this
threshold could require the consensus of the voters.
NBS also assists with modeling the "recommended" or "targeted" level of cost recovery for each fee, always
established at 100%, or less, than the calculated full cost of service. Targets and recommendations always reflect
agency -specific judgments linked to a variety of factors, such as existing City policies, agency -wide or departmental
revenue objectives, economic goals, community values, market conditions, level of demand, and others.
A general means of selecting an appropriate cost recovery target is to consider the public and private benefits of
the service or activity in question.
• To what degree does the public at large benefit from the service?
• To what degree does the individual or entity requesting, requiring, or causing the service benefit?
When a service or activity completely benefits the public at large, there is generally little to no recommended fee
amount (i.e., 0% cost recovery), reflecting that a truly public -benefit service is best funded by the general resources
of the City, such as General Fund revenues (e.g., taxes). Conversely, when a service or activity completely benefits
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NBS
an individual or entity, there is generally closer to or equal to 100% of cost recovery from fees, collected from the
individual or entity. An example of a completely private benefit service may be a request for exemption from a City
regulation or process.
In some cases, a strict public -versus -private benefitjudgment may not be sufficient to finalize a cost recovery target.
Any of the following other factors and considerations may influence or supplement the public/private benefit
perception of a service or activity:
• If optimizing revenue potential is an overriding goal, is it feasible to recover the full cost of service?
• Will increasing fees result in non-compliance or public safety problems?
• Are there desired behaviors or modifications to behaviors of the service population helped or hindered
through the degree of pricing for the activities?
• Does current demand for services support a fee increase without adverse impact to the citizenry served
or current revenue levels? (In other words, would fee increases have the unintended consequence of
driving away the population served?)
• Is there a good policy basis for differentiating between type of users (e.g., residents and non-residents,
residential and commercial, non-profit entities and business entities)?
• Are there broader City objectives that inform a less than full cost recovery target from fees, such as
economic development goals and local social values?
Because this element of the Study is subjective, NBS provides the full cost of service calculation information and
the framework for considering fees, while those closest to the fee -paying population — the City departments and
programs — have considered appropriate cost recovery levels at or below that full cost for the Council's review.
Data Sources
The following City -published data sources were used to support the cost of service analysis and fee establishment
phases of this Study:
• The City of Rancho Cucamonga's Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2017-18.
• A complete listing of all City personnel, salary/wage rates, regular hours, paid benefits, and paid leave amounts
— provided by the Finance Department.
• Various correspondences with the City staff supporting the adopted budgets and current fees, including budget
notes and expenditure detail not shown in the published document.
• Prevailing fee schedules provided by each involved department.
• Annual workload data from the prior fiscal year provided by each involved department.
The City's adopted budget is the most significant source of information affecting cost of service results. NBS did not
audit or validate the City's financial management and budget practices, nor was cost information adjusted to reflect
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NBS
different levels of service or any specific, targeted performance benchmarks. This Study has accepted the City's
budget as a legislatively adopted directive describing the most appropriate and reasonable level of City spending.
Consultants accept the City Council's deliberative process and ultimate acceptance of the budget plan and further
assert that through that legislative process, the City has yielded a reasonable expenditure plan, valid for use in
setting cost -based fees.
Original data sets also support the work of this Study: primarily, estimated staff time at various levels of detail. To
develop these data sets, consultants prepared questionnaires and conducted interviews with individual
departments. In the fee establishment phase of the analysis, departmental staff provided estimates of average
time spent providing a service or activity corresponding with an existing or new fee. Consultants and departmental
management reviewed and questioned responses to ensure the best possible set of estimates.
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga 8
Prepared by NBS
Section 2 — Planning Fees
The Planning Division is tasked with ensuring land uses in Rancho Cucamonga comply with City codes, the General
Plan, City Council and Planning Commission policies, and State law requirements. Approval of projects through the
planning process is often required prior to issuing building permits. The Planning Division handles environmental
review of public and private projects. Advanced planning programs provided by the division include a
comprehensive General Plan update, preparing and amending specific plans, and conducting special land use
studies as directed by the Planning Commission and City Council.
Cost of Service Analysis
The following table categorizes the Planning Division's costs across both fee and non -fee related services, resulting
in the fully -burdened hourly rate applicable toward establishing the full cost of providing fee related services.
Labor
$ 116,561
$ 223,882
$ 62,627
$ 605,149
$ 1,008,219
Recurring Non -Labor
4,122
7,918
2,215
21,401
35,656
Citywide Overhead
63,710
122,370
34,231
330,763
551,074
Department Admin
Division Total
92,794
$ 277,188
178,232
$ 532,402
49,857
$ 148p930
481,757
1A39,071
802,640
$ 2,397p590
Cost Recovery Targeted from Fees
50%
0%
0%
100%
665
Amount Targeted for Consideration in Billings/Fees
138,594
-
1,439,071
1,577,665
Amount Requiring Another Funding Source
138,594
532,402
148,930
819,926
Reference: Direct 8,934
Hours OnIV
All subsequent cost of service calculations at the individual fee level assume a fully burdened hourly rate of $177,
with estimated eligible recovery of $1.6 million in costs from fees for service.
The cost category columns shown in the table above were adapted and summarized from Division staff interviews.
To assist the reader in understanding the underlying costs and assumptions used to calculate the fully burdened
hourly rate, the following provides summary descriptions of each cost category:
• Public Counter Duty / General Info — Activities associated with responding to phone calls and general
information requests that support the development review process. Typically, some portion of costs for
provision of general public information and assistance do not apply toward recovery from fees, and are
considered a basic function of governmental services to the public. Planning staff estimated that approximately
50% of these costs support land use application review activities, while the remaining costs should be not be
considered in the calculation of fees for services.
• Advance / Long Range Planning — Advanced planning programs provided by the division include a cyclical and
comprehensive General Plan update, preparing and amending specific plans, and conducting special land use
studies as directed by the Planning Commission and City Council. These costs are not considered for recovery
from Planning fees, but are commonly recovered partially through a separate "Long Range Planning" or
"General Plan Maintenance" surcharge on top of relevant planning and building permits in other California
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NBS
0
cities. NBS has calculated a separate surcharge for recovery of these costs as part of this Study, discussed in
Section 4 of this report.
• Non -Fee Support to Other City Departments — Planning staff provide support to other City Departments. These
costs are not recommended for recovery from Planning fees.
• Current Planning Direct Services — Development review and approval comprises the majority of this Division's
work efforts. 100% of these costs apply toward recovery from the Division's routine types of fees for service.
Significant analytical and policy decisions revolve around inclusion of categorized activity costs in the fully burdened
hourly rate. The decision of whether to apply or exclude certain costs toward recovery in fees for service stems
from the basic fee setting parameters offered by the California State Constitution and Statutes, which requires that
any new fee levied or existing fee increased should not exceed the estimated amount required to provide the
service for which the charge is levied.
Fee Establishment
The list of fees as shown in Appendix A.1 to this report reflect some minor changes to the City's prior fee schedule.
Highlights include:
• Fees that were redundant or unused were deleted
• To update fee structures to be clearer and more precise, added new sub -categories for the following fees:
Conditional Use Permit & Modification, Design Review, Environmental Review IS/ND/MND, Environmental
Impact Report, Hillside Design Review, Minor Design Review, Minor Exception, Site Development Review,
Temporary Use Permit, Tentative Tract Map, Time Extension, and Tree Removal Permits.
• New fee categories were added for Landscape Plan Review— New Development, Public Noticing, Technical
Report Review, 3rd and Subsequent Submittal Reviews, and Additional Hearings Required.
In addition to these changes, the Study's efforts focused on review and refinement of the Division's tools to
calculate special cost recovery. The proposed fee schedule distinguishes between projects recommended by the
Division as flat/fixed fee amounts, versus projects requiring an initial deposit and hourly billing basis for cost
recovery.
Section 1, Methods of Analysis, provides additional discussion on the Study's approach to adding, deleting, and
revising fee categories.
Cost Recovery Evaluation
Appendix A.1 presents the results of the detailed cost recovery analysis for the City's Planning fees. The "Cost of
Service per Activity" column establishes the maximum adoptable fee amount for the corresponding service
identified in the "Fee Name" list. This Cost of Service per Activity is reflective of the Planning Division's costs for
review of each entitlement/permit, as well as any supporting department/division's review as required by the City's
established development review processes.
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga 10
Prepared by NBS
The City's current Planning fees recover approximately 44% of the City's total cost of providing services. As shown
in the following table, the City collects approximately $708,000 per year in revenues at current fee amounts. At full
cost recovery, the same demand for these services would recover approximately $1.6 million.
NBS provided the full cost of service information and the framework for considering fees, while those closest to the
fee -paying population, the Planning Division, considered appropriate cost recovery levels at or below that full cost.
The "Recommended Fee Level/Deposit" column in Appendix A.1 displays the City staff's initial recommended fee
amounts. Staff recommends all fees to recover 100% of the costs of providing services except for the following fees,
in order to keep those affordable and encourage public use for Rancho Cucamonga residents:
Adult Entertainment Permit
Annexation
Certificate of Appropriateness - Residential
Conditional Use Permits Courtesy Review
Design Review for Mixed Use Zones
Entertainment Permit
Film Permit
Massage Business Permit
Minor Design Review
Minor Exception
PC Approval
Pre -Application Review
Preliminary Review
Site Development Review
Temporary Use Permit —All Other/ Non -Profit
Trail Easement Vacation
Tree Removal Permits — Single Family
Residential
Uniform Sign Program Modification
Variance,
Zoning Map Amendment
Appeals
Large Day Care Permit
Government Referral
Landmark Application
Mills Act Application
Dead Tree Removal
Staff's initial recommendations for adjusted fee amounts recover an additional $595,000 in costs per year, as
opposed to $892,000 if all fees were recommended at full cost recovery. Recommended fee amounts will recover
approximately 81% of the total costs of providing fee related services, assuming current demand for services stays
relatively constant.
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NBS
11
Section 3 - Building and Safety Fees
The Building and Safety Division is responsible for ensuring that structures adhere to minimum standards to
safeguard life, health, property and the public welfare. This is accomplished through building plan review, issuance
of building permits and inspection of buildings to ensure compliance with local and state laws. Building and Safety
also performs Fire reviews and inspections on behalf of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD).
Cost of Service Analysis
The following categorizes the Building and Safety Division's costs across both fee and non -fee related services,
resulting in the fully -burdened hourly rate applicable toward establishing the full cost of providing fee related
services.
Labor
$ 220,235
$ 77,023
$ 135,128
$ 364,143
$ 355,099
$ 1,151,629
Recurring Non -Labor
6,000
2,099
3,682
189,921
9,675
211,377
Citywide Overhead
108,555
37,965
66,605
179,488
175,030
567,643
Building Division Admin
136,646
47,789
83,841
299,403
220,323
788,002
Division Total
471,437
$ 164,876
$ 289,256
$ 1,032,955
$ 760,126
$ 2,718,650
Cost Recovery Targeted from Fees
90%
0%
100%
100%
100%
77i
Amount Targeted for Consideration in Billings/Fees
424,293
289,256
1,032,955
760,126
2,082,337
Amount Requiring Another Funding Source
47,144
164,876
-
-
-
164,876
Reference:
Direct Hours 15,870
Only
All subsequent cost of service calculations at the individual fee level assume a fully burdened hourly rate of $131,
with estimated eligible recovery of $2.1 million in costs from fees for service.
The cost category columns shown in the table above were adapted and summarized from Division staff interviews.
To assist the reader in understanding the underlying costs and assumptions used to calculate the fully burdened
hourly rate, the following provides summary descriptions of each cost category:
• Public Counter and General Information -Staff time devoted to responding to phone calls and public
inquiries not specifically associated with an active permit. Typically, some portion of costs for provision
of general public information and assistance are not linked for recovery from fees for building permit
applications. Building staff estimates approximately 90% of this activity supports building plan review
and inspection activities, while 10% of the remaining costs should not be considered fee recoverable.
• Building Code Enforcement - Work activities in response to a complaint received by the Building Division
related to violation of a prior condition of approval, City Ordinance or State law. Includes complaint
investigation, follow up, and any associated abatement or enforcement actions. None of these costs are
recommended for recovery in the City's user and regulatory fees for service.
• Direct Services (Processing, Plan Check, Inspection) - Work activities associated with an active building
permit applications. 100% of these costs are recoverable in Building user and regulatory fees for service.
User Fees and Charges Study - City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NBS
12
Significant analytical and policy decisions revolve around inclusion of categorized activity costs in the fully
burdened hourly rate. The decision of whether to apply or exclude certain costs toward recovery in fees for
service stems from the basic fee setting parameters offered by the California State Constitution and Statutes,
which requires that any new fee levied or existing fee increased should not exceed the estimated amount
required to provide the service for which the charge is levied.
Fee Establishment
The list of fees as shown in Appendices A.2 and A.3 to this report reflect the following changes to the City's prior
fee schedule for Building:
• Fees that were redundant or unused were deleted
• Restructuring of how building permit fees are calculated to simplify and improve clarity
• Added new fees for Outsourced Plan Check, Change of Address, Occupancy Inspection, and Sewer and
Water
Section 1, Methods of Analysis, provides additional discussion on the Study's approach to adding, deleting, and
revising fee categories.
Cost Recovery Evaluation
Appendices A.2 and A.3 present the results of the detailed cost recovery analysis for the City's Building and Safety
fees. The "Cost of Service per Activity' column establishes the maximum adoptable fee amount for the
corresponding service identified in the "Fee Name" list. This Cost of Service per Activity is reflective of the Building
and Safety Division's costs for review of each plan/permit, as well as any supporting department/division review as
required by the City's established development review processes.
The City's Building fees currently recover approximately 94% of the Division's cost of providing services. As shown
in the following table, the City collects approximately $1.98 million per year in revenues at current fee amounts. At
full cost recovery, the same demand for these services would generate approximately $2.10 million.
NBS provided the full cost of service information and the framework for considering fees, while those closest to the
fee -paying population, the City departments, considered appropriate cost recovery levels at or below that full cost.
The "Recommended Fee Level/Deposit" column in Appendices A.2 and A.3 display City staff's initially
recommended fee amounts. Staff recommends all fees to recover 100% of the costs of providing services except
for the following miscellaneous permits, in order to keep those affordable and encourage public safety for Rancho
Cucamonga residents:
Tent/Awnings Fences
Wall openings Retaining walls
Block walls Interior remodels
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NIBS
13
Siding
Insulation/drywall
Cabana, and Carports.
Mechanical Permits for Exhaust hoods, Vent
fans, Ventilation systems, Heating Units,
Compressors, and Evaporative coolers.
Staff's initial recommendations for adjusted fee amounts recover an additional $83,000 in costs per year, as
opposed to $121,000 if all fees were recommended at full cost recovery. Recommended fee amounts will recover
approximately 98% of the total costs of providing fee related services, assuming current demand for services stays
relatively constant.
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga 14
Prepared by NBS
Section 4 — General Plan Maintenance Surcharge
The City of Rancho Cucamonga updates its General Plan on a routine basis. This Plan helps to guide the growth of
the community in a consistent manner. Government Code 66014 (b) allows local agencies to, "...include the costs
reasonably necessary to prepare and revise the plans and policies that a local agency is required to adopt before it
can make any necessary findings and determinations". This section of the Government Code supports inclusion of
general plan maintenance and update costs in fees for service.
Cost of Service Analysis
As shown in the table below, the City would need to accrue approximately $400,000 per year in funding for the
purpose of updating and maintaining the General Plan.
Amortization
Total Cost Period (Yrs) Annual Cost
� 111 111 1 � 11 111
This is based on the City's estimate of $4 million in contract and staffing costs required to update the General Plan.
Fee Establishment
The City does not currently collect a General Plan Surcharge. The proposed Surcharge should apply only to projects
that either impact or are subject to policies in the General Plan. The City and consultants reviewed the proposed
list of development user fees and determined the following Planning and Building fee items are eligible for the
surcharge:
• Planning Applications:
o Adult Entertainment Permit
o Annexation
o Appeals
o Certificate of Appropriateness
o Conditional Use Permit & Modification
o Courtesy Review
o Design Review & Modification
o Development Agreement & Modification
o Development Code Amendment
o Entertainment Permit & Modification
o Environmental Review IS/ND/MND and Exemptions
o Environmental Impact Report
o General Plan Amendment
o Government Referral
o Hillside Design Review
o Landmark Application
o Landscape Plan Review — New Development
o Large Day Care Permit
o Lot Line Adjustment
o Massage Business Permit
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga 15
Prepared by NBS
o Mills Act Application
o Minor Design Review & Modification
o Minor Exception
o Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program
o Pre -Application Review
o Preliminary Review
o Public Convenience or Necessity (ABC License)
o Public Noticing
o Similar Use Determination
o Site Development Review
o Specific / Community New & Amendment
o Master Plan New & Amendment
o Street Name Change
o Technical Report Review
o Tentative Parcel Map
o Tentative Tract Map
o Time Extension
o Trail Easement Vacation
o Tree Removal Permits
o Uniform Sign Program & Modification
o Variance
o Zoning Map Amendment
• Building permits:
o Building permit and plan check for all new construction and tenant improvements
o Residential and Commercial Processing fees that required routing to other departments
o Antennas
o New Cell Towers w/ equipment shelter
o Cell Site Modification
o Tent/Awnings
o Balcony/Decks
o Demolitions
o Block Walls
o Masonry Pilasters
o Fences
o Flagpoles
o Garages
o Patio Covers
o Patio Enclosures
o Septic pre -inspections
o Relocate Buildings
o Retaining Walls
o Barn/Storage sheds
o Light Standards
o Mobile Homes
o Temporary Building/Trailers
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NIBS
16
o Signs
o Re -roofing
o Roof Framing
o Room Addition
o Siding
o Solar/Photovoltaic
o Residential/Commercial Solar Power Storage System
o Cabanas
o Above Ground Tanks
o Carports
o Exhaust Hoods
o Dust Collection Systems
o Cooling Tower or Heat Exchange
o Outdoor Events — Carnival Rides, Electric Generators
Revenue from this fee should be accounted for separately and tracked for application of funds toward update and
maintenance of the Plan. In calculating the surcharge amount for recovery of General Plan maintenance and update
costs, the Department and Council should agree upon a desired cost recovery target for this program, to be
captured as a percentage of each applicable fee amount. Projected FY 18-19 fee revenue for projects impacted or
subject to policies in the General Plan is approximately $2.6 million. The following table provides options for
surcharge amounts based on varied cost recovery targets.
Each jurisdiction's policy makers must decide to what degree new development impacts the revision and
maintenance efforts to their Plan. For jurisdictions with large amounts of undeveloped land available, the impact
is typically considered higher than for jurisdictions that are closer to "build -out" of available land resources. This
surcharge should apply to projects with the largest relative impact on the maintenance, update, and use of the
City's General Plan.
Cost Recovery Evaluation
As the City does not currently have a General Plan Maintenance surcharge, there is no annual current fee revenue
collected for this purpose.
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga 17
Prepared by NBS
Upon reviewing this information and options for establishing this surcharge, City staff recommends a 65% annual
cost recovery target, with a corresponding fee of 10.0% applicable to projects impacted or subject to policies in the
General Plan. If adopted, the fee could generate approximately $260,000 per year. The remaining unfunded amount
would be subsidized by other City revenue sources such as the general fund. This is appropriate considering there
is a broader community benefit received from the Plan, as well as use of the Plan by other non -development
services departments such as public safety and utilities.
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga 18
Prepared by NBS
Section 5 — Conclusion
Based on the Cost of Service Analysis, Cost Recovery Evaluation, and Proposed Fee phases of analysis in this Study,
the proposed master schedule of fees formatted for implementation has been prepared and included in the City's
accompanying staff report.
As discussed throughout this report, the proposed fee schedule includes fee increases intended to greatly improve
the City's recovery of costs incurred to provide individual services, as well as to adjust fees downward where fees
charge exceed the average costs incurred.
Predicting the amount to which any adopted fee increases will affect Department revenues is difficult to quantify.
For the near-term, the City should not count on increased revenues to meet any specific expenditure plan.
Experience with these fee increases should be gained first before revenue projections are revised. However, unless
there is some significant, long-term change in activity levels at the City, proposed fee amendments should — over
time — enhance the City's revenue capabilities, providing it the ability to stretch other resources further for the
benefit of the public at large.
The City's Master Fee Schedule should become a living document but handled with care:
• A fundamental purpose of the fee schedule is to provide clarity and transparency to the public and to staff
regarding fees imposed by the City. Once adopted by the Council, the fee schedule is the final word on
the amount and manner in which fees should be imposed by the departments. Old fee schedules should
be superseded by the new master document. If the master document is found to be missing fees, those
fees need eventually to be added to the master schedule and should not continue to exist outside the
consolidated, master framework.
• NBS recommends the City adjust fees on an annual basis to keep pace at least with cost inflation. The City's
historical approach has been to apply the Bureau of Labor Statistics Employee Cost Index for State and
Local Government Employees - Total Compensation. In NBS' opinion, the City's approach is in line with
industry standards and could be continued. Conducting a comprehensive user fee Study is not an annual
requirement; it becomes worthwhile only over time as significant shifts in organization, local practices,
legislative values, or legal requirements change. In NBS' experience, a comprehensive analysis such as this
should be performed every three to five years. It should be noted that when an automatic adjustment is
applied annually, the City is free to use its discretion in applying the adjustment; not all fees need to be
adjusted, especially when there are good policy reasons for an alternate course. The full cost of service is
the City's only limit in setting its fees.
As a final note in this Study, it is worth acknowledging the path that fees in general have taken in California. The
public demands ever more precise and equitable accounting of the basis for governmental fees and a greater say
in when and how they are imposed. It is inevitable in the not too distant future that user fees and regulatory fees
will demand an even greater level of analysis and supporting data to meet the public's evolving expectations.
Technology systems will play an increased and significant role in an agency's ability to accomplish this. Continuous
improvement and refinement of time tracking abilities will greatly enhance the City's ability to set fees for service
and identify unfunded activities in years to come.
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NBS
19
In preparing this report and the opinions and recommendations included herein, NBS has relied on a number of
principal assumptions and considerations with regard to financial matters, conditions and events that may occur in
the future. This information and assumptions, including the City's budgets, time estimate data, and workload
information from City staff, were provided by sources we believe to be reliable; however, NBS has not
independently verified such information and assumptions.
While we believe NBS' use of such information and assumptions is reasonable for the purpose of this report, some
assumptions will invariably not materialize as stated herein and may vary significantly due to unanticipated events
and circumstances. Therefore, the actual results can be expected to vary from those projected to the extent that
actual future conditions differ from those assumed by us or provided to us by others.
User Fees and Charges Study — City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by NBS
20
APPENDIX A.1
Cost of Service Analysis — Planning
Prepared by NBS for City of Rancho Cucamonga
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.1
Fee Name
PLANNING DEPARTMENT FEES
Type
(Flat 'w
Deposit / Z"
Hourly)
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Service
Activity
Cost of
Per
DepositFee
Current Fee /
Recovery
Exi ting
S
%
Deposit
Estimated
Activity
Annual
im
Est ated
Current Fee
Annual
Estimated
Full Cost
RM
Revenuesat
Fee
1
Adult Entertainment Permit
DEPOSIT
142.20
$
21,106
$ 2,568
12%
$
10,000
47%
$
$
$
2
Annexation
DEPOSIT
402.00
$
66,026
$ 12,546
19%
$
15,000
23%
$
$
$
3
Appeal of a Planning Commission decision
FLAT
104.00
$
17,213
$ 2,595
15%
$
2,595
15%
$
$
$ -
4
Appeal of Planning Director decision
FLAT
45.00
$
7,563
$ 1,364
18%
$
1,364
18%
1
$ 1,364
$ 7,563
$ 1,364
5
Business License Review
FLAT
0.40
$
71
No Charge
%
$
71
100%
1,058
$ -
$ 74,737
$ 74,737
6
Certificate of Appropriateness
Residential
FLAT
37.90
$
6,543
$ 2,277
35%
$
2,277
35%
1
$ 2,277
$ 6,543
$ 2,277
All Others
FLAT
37.90
$
6,543
$ 2,277
35%
$
6,543
100%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
7
Conditional Use Permit
Administrative Approval
FLAT
27.50
$
4,646
$ 3,109
67%
$
3,716
80%
17
$ 52,856
$ 78,982
$ 63,172
PC Approval
FLAT
47.70
$
8,213
$ 3,109
38%
$
6,570
80%
$ -
$
$
8
Conditional Use Permit - Modification
Administrative Approval
FLAT
20.00
$
3,390
$ 1,555
46%
50% of the
original fee
%
2
$ 3,109
$ 6,779
$ -
PC Approval
FLAT
20.00
$
3,390
$ 1,555
46%
$
3,390
100%
2
$ 3,109
$ 6,779
$ 6,779
9
Courtesy Review
FLAT
8.90
$
1,320
No Charge
%
$
550
42%
8
$ -
$ 10,563
$ 4,400
10
Design Review
Single Family Residential
5 -10 Units
FLAT
90.00
$
14,131
$ 7,391
52%
$
14,131
100%
1
$ 7,391
$ 14,131
$ 14,131
11- 25 Units
FLAT
116.10
$
18,660
$ 7,391
40%
$
18,660
100%
3
$ 22,173
$ 55,979
$ 55,979
26+ Units
FLAT
167.20
$
26,432
$ 7,391
28%
$
26,432
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
Multi -Family Residential
2- 10 Units
FLAT
91.00
$
14,263
$ 10,909
76%
$
14,263
100%
$
$
$
11- 75 Units
FLAT
118.90
$
19,127
$ 10,909
57%
$
19,127
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
75+ Units
FLAT
178.90
$
28,389
$ 10,909
38%
$
28,389
100%
3
$ 32,728
$ 85,167
$ 85,167
Commercial Uses
0 - 50,000 Square Feet
FLAT
87.90
$
13,742
$ 10,255
75%
$
13,742
100%
3
$ 30,764
$ 41,225
$ 41,225
50,001-150,000 Square Feet
FLAT
120.40
$
18,962
$ 10,255
54%
$
18,962
100%
1
$ 10,255
$ 18,962
$ 18,962
150,001+ Square Feet
FLAT
185.20
$
29,091
$ 10,255
35%
$
29,091
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
Industrial Zones
0-150,OOOSquare Feet
FLAT
85.30
$
13,283
$ 10,255
77%
$
13,283
100%
3
$ 30,764
$ 39,848
$ 39,848
150,001- 300,000 Square Feet
FLAT
108.30
$
17,165
$ 10,255
60%
$
17,165
100%
2
$ 20,510
$ 34,330
$ 34,330
300,001+ Square Feet
FLAT
143.20
$
22,389
$ 10,255
46%
$
22,389
100%
1
$ 10,255
$ 22,389
$ 22,389
Mixed Use Zones
Combined cost based on land uses
FLAT
227.20
$
36,959
$ 10,255
28%
$
29,091
79%
1
$ 10,255
$ 36,959
$ 29,091
30% discount if residential, office, and
commercial are included in one
development
FLAT
227.20
$
36,959
n/a
%
$
20,363
55%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Planning COS,Page 1 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.1
11
Design Review -Modification
FLAT
[1]
Average Labor
Time Per
n/a
$
50% of original
application
%
50% of original
application
%
5
1L
$
Estimate
Revenuesat
Full Cost
$
$
12
Development Agreement
DEPOSIT
380.00
$
59,088
$ 13,637
23%
$ 59,088
100%
1
$ 13,637
$ 59,088
$ 59,088
13
Development Agreement - Modification
DEPOSIT
150.00
$
23,031
$ 6,818
30%
$ 23,031
100%
2
$ 13,637
$ 46,061
$ 46,061
14
Development Code Amendment
DEPOSIT
83.00
$
14,525
$ 6,546
45%
$ 14,525
100%
3
$ 19,637
$ 43,574
$ 43,574
15
Entertainment Permit
FLAT
71.90
$
12,348
$ 5,313
43%
$ 7,408
60%
1
$ 5,313
$ 12,348
$ 7,408
16
Entertainment Permit - Modification
FLAT
35.90
$
6,169
$ 2,656
43%
$ 3,701
60%
$ -
$ -
$ -
17
Entertainment Permit -Annual Renewal
FLAT
17.00
$
2,465
$ 164
7%
$ 550
22%
9
$ 1,473
$ 22,185
$ 4,950
18
Environmental/CEQA Review - Exemption
FLAT
0.50
$
88
No Charge
%
$ 88
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
19
Environmental Review IS/ND/MND
Performed by City Staff
DEPOSIT
80.50
$
14,178
$ 4,700
33%
$ 14,178
100%
$
$
$
City Attorney Fee
DEPOSIT
[2]
n/a
Actual Cost
%
Actual Cost
%
$
$
$ -
Submitted by Developer, subject to peer review
City Administrative Processing Fee
DEPOSIT
13.00
$
2,219
$ 870
39%
$ 2,219
100%
31
$ 26,970
$ 68,786
$ 68,786
Consultant Cost
DEPOSIT
n/a
Actual Cost
%
Actual Cost
%
$ -
$ -
$ -
City Attorney Fee
DEPOSIT
[2]
n/a
Actual Cost
%
Actual Cost
%
$
$
$
City Facilitation of Consultant
City Administrative Processing Fee
DEPOSIT
25.00
$
4,415
new
%
$ 4,415
100%
$
$
$
Consultant Cost
DEPOSIT
n/a
Actual Cost
%
Actual Cost
%
$
$
$
City Attorney Fee
DEPOSIT
[2]
n/a
Actual Cost
%
Actual Cost
%
$
$
$
20
Environmental Impact Report
City Administrative Processing Fee
DEPOSIT
456.50
$
74,673
$ 38,183
51%
$ 74,673
100%
$
$
$
Consultant Cost
DEPOSIT
n/a
Actual Cost
%
Actual Cost
%
$
$
$
City Attorney Fee
DEPOSIT
[2]
n/a
Actual Cost
%
Actual Cost
%
$
$
$ -
21
Film Permit
FLAT
5.70
$
877
$ 177
20%
$ 300
34%
8
$ 1,414
$ 7,020
$ 2,400
22
General Plan Amendment
DEPOSIT
121.25
$
20,895
$ 12,437
60%
$ 20,895
100%
1
$ 12,437
$ 20,895
$ 20,895
23
Government Referral
FLAT
3.00
$
530
No Charge
%
$ -
0%
4
$ -
$ 2,119
$ -
24
Hillside Design Review
FLAT
1 Unit
FLAT
51.80
$
7,959
$ 2,182
27%
$ 7,959
100%
8
$ 17,455
$ 63,670
$ 63,670
2-4 Units
DEPOSIT
78.40
$
12,558
$ 2,182
17%
$ 12,558
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
S+Units
DEPOSIT
165.90
$
24,999
$ 10,909
44%
$ 24,999
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
25
Home Occupation Permit
FLAT
0.50
$
88
$ 55
62%
$ 88
100%
403
$ 21,982
$ 35,585
$ 35,585
26
Land Use Verification Report
FLAT
4.00
$
706
$ 131
19%
$ 706
100%
21
$ 2,749
$ 14,834
$ 14,834
27
Landmark Application
FLAT
42.20
$
7,358
No Charge
%
$ -
0%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Planning COS,Page 2 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.1
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Planning COS,Page 3 of 28
Landscape Plan Review - New Development
A or
verage Lab!
Time PerRevenuesat
!new
..
....
OR$
Estimated
Full Cost28
Reviewed by City Staff
FLAT
9.10
$
1,432
%
$
1,432
100%
16
$ 22,919
$ 22,919
City Facilitation of Consultant
City Administrative Processing Fee
FLAT
1.75
$
309
%
$
309
100%
$
$ -
$ -
Consultant Cost
FLAT
n/a
%
Actual Cost
%
$
$
$
29
Large Day Care Permit
FLAT
10.20
$
1,682
$ 590
35%
$
750
45%
$
$
$ -
30
Lot Line Adjustment
FLAT
4.50
$
795
No Charge
%
$
795
100%
5
$
$ 3,973
$ 3,973
31
Massage Business Permit
FLAT
20.00
$
3,142
$ 1,140
36%
$
3,142
100%
1
$ 1,140
$ 3,142
$ 3,142
32
Massage Business Permit -Ancillary
FLAT
14.00
$
2,083
$ 570
27%
$
1,041
50%
2
$ 1,140
$ 4,165
$ 2,082
33
Massage Business Permit -Annual Renewal
FLAT
6.50
$
872
new
%
$
550
63%
2
$ -
$ 1,744
$ 1,100
34
Mills Act Application
FLAT
26.80
$
4,715
No Charge
%
$
-
0%
$ -
$ -
$
35
Minor Design Review
Residential
FLAT
32.30
$
4,818
$ 2,182
45%
$
3,131
65%
15
$ 32,728
$ 72,273
$ 46,965
Commercial / Industrial
FLAT
45.30
$
7,476
$ 2,182
29%
$
4,859
65%
$ -
$ -
$ -
36
Minor Design Review - Modification
FLAT
19.80
$
3,171
$ 1,091
34%
$1,500
Residential
$2,500 Other
%
5
$ 5,455
$ 15,857
$
37
Minor Exception
Administrative Approval
FLAT
18.40
$
3,109
$ 523
17%
$750
Residential
$2,487 Other
%
20
$ 10,451
$ 62,189
$
PC Approval
FLAT
29.20
$
5,017
$ 523
10%
$
4,013
80%
$ -
$ -
$
38
Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program
FLAT
5.00
$
883
$ 747
85%
$
883
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
39
Pre Application Review- Planning Commission
FLAT
47.30
$
7,783
$ 2,182
28%
$
3,500
45%
8
$ 17,455
$ 62,267
$ 28,000
40
Preliminary Review
FLAT
36.80
$
5,841
$ 2,182
37%
$
4,200
72%
1
$ 2,182
$ 5,841
$ 4,200
41
Public Convenience or Necessity (ABC License)
FLAT
21.80
$
3,688
$ 1,255
34%
$
3,688
100%
1
$ 1,255
$ 3,688
$ 3,688
42
Public Noticing
[3]
Staff Time
FLAT
1.00
$
177
Advertising - Actual Cost
FLAT
n/a
$
542
Subtotal
1.00
718
No Charge
%
$
718
%
$ -
$ -
$ -
43
Sign Permit
FLAT
1.20
$
212
$ 125
59%
$
212
100%
217
$ 27,224
$ 45,986
$ 45,986
44
Similar Use Determination
FLAT
22.40
$
3,956
$ 1,527
39%
$
3,956
100%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
45
Site Development Review
Residential
FLAT
7.80
$
1,206
$ 327
27%
$
650
54%
47
$ 15,382
$ 56,683
$ 30,550
Commercial / Industrial
FLAT
12.20
$
1,956
$ 327
17%
$
1,956
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
46
Specific/Community - New
DEPOSIT
240.40
$
38,242
$ 13,091
34%
$
38,242
100%
$
$
$
47
Specific/Community Amendment
DEPOSIT
70.00
$
12,362
$ 4,364
35%
$
12,362
100%
$
$
$
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Planning COS,Page 3 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.1
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Planning COS,Page 4 of 28
Master Plan - New
DEPOSIT
Average Labor
Per
T im P
240.40
$
N
38,242
$ 13,091
34%
$
38,242
.".
1LFRevenuesat
$
Estimated
Full Cost48
$
0
$
49
Master Plan Amendment
DEPOSIT
70.00
$
12,362
$ 4,364
35%
$
12,362
100%
$
$
$
50
Street Name Change
FLAT
43.80
$
7,697
$ 4,691
61%
$
7,697
100%
$
$
$
51
Technical Report Review
City Administrative Processing Fee
FLAT
8.00
$
1,413
NEW
%
$
1,413
100%
$
$
$
Consultant Cost
FLAT
n/a
NEW
%
Actual Cost
%
$
$
$
52
Temporary Use Permit
Model Home Sales Office / Temporary Offices
FLAT
16.50
$
2,751
$ 185
7%
$
2,751
100%
$
$
$ -
All Others
FLAT
6.50
$
1,025
$ 185
18%
$
525
51%
69
$ 12,797
$ 70,728
$ 36,225
Non -Profit
FLAT
6.50
$
1,025
$ 185
18%
$
185
18%
$ -
$ -
$ -
53
Tentative Parcel Map
FLAT
43.10
$
6,509
$ 8,040
124%
$
6,509
100%
4
$ 32,161
$ 26,034
$ 26,034
54
Tentative Parcel Map - Review for Substantial
Conformance (Modification)
FLAT
19.80
$
2,972
$ 4,020
135%
$
2,972
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
55
Tentative Tract Map
5 -10 lots
FLAT
54.90
$
8,565
$ 14,773
172%
$
8,565
100%
7 1
$ 103,414
$ 59,953
$ 59,953
11-25 lots
FLAT
66.50
$
10,568
$ 14,773
140%
$
10,568
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
26+ lots
DEPOSIT
101.90
$
15,653
$ 14,773
94%
$
15,653
100%
$
$
$
56
Tentative Tract Map - Review for Substantial
Conformance (Modification)
FLAT
32.90
$
4,956
$ 7,387
149%
$
4,956
100%
$
$
$
57
Time Extension
Administrative Approval
FLAT
13.05
$
2,210
$ 709
32%
$
2,210
100%
8
$ 5,673
$ 17,680
$ 17,680
PC Approval
FLAT
46.80
$
7,402
$ 709
10%
$
7,402
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
58
Trail Easement Vacation
FLAT
81.40
$
13,871
$ 5,905
43%
$
5,905
43%
1
$ 5,905
$ 13,871
$ 5,905
59
Tree Removal Permits
Single Family Residential
Live Trees
FLAT
2.20
$
371
$ 109
29%
$
175
47%
$
$
$
Dead Trees (No Charge)
FLAT
2.20
$
371
$ -
0%
$
-
0%
$
$
$ -
Multi-Family/Commercial/Industrial
Administrative Approval up to 4 trees
FLAT
4.70
$
812
$ 436
54%
$
812
100%
33
$ 14,400
$ 26,806
$ 26,806
Administrative Approval 5 or more trees
FLAT
8.40
$
1,466
$ 436
30%
$
1,466
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
PGAWevaF
F6kT
960
v 436
%
v
9G
v
�-
New Development
1-10 trees
FLAT
10.70
$
1,872
$ 806
43%
$
1,872
100%
$
$
$
11- 20 trees
FLAT
15.20
$
2,667
$ 806
30%
$
2,667
100%
$
$
$
21+ trees
FLAT
20.70
$
3,638
$ 806
22%
$
3,638
100%
$
$
$ -
60
Tribal Consultation
DEPOSIT
10.00
$
1,766
$ 109
6%
$
1,766
100%
$
$
$ -
61
Uniform Sign Program
FLAT
22.30
$
3,938
$ 2,132
54%
$
3,938
100%
4
$ 8,527
$ 15,753
$ 15,753
62
Uniform Sign Program Modification
FLAT
12.60
$
2,225
$ 1,066
48%
$
1,780
80%
3
$ 3,198
$ 6,675
$ 5,340
63
Variance
FLAT
31.60
$
5,389
$ 2,418
45%
$
4,311
80%
8
$ 19,340
$ 43,110
$ 34,488
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Planning COS,Page 4 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.1
[Notes]
[1] Set per City policy / NBS did not evaluate.
[2] City Attorney fee charged based on actual cost.
[3] Fee is charged per advertisement.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Planning COS,Page 5 of 28
Zoning Map Amendment
IIIEstimated
FLAT
1,Average
Labor!
Per
Time e
im P
78.20
$ 13,810
$ 9,273
67%
$ 11,048
80 .
$
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost64
$
$
new
3rd and Subsequent Submittal Review
FLAT
8.30
$ 1,426
n/a
%
$1,426 or 20%
of the original
application fee,
whichever is
less.
%
$
$
$
new
Additional Hearing Required (per hearing)
FLAT
12.00
$ 2,119
n/a
%
$ 2,119
100%
$
$
$
REFUNDABLE DEPOSITS
1 On -Site Subdivision sign cash deposit per sign
DEPOSIT
5.00
$ 706
$ 613
87%
$ 706
100%
$
$
$
2 Off -Site Subdivision sign cash deposit per sign
DEPOSIT
5.00
$ 706
$ 613
87%
$ 706
100%
$
$
$ -
3 Notice of Filing Sign (per sign)
DEPOSIT
6.50
$ 971
$ 613
63%
$ 971
100%
22
1 $ 13,486
$ 21,356
$ 21,356
4 Temporary Use Permit Model Home Restoration
Deposit
DEPOSIT
5.00
$ 883
$ 6,127
694%
$ 883
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
Fees for development entitlements or services not listed will
be determined on a case-by-case basis by the Planning
Director. It will be based on the fully burdened hourly rate
and the time of service provided.
Applications requiring three or more entitlements from the fee list
will use the fee schedule to establish a deposit amount.
r1,303,21
[Notes]
[1] Set per City policy / NBS did not evaluate.
[2] City Attorney fee charged based on actual cost.
[3] Fee is charged per advertisement.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Planning COS,Page 5 of 28
APPENDIX A.2
Cost of Service Analysis — Building and Safety
Prepared by NBS for City of Rancho Cucamonga
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee Fee Unit
No. Fee Name Type
Estimated
w' Average Labor
0 Time Per
z Activity (hours)
Cost
Service
Activity
of
Per
Current
Deposit
Fee /
Existing
Cost
Recovery
%
Recommended
Fee Level
Deposit
I
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Recommended
Fee
new Processing Fee
Residential - Routed
2.00
$
262
n/a
%
$
262
100%
767
$ $
201,345
$ 201,345
Residential - Non -routed
0.50
$
66
n/a
%
$
66
100%
1,153
$ $
75,661
$ 75,661
Commercial - Routed
2.50
$
328
n/a
%
$
328
100%
400
$ $
131,209
$ 131,209
Commercial - Non -routed
1.00
$
131
n/a
%
$
131
100916
13
$ $
1,706
$ 1,706
COMMERCIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION, ADDITIONS, AND TENANT IMPROVMENTS
(Includes all associated MEPs)
A Class
1
With food and/or drink
500
base fee up to
500 s.f.
9.70
$
1,318
$
1,047
79%
$
1,318
100%
$ $
$
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
s.f.
$
22.31
$
21
n/a
$
22.31
100%
$ $
$
2,500
base fee up to
2,500 s.f.
13.10
$
1,764
$
1,470
83%
$
1,764
100%
$ $
$
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
s.f.
0.18
$
23.09
$
21
n/a
$
23.09
100%
$ $
$
5,000
base fee up to
5,000 s.f.
17.50
$
2,342
$
1,985
85%
$
2,342
100%
$ $
$
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
s.f.
$
12.86
$
9
n/a
$
12.86
100%
$ $
$
10,000
base fee up to
10,000 s.f.
22.40
$
2,984
$
2,414
81%
$
2,984
100%
$ $
$
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
s.f.
$
29.84
$
4
n/a
$
29.84
100%
$ $
$
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 6 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee Name
Fee Unit
Type
w
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee
Deposit
Existing
Cost
%
Recommended
Fee Level
DepositRecovery
Estimated
Recommended
Volume of
Annual Annual
Estimated
Estimated
Revenues at F 11
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Fee
2 Without food and/or drink
500
base fee up to
7.70
$ 1,056
$ 1,047
99%
$ 1,056
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.18
$ 22.96
$ 21
n/a
$ 22.96
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
11.20
$ 1,515
$ 1,470
97%
$ 1,515
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.22
$ 28.34
$ 21
n/a
$ 28.34
100%
$
$
$ -
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
16.60
$ 2,223
$ 1,985
89%
$ 2,223
100%
1
$ 1,985
$ 2,223
$ 2,223
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.07
$ 8.92
$ 9
n/a
$ 8.92
100%
17
$ 142
$ 148
$ 148
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
20.00
$ 2,670
$ 2,414
90%
$ 2,670
100%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.20
$ 26.70
$ 4
n/a
$ 26.70
100%
-
$
$ -
$
s.f.
3
With food and/or drink over 300
2,000
base fee up to
14.60
$ 1,961
$ 1,364
70%
$ 1,961
100%
1
$ 1,364
$ 1,961
$ 1,961
2,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.12
$ 15.42
$ 21
n / a
$ 15.42
100%
17
$ 346
$ 259
$ 259
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
24.00
$ 3,194
$ 2,414
76%
$ 3,194
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.06
$ 8.40
$ 4
n/ a
$ 8.40
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
s.f.
20,000
base fee up to
30.40
$ 4,034
$ 3,067
76%
$ 4,034
100%
1
$ 3,067
$ 4,034
$ 4,034
20,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.15
$ 20.17
$ 4
n/a
$ 20.17
100%
150
$ 640
$ 3,024
$ 3,024
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 7 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee Name
Fee Unit
Type
'w
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee
Deposit
Existing
Cost
%
Recommended
Fee Level
DepositRecovery
Recommended Estimated
Volume of
Annual Annual
Estimated Estimated
Revenues at F 11
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Fee
4 Without food and/or drink over 300
2,000
base fee up to
10.70
$ 1,449
$ 1,364
94%
$ 1,449
100%
$
$
$
2,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.11
$ 14.60
$ 21
n/a
$ 14.60
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
19.60
$ 2,617
$ 2,414
92%
$ 2,617
100%
$
$
$
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.06
$ 8.40
$ 4
n/a
$ 8.40
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
20,000
base fee up to
26.00
$ 3,457
$ 3,067
89%
$ 3,457
100%
$
$
$
20,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.13
$ 17.28
$ 4
n/a
$ 17.28
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
B Class
1
Office and Public Buildings
500
base fee up to
5.80
$ 806
$ 1,047
130%
$ 806
100%
40
$ 41,875
$ 32,256
$ 32,256
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 21
n/a
$ 9.18
100%
277
$ 5,864
$ 2,546
$ 2,546
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
7 20
$ 990
$ 1,470
148%
$ 990
100%
27
$ 39,691
$ 26,733
$ 26,733
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
018$
23.09
$ 21
n/a
$ 23.09
100%
190
$ 3,914
$ 4,388
$ 4,388
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
11.60
$ 1,567
$ 1,985
127%
$ 1,567
100%
8
$ 15,880
$ 12,539
$ 12,539
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.0 5
$ 6.30
$ 9
n/a
$ 6.30
100%
106
$ 909
$ 667
$ 667
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
14.00
$ 1,882
$ 2,414
128%
$ 1,882
100%
18
$ 43,454
$ 33,882
$ 33,882
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.14
$ 18.82
$ 4
n/a
$ 18.82
100%
1,294
$ 5,631
$ 24,365
$ 24,365
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 8 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee
No.
Fee Name
Fee Unit
Type
w'
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee /
Deposit
Existing
Cost
%
Recommended
Fee Level
DepositRecovery
Recommended Estimated
Volume of
Annual Annual
Estimated Estimated
Revenues at Full
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Fee
2
Service
500
base fee up to
7.80
$ 1,069
$ 1,047
98%
$ 1,069
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.07
$ 9.18
$ 21
n/a
$ 9.18
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
9.20
$ 1,253
$ 1,470
117%
$ 1,253
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.14
$ 17.84
$ 21
n/a
$ 17.84
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
12.60
$ 1,699
$ 1,985
117%
$ 1,699
100%
$
$
$
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.25
$ 33.97
$ 9
n/a
$ 33.97
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
3
Medical
500
base fee up to
12.20
$ 1,646
$ 1,047
64%
$ 1,646
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.22
$ 28.87
$ 21
n/a
$ 28.87
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
16.60
$ 2,223
$ 1,470
66%
$ 2,223
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100$
33.59
$ 21
n/a
$ 33.59
100%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
23.00
$ 3,063
$ 1,985
65%
$ 3,063
100%
$
$
$
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.46
$ 61.26
$ 9
n/a
$ 61.26
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
4
Restaurant
500
base fee up to
9.70
$ 1,318
$ 1,047
79%
$ 1,318
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.17
$ 22.31
$ 21
n/a
$ 22.31
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
13.10
$ 1,764
$ 1,470
83%
$ 1,764
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.29
$ 38.05
$ 21
n/a
$ 38.05
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
3,500
base fee up to
16.00
$ 2,145
$ 1,676
78%
$ 2,145
100%
$
$
$
3,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.46
$ 61.28
$ 21
n/a
$ 61.28
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 9 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee Name
71
Fee Unit
Type
'w
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee
Deposit
Existing
Cost
%
Recommended
Fee Level
DepositRecovery
Recommended Estimated
Volume of
Annual Annual
Estimated Estimated
Revenues at F 11
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Fee
��
5 Laboratories
500
base fee up to
14.20
$ 1,909
$ 1,047
55%
$ 1,909
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.10
$ 12.46
$ 21
n/a
$ 12.46
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
16.10
$ 2,158
$ 1,470
68%
$ 2,158
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.20
$ 25.72
$ 21
n/a
$ 25.72
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
21.00
$ 2,801
$ 1,985
71%
$ 2,801
100%
$
$
$
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.42
$ 56.02
$ 9
n/a
$ 56.02
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
E Class
1
Day Care / Private School
500
base fee up to
12.80
$ 1,725
$ 1,047
61%
$ 1,725
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.27
$ 34.77
$ 21
n/a
$ 34.77
100%
$
$
$ -
S.f.
base fee up to
2,500
18.10
$ 2,420
$ 1,470
61%
$ 2,420
100%
1
$ 1,470
$ 2,420
$ 2,420
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.20
$ 25.72
$ 21
n/ a
$ 25.72
100%
9
$ 185
$ 231
$ 231
S. f.
5,000
base fee up to
23.00
$ 3,063
$ 1,985
65%
$ 3,063
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.11
$ 14.17
$ 9
n / a
$ 14.17
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
S.f.
base fee up to
10,000
28.40
$ 3,772
$ 2,414
64%
$ 3,772
100%
1
$ 2,414
$ 3,772
$ 3,772
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.28
$ 37.72
$ 4
n/a
$ 37.72
100%
32
$ 141
$ 1,219
$ 1,219
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 10 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee
Fee Name
No.
Fee Unit
Type
w'
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
(hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee /
Deposit
Existing
Cost
Recovery
%
Recommended
Fee Level
posit
DeActivity
Recommended Estimated
Volume of
Cost Recovery % Activity
Annual Annual
Estimated Estimated
Revenues at Full
Revenuesat Cost Re overy
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Recommended
Fee
Class
1
Industrial / Manufacturing F1/F2
2,500
base fee up to
10.80
$ 1,462
$ 1,470
101%
$ 1,462
100%
1
$ 1,470
$ 1,462
$ 1,462
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.04
$ 5.60
$ 21
n/a
$ 5.60
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
14.00
$ 1,882
$ 2,414
128%
$ 1,882
100%
$
$
$
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.04
$ 5.77
$ 4
n/a
$ 5.77
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
20,000
base fee up to
18.40
$ 2,460
$ 3,067
125%
$ 2,460
100%
$
$
$
20,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.09
$ 12.30
$ 4
n/a
$ 12.30
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
H Class
1
Hl, H2, H3, H4, HS
2,500
base fee up to
20.60
$ 2,748
$ 1,470
53%
$ 2,748
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.10
$ 12.95
$ 21
n/a
$ 12.95
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
28.00
$ 3,719
$ 2,414
65%
$ 3,719
100%
$
$
$
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.09
$ 12.33
$ 4
n/a
$ 12.33
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
20,000
base fee up to
37.40
$ 4,953
$ 3,067
62%
$ 4,953
100%
$
$
$
20,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.19
$ 24.76
$ 4
n/a
$ 24.76
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 11 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee
Fee Name
No.
Fee Unit
Type
w'
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee /
Deposit
Existing
Cost
%
Recommended
Fee Level
DepositRecovery
Recommended Estimated
Volume of
Annual Annual
Estimated Estimated
Revenues at Full
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Fee
Class
1
All I classifications
500
base fee up to
12.20
$ 1,646
$ 1,047
64%
$ 1,646
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.25
$ 32.15
$ 21
n/a
$ 32.
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
17.10
$ 2,289
$ 1,470
64%
$ 2,289
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.20
$ 25.72
$ 21
n/a
$ 25.72
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
22.00
$ 2,932
$ 1,985
68%
$ 2,932
100%
$
$
$
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.13
$ 16.79
$ 9
n/a
$ 16.79
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
28.40
$ 3,772
$ 2,414
64%
$ 3,772
100%
$
$
$
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.28
$ 37.72
$ 4
n/a
$ 37.72
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
M class
1
Retail
500
base fee up to
5.80
$ 806
$ 1,424
177%
$ 806
100%
40
$ 56,966
$ 32,256
$ 32,256
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.12
$ 15.75
$ 56
n a
/
$ 15.75
100%
282
$ 15,811
$ 4,440
$ 4,440
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
8.20
$ 1,121
$ 2,204
197%
$ 1,121
100%
28
$ 61,702
$ 31,396
$ 31,396
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.06
$ 7.
$ 25
n/a
$ 7.70
100%
957
$ 23,708
$ 7,368
$ 7,368
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
12.60
$ 1,699
$ 3,267
192%
$ 1,699
100%
5
$ 16,334
$ 8,493
$ 8,493
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.01
$ 1.44
$ 13
n/a
$ 1.4
100%
736
$ 9,522
$ 1,062
$ 1,062
s.f.
50,000
base fee up to
17.00
$ 2,276
$ 11,425
502%
$ 2,276
100%
2
$ 22,850
$ 4,552
$ 4,552
50,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.01
$ 1.42
$ 23
a n
/
$ 1.42
100%
713
$ 16,287
$ 1,010
$ 1,010
s.f.
100,000
base fee up to
22.40
$ 2,984
$ 22,850
766%
$ 2,984
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
100,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.02
$ 2.98
$ 23
n/a
$ 2.98
100%
$
$ -
$
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 12 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee
Fee Name
No.
Fee Unit
Type
w'
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee /
Deposit
Existing
Cost
Recovery
%
Recommended
Fee Level
Deposit
Recommended Estimated
Volume of
Cost Recovery % Activity
Annual Annual
Estimated Estimated
Revenues at Full
Revenuesat Cost Re overy
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Recommended
Fee
S Class
1
S1/S2 Warehouses
10,000
base fee up to
6.10
$ 846
$ 2,4T3373%
$ 846
100%
2
$ 4,828
$ 1,692
$ 1,692
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.01
$ 0.66
$
$ 0.66
100%
700
$ 3,045
$ 459
$ 459
s.f.
50,000
base fee up to
8.10
$ 1,108
$ 4,1$
1,108
100%
$
$
$
50,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.00
$ 0.12
$ 8
n/a
$ 0.12
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
250,000
base fee up to
10.00
$ 1,357
$ 20,675
1523%
$ 1,357
100%
$
$
$
250,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.00
$ 0.17
$ 8
n/a
$ 0.17
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
500,000
base fee up to
13.20
$ 1,777
$ 41,350
2326%
$ 1,777
100%
$
$
$
500,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.00
$ 0.10
$ 8
n/a
$ 0.10
100%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
s.f.
AL
1,000,000
base fee up to
16.90
$ 2,263
$ 82,700
3655%
$ 2,263
100%
$
$
$
1,000,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 0.23
$ 8
n/a
$ 0.
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2
S1 Mini Storage / Parking Garages (open or closed)
2,500
base fee up to
7.30
$ 1,003
$ 1,470
147%
$ 1,003
100%
1
$ 1,470
$ 1,003
$ 1,003
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
6.82
$ 21
n/a
$ .82
100%
$
$
$ -
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
11.20
$ 1,515
$ 2,414
159%
$ 1,515
100%
$
$
$
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.04
$ 5.
$ 4
n/a
$ 5.77
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
20,000
base fee up to
15.60
$ 2,092
$ 3,067
147%
$ 2,092
100%
$
$
$
20,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.08
$ 10.46
$ 4
n/a
$ 10.46
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 13 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee Name
Fee Unit
Type
w'
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee /
Deposit
Existing
Cost
%
Recommended
Fee Level
DepositRecovery
Recommended Estimated
Volume of
Annual Annual
Estimated Estimated
Revenues at Full
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Fee
3 S1 Repair Garage
500
base fee up to
10.80
$ 1,462
$ 1,047
72%
$ 1,462
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.33
$ 42.64
$ 21
n/a
$ 42.64
100%
$
$
$
S.f.
2,500
base fee up to
17.30
$ 2,315
$ 1,470
63%
$ 2,315
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.18
$ 23.09
$ 21
n/a
$ 23.09
100%
$
$
$
S.f.
5,000
base fee up to
21.70
$ 2,893
$ 1,985
69%
$ 2,893
100%
$
$
$
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.43
$ 57.85
$ 9
n/a
$ 57.85
100%
$
$
$ -
s.f.
Shells only- Types I-V not including buildout
10,000
base fee up to
16.00
$ 2,145
$ 4,783
223%
$ 2,145
100%
41
$ 196,115
$ 87,934
$ 87,934
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.02
$ 2.12
$ 12.99
n/a
$ 2.12
100%
1,906
$ 24,756
$ 4,047
$ 4,047
S.f.
50,000
base fee up to
22.30
$ 2,994
$ 7,397
247%
$ 2,994
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
50,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.00
$ 0.38
$ 3.21
n/a
$ 0.38
100%
$
$
$
S.f.
250,000
base fee up to
28.10
$ 3,755
$ 22,500
599%
$ 3,755
100%
$
$
$
250,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.00
$ 0.34
$ 9.00
n / a
$ 0.34
100%
$
$
$
S.f.
500,000
base fee up to
34.40
$ 4,604
$ 45,000
977%
$ 4,604
100%
$
$
$
500,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.00
$ 0.20
$ 9.00
n / a
$ 0.20
100%
$
$
$
S.f.
1,000,000
base fee up to
42.20
$ 5,628
$ 90,000
1599%
$ 5,628
100%
$
$
$
1,000,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.00
$ 0.56
$ 9.00
n/a
$ 0.56
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 14 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee Name
I
Fee Unit
Type
w'
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee /
Deposit
Existing
Cost
Recovery
%
Recommended
Fee Level
Deposit
Recommended Estimated
Volume of
Cost Recovery % Activity
Annual Annual
Estimated Estimated
Revenues at Full
Revenuesat Cost Re overy
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Recommended
Fee
RESIDENTIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION
(Includes all associated MEPs)
R Class
1
R1/R2
500
base fee up to
11.10
$ 1,479
$ 3,288
22206
$ 1,479
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.29
$ 38.05
$ 34.29
n / a
$ 38.05
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
16.90
$ 2,240
$ 4,660
208%
$ 2,240
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.17
$ 22.04
$ 20.50
n/a
$ 22.04
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
29.50
$ 3,893
$ 5,685
146%
$ 3,893
100%
$
$
$
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.04
$ 4.99
$ 15.11
n/a
$ 4.99
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
50,000
base fee up to
44.70
$ 5,888
$ 7,196
122%
$ 5,888
100%
$
$
$
50,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.03
$ 4.51
$ 5.35
n/ a
$ 4.51
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
100,000
base fee up to
61.90
$ 8,145
$ 8,800
108%
$ 8,145
100%
$
$
$
100,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.06
$ 8.14
$ 3.82
n/a
$ 8.
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 15 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee Name
Fee Unit
Type
w'
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee /
Deposit
Existing
Cost
%
Recommended
Fee Level /
DepositRecovery
Recommended Estimated
Volume of
Annual Annual
Estimated Estimated
Revenues at Full
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Fee
2 R1/R2 Major Remodels
500
base fee up to
10.70
$ 1,427
$ 3,288
230%
$ 1,427
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.39
$ 51.17
$ 34.29
n/a
$ 51.17
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
18.50
$ 2,450
$ 4,660
190%
$ 2,450
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.10
$ 13.65
$ 20.50
n/a
$ 13.65
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
26.30
$ 3,473
$ 5,685
164%
$ 3,473
100%
$
$
$
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.03
$ 4.20
$ 15.11
n/a
$ 4.20
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
50,000
base fee up to
39.10
$ 5,153
$ 7,196
140%
$ 5,153
100%
$
$
$
50,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.04
$ 4.62
$ 5.35
n/a
$ 4.62
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
100,000
base fee up to
56.70
$ 7,462
$ 8,800
118%
$ 7,462
100%
$
$
$
100,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 7,46
$ 3.82
n/a
$ 7.46
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
3
R2 Production Rate
2,500
base fee up to
7.50
$ 1,007
$ 3,288
327%
$ 1,007
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 34.29
n/a
$ 9.80
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
13.10
$ 1,742
$ 4,660
268%
$ 1,742
100%
$
$
$
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.04
$ 5.51
$ 20.50
n/a
$ 5.51
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
20,000
base fee up to
17.30
$ 2,293
$ 5,685
248%
$ 2,293
100%
$
$
$
20,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.09
$ 11.46
$ 15.11
n/a
$ 11.46
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 16 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee
No.
Fee Name
Fee Unit
Type
w'
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee /
Deposit
Existing
Cost
%
Recommended
Fee Level
DepositRecovery
Recommended Estimated
Volume of
Annual Annual
Estimated Estimated
Revenues at Full
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Fee
4
R2.1
500
base fee up to
14.50
$ 1,925
$ 3,288
171%
$ 1,925
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.19
$ 24.93
$ 34.29
n/a
$ 24.93
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
18.30
$ 2,424
$ 4,660
192%
$ 2,424
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.17
$ 22.04
$ 20.50
n/a
$ 22.04
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
30.90
$ 4,077
$ 5,685
139%
$ 4,077
100%
$
$
$
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.04
$ 4.99
$ 15.11
n/a
$ 4.99
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
50,000
base fee up to
46.10
$ 6,071
$ 7,196
119%
$ 6,071
100%
$
$
$
50,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.03
$ 3.99
$ 5.35
n/a
$ 3.99
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
100,000
base fee up to
61.30
$ 8,066
$ 8,800
109%
$ 8,066
100%
$
$
$
100,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.06
$ 8.07
$ 3.82
n/a
$ 8.07
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
AL
5
R3
base fee up to
500
11.60
$ 1,613
$ 3,288
204%
$ 1,613
100%
18
$ 59,184
$ 29,030
$ 29,030
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.33
$ 43.30
$ 34.29
a n
/
$ 43.30
100%
160
$ 5,474
$ 6,912
$ 6,912
s.f.
base fee up to
2,500
18.20
$ 2,479
$ 4,660
188%
$ 2,479
100%
15
$ 69,900
$ 37,182
$ 37,182
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.34
$ 45.14
$ 20.50
a n
/
$ 45.14
100%
215
$ 4,400
$ 9,688
$ 9,688
S.C.
base fee up to
5,000
26.80
$ 3,607
$ 5,685
158%
$ 3,607
100%
14
$ 79,590
$ 50,500
$ 50,500
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.11
$ 14.70
$ 15.11
n/a
$ 14.70
100%
157
$ 2,370
$ 2,305
$ 2,305
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
32.40
$ 4,342
$ 7,196
166%
$ 4,342
100%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.32
$ 43.42
$ 5.35
n/a
$ 43.42
100%
$ -
$ -
$
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 17 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee Name
Fee Unit
Type
w'
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee /
Deposit
Existing
Cost
%
Recommended
Fee Level
DepositRecovery
Recommended Estimated
Volume of
Annual Annual
Estimated Estimated
Revenues at Full
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Fee
6 R3 Production Rate
500
base fee up to
7.00
$ 1,009
$ 750
74%
$ 1,009
100%
4
$ 3,002
$ 4,037
$ 4,037
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.24
$ 31.49
$ 8.68
n/a
$ 31.49
100%
73
$ 633
$ 2,295
$ 2,295
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
11.80
$ 1,639
$ 837
51%
$ 1,639
100%
75
$ 62,798
$ 122,928
$ 122,928
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.13
$ 16.79
$ 13.37
n/a
$ 16.79
100%
815
$ 10,890
$ 13,679
$ 13,679
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
15.00
$ 2,059
$ 971
47%
$ 2,059
100%
35
$ 33,986
$ 72,062
$ 72,062
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.10
$ 13.65
$ 15.97
n/a
$ 13.65
100%
1,108
$ 17,696
$ 15,121
$ 15,121
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
20.20
$ 2,741
$ 1,131
41%
$ 2,741
100%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.20
$ 27.41
$ 13.27
n/a
$ 27.41
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
7
R3.1 Change of Occupancy (Build -Out Only)
500
base fee up to
9.70
$ 1,295
$ 750
58%
$ 1,295
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.17
$ 22.31
$ 8.68
n/a
$ 22.31
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
13.10
$ 1,742
$ 837
48%
$ 1,742
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.22
$ 28.34
$ 13.37
n/a
$ 28.34
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
5,000
base fee up to
18.50
$ 2,450
$ 971
40%
$ 2,450
100%
$
$
$
5,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.03
$ 3.67
$ 15.97
n/a
$ 3.67
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to
19.90
$ 2,634
$ 1,131
43%
$ 2,634
100%
$
$
$
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.20
$ 26.34
$ 13.27
n/a
$ 26.34
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 18 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee Name
Fee Unit
Type
w'
0
z
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current
Fee /
Deposit
Existing
Cost
%
Recommended
Fee Level
DepositRecovery
Recommended Estimated
Volume of
Annual Annual
Estimated Estimated
Revenues at Full
Current Fee Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Fee
8 R3 Accessory Dwelling Unit
500
base fee up to
9.60
$ 1,350
$ 1,636
121%
$ 1,350
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.33
$ 43.30
$ 27.44
n/a
$ 43.30
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
16.20
$ 2,216
$ 1,910
86%
$ 2,216
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.65
$ 88.65
$ 23.25
n/a
$ 88.65
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
9
R4
500
base fee up to
14.50
$ 1,925
$ 3,288
171%
$ 1,925
100%
$
$
$
500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
$ 24.93
$ 34.29
n/a
$ 24.93
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
2,500
base fee up to
18.30
$ 2,424
$ 4,660
192%
$ 2,424
100%
$
$
$
2,500 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.17
$ 22.04
$ 20.50
n/a
$ 22.04
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
10,000
base fee up to30.90
$ 4,077
$ 5,685
139%
$ 4,077
100%
1
$ 5,685
$ 4,077
$ 4,077
10,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.04
$ 4.99
$ 15.11
n/a
$ 4.99
100%
19
$ 280
$ 92
$ 92
s.f.
50,000
base fee up to
46.10
$ 6,071
$ 7,196
119%
$ 6,071
100%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
50,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.03
$ 3.99
$ 5.35
n/a
$ 3.99
100%
$
$
$
s.f.
100,000
base fee up to
61.30
$ 8,066
$ 8,800
109%
$ 8,066
100%
1
$ 81800
$ 8,066
$ 8,066
100,000 s.f.
each additional 100 s.f. or fraction thereof
each add'I 100
0.06
$ 8.07
$ 3.82
n/a
$ 8.07
100%
167
$ 637
$ 1,345
$ 1,345
s.f.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 19 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee
Type
J1 Fee Nam.
MINOR IMPROVEMENTS/ MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
Unit w' Average
16
z
Activity
Estimated
Labor
Time Per
(hours)
Cost
Service
Activity
of
Per
Current
Fee
Deposit
/
Existing
Cost
Recovery
%
Recommended
Fee
Deposit
Recommended
Level /
Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Current Fee
Annual
E timated
Revesnues at Full
Cost Recovery
Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Recommended
Fee
1
Antenna
4.30
$
587
$
133
23%
$
587
100%
$
$
$
2
New Cell tower w/equipment shelter
Ill
13.50
$
1,839
$
133
7%
$
1,839
100%
$
$
$
3
Cell Site modification (hourly)
3.40
$
469
$
-
0%
$
469
100%
$
$
$
4
Tent or awning w/sides- 200-400 sq ft
Ill
2.40
$
315
$
99
31%
$
190
60916
$
$
$
5
Tent/awning - 401 + sq ft
11l
3.10
$
407
$
99
24%
$
250
61%
$
$
$ -
6
Balcony/Deck - first 500 sq ft
Ill
4.30
$
587
$
213
36%
$
587
100916
16
$ 3,409
$ 9,390
$ 9,390
7
Balcony/Deck - each additional 500 sq ft
Ill
2.90
$
403
$
213
53%
$
403
100%
2
$ 426
$ 806
$ 806
8
Demolition Residential
4.30
$
578
$
99
17%
$
578
100%
4
$ 398
$ 2,311
$ 2,311
9
Demolition multi family/commercial
2.90
$
394
$
133
34%
$
394
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
10
Shoring
1.60
$
210
new
%
$
210
100%
$
$
$
11
Wall opening (windows/doors) new/altered
Ill
4.00
$
548
$
0%
$
390
71%
$
$
$
12
Dock levelers
Ill
3.40
$
460
$
0%
$
460
100%
$
$
$ -
13
Block wall 3-6 ft high -1st 100 linear ft.
Ill
3.30
$
456
$
99
22%
$
350
77%
29
$ 2,864
$ 13,215
$ 10,150
14
Each add'I 50 linear ft
Ill
0.70
$
92
$
-
0%
$
92
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
15
Masonry pilasters -1-10
Ill
1.20
$
157
$
204
130%
$
157
100%
1
$ 204
$ 157
$ 157
16
Fence(wood, wrough iron, chain link) over 6' high
Ill
3.30
$
456
$
133
29%
$
350
77%
$ -
$ -
$ -
17
Fire place- masonry
Ill
4.80
$
643
$
166
26%
$
643
100%
4
$ 663
$ 2,574
$ 2,574
18
Fire place pre fab metal
3.30
$
447
$
133
30%
$
447
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
19
Flagpole over 20' high
Ill
2.70
$
368
$
133
36%
$
368
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
20
Garage First 500 sq ft
5.70
$
771
$
331
43%
$
771
100%
36
$ 11,934
$ 27,741
$ 27,741
21
Garage each additional 500 sq ft
2.15
$
282
$
-
0%
$
282
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
22
Patio cover -1st 500 sq ft
11l
2.60
$
364
$
243
67%
$
364
100%
258
$ 62,720
$ 93,870
$ 93,870
23
Patio cover- each additional 500 sq ft
Ill
1.40
$
184
$
243
132%
$
184
100%
62
$ 15,072
$ 11,389
$ 11,389
24
Patio cover - pre-engineered 1st 500 sq ft
3.10
$
407
$
243
60%
$
407
100%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
25
Patio cover- pre-engineered- each additional 500 sq ft
Ill
1.90
$
249
$
243
98%
$
249
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
26
Patio enclosure First 500 sq ft
Ill
3.80
$
521
$
309
59%
$
521
100%
13
$ 4,022
$ 6,777
$ 6,777
27
Patio enclosure- each additional 500 sq ft
1.90
$
249
$
309
124%
$
249
100%
3
$ 928
$ 748
$ 748
28
Patio enclosure- pre-engineered- first 500 sq ft
[1]
3.30
$
433
$
309
71%
$
433
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
29
Patio enclosure - pre-engineered- each additional 500
sq ft
[1]
1.90
$
249
$
309
124%$
249
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
30
Septic pre -inspection
1.40
$
184
$
166
90%
$
184
100%
29
$ 4,807
$ 5,327
$ 5,327
31
Relocate building
7.30
$
981
$
641
65%
$
981
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
32
Retaining wall -1st 100 linear ft
[1]
3.80
$
521
$
232
45%
$
350
67%
46
$ 10,674
$ 23,979
$ 16,100
33
Retaining wall- each additional 50 linear ft
[1]
0.50
$
66
$
66
101%
$
66
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
34
Retaining wall over 6' high - hourly
[i]
3.30
$
456
$
511
112%
$
456
100%
$ -
$ -
$
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 20 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
4
35
Fee Unit
Fee Name
Type
Barn/storage shed up to 500 sq ft
w' Average
0
Z
Activity
Ill
Estimated
Labor
Time Per
(hours)
5.00
Cost
Service
Activity
$
of
Per
679
Current
Deposit
$
Fee /
99
Existing
Cost
%
15%
Recommended
Fee
DepositRecovery
$
Recommended
Level
679
100%
Estimated
Volume of
5
Annual
Estimated
Current Fee
$ 497
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at Full
Fee
$ 3,394
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Fee
$ 3,394
36
Barn/storage shed each additional 500 sq ft
Ill
1.90
$
249
$
199
80%
$
249
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
37
Interior remodel (residential) first 500 sq ft
Ill
5.10
$
683
$
431
63%
$
450
66%
80
$ 34,476
$ 54,623
$ 36,000
38
Interior remodel (residential) - each additional 500 sq ft
Ill
2.40
$
315
$
265
84%
$
315
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
39
Light Standards - first 5
Ill
4.60
$
626
$
-
0%
$
626
100%
$
$
$
40
Light Standards -each additional
Ill
0.35
$
46
$
-
0%
$
46
100%
$
$
$ -
41
Mobile home- Not in MH Park
6.80
$
983
$
204
21%
$
983
100916
$
$
$
42
Temporary Building/Trailer
4.60
$
626
$
204
33%
$
626
100%
$
$
$ -
43
Demising wall 1-100 linearfeet- commercial
Ill
5.30
$
718
$
221
31%
$
718
100%
$
$
$
44
Demising wall each additional 100 linear ft.
Ill
1.20
$
157
$
221
140%
$
157
100%
$
$
$ -
45
Partition wall 1-50 linearfeet- commercial
Ill
3.10
$
429
$
221
51%
$
429
100%
3
$ 663
$ 1,288
$ 1,288
46
partition wall each additional 50 linear feet
Ill
1.20
$
157
$
221
140%
$
157
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
47
Signs- Blade, channel letter, directional (structural)
Ill
2.60
$
341
$
99
29%
$
341
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
48
Signs- Monument Signs (structural and electrical)
Ill
3.80
$
499
$
99
20%
$
499
100%
26
$ 2,585
$ 12,963
$ 12,963
49
Signs - Wall signs- (structural and electrical)
Ill
3.10
$
407
$
99
24%
$
407
100%
111
$ 11,038
$ 45,149
$ 45,149
50
Skylights/ Smoke Hatches 1- 10
Ill
3.70
$
499
$
66
13%
$
499
100%
1
$ 66
$ 499
$ 499
51
Pre fab spa/hot tub
2.90
$
394
$
99
25%
$
394
100%
65
$ 6,464
$ 25,618
$ 25,618
52
Stairs- each flight / story
Ill
3.10
$
429
$
232
54%
$
429
100%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
53
Storage racks and catwalks -1st 500 sq ft
Ill
4.80
$
630
$
818
130%
$
630
100%
$
$
$
54
Storage racks and catwalks- 501 sq ft -250,000 sq ft
Ill
9.60
$
1,260
$
663
53%
$
1,260
100%
$
$
$
55
Storage racks and catwalks- over 251,000 sq ft
Ill
14.40
$
1,889
$
818
43%
$
1,889
100%
$
$
$
56
Mezzanines and Equipment Platforms - 0-500sq ft
Ill
6.30
$
849
$
-
0%
$
849
100%
$
$
$
57
Mezzanines and Equipment Platforms - 501-5000 sq ft
Ill
8.70
$
1,142
$
0%
$
1,142
100%
$
$
$
58
Mezzanines and Equipment Platforms - 5001 + sq ft
Ill
10.60
$
1,391
$
0%
$
1,391
100%
$
$
$ -
59
Vinyl lined or fiberglass swimming pool- Residential
Ill
5.00
$
670
$
265
40%
$
670
100%
1
$ 265
$ 670
$ 670
60
Gunite swimming pool/spa - residential
Ill
6.90
$
919
$
677
74%
$
919
100%
10
$ 6,766
$ 9,190
$ 9,190
61
Commercial swimming pool
Ill
10.50
$
1,400
$
677
48%
$
1,400
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
62
Utility Connection
1.05
$
138
$
66
48%
$
138
100%
$
$
$
63
Tile Lift and Re-lay- first 3500 sq ft
3.50
$
482
$
398
83%
$
482
100%
$
$
$
64
Tile Lift and Re-lay- Each additional 3500 sq ft
2.00
$
262
$
398
152%
$
262
100%
$
$
$ -
65
Re -roofing - first 3500 sq ft residential
Ill
3.30
$
456
$
398
87%
$
456
100%
1
$ 398
$ 456
$ 456
66
Re -roofing - each additional 3500 sq ft
1.40
$
184
$
99
54%
$
184
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
67
Re -roofing - first 50,000 commercial
2.60
$
364
n/a
%
$
364
100%
$ -
$ -
$
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 21 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee
No.
68
Fee Unit
Fee Name
Type
Re -roofing - each additional 50,000 commercial
w' Average
0
z
Activity
Estimated
Labor
Time Per
(hours)
1.05
Cost
Service
Activity
$
of
Per
138
Current
Deposit
Fee /
n/a
Existing
Cost
Recovery
%
%
Recommended
Fee
Deposit
$
Recommended
Level /
Cost
138
Recovery %
100%
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Current Fee
$ -
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Re overy
Fee
$ -
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Recommended
Fee
$ -
69
Roof framing (replacement) -1st 1,000 sq ft residential
Ill
2.60
$
341
$
685
201%
$
341
100%
1
$ 685
$ 341
$ 341
70
Roof framing (replacement) each additional 500 sq ft
[1]
2.40
$
338
$
376
111%
$
338
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
71
Roofcoating- Commercial
3.80
$
521
n/a
%
$
521
100%
$
$
$
72
Roof coating- Residential
1.90
$
272
n/a
%
$
272
100916
$
$
$
73
Room addition- up to 500 sq ft
Ill
6.70
$
902
$
802
89%
$
902
100%
69
$ 55,348
$ 62,224
$ 62,224
74
Room addition- each additional 500 sq ft
Ill
3.10
$
429
$
935
218%
$
429
100916
53
$ 49,542
$ 22,760
$ 22,760
75
Spray booth first 500 sq ft
Ill
8.30
$
1,112
$
232
21%
$
1,112
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
76
Spray booth -each additional 500 sq ft
Ill
3.40
$
446
$
232
52%
$
446
100%
$
$
$
77
Sauna- pre -fabricated
2.55
$
348
$
486
140%
$
348
100%
$
$
$ -
78
Siding, stucco, brick or stone veneer first 500 sq ft
3.00
$
416
$
99
24%
$
350
84%
1
$ 99
$ 416
$ 350
79
Siding, stucco, brick or stone veneer each additional
500 sq ft
1.90
$
249
$
99
40%
$
249
100%
$
$ -
$ -
80
Solar/photovoltaic up to 10 Kw - Residential
Ill
1.00
$
145
n/a
%
$
145
100%
1,016
$
$ 147,143
$ 147,143
81
Solar/photovoltaic-10.1-30 Kw -Residential
Ill
4.10
$
552
$
132
24%
$
552
100%
$
$ -
$ -
82
Solar/photovoltaic 30.1+kw Residential
Ill
5.80
$
775
n/a
%
$
775
100%
-
$
$
$
83
Solar/photovoltaic-0-50 kw Commercial
Ill
7.30
$
981
$
641
65%
$
981
100%
$
$
$
84
Solar/photovoltaic -51+kw Commercial
Ill
10.70
$
1,427
$
641
45%
$
1,427
100%
$
$
$
85
Residential Solar power storage system
Ill
2.40
$
315
$
641
204%
$
315
100%
$
$
$
86
Solar power storage system Commercial
Ill
7.60
$
1,020
$
641
63%
$
1,020
100%
$
$
$ -
87
Insulation / drywall- first 500 sq ft
2.80
$
367
$
-
0%
$
350
95%
6
$
$ 2,204
$ 2,100
88
Insulation / drywall- each additional 500 sq ft
2.00
$
262
$
0%
$
150
57%
3
$
$ 787
$ 450
89
Percolation inspection (septic)
1.40
$
184
$
0%
$
184
100%
$
$ -
$ -
90
ADA or Seismic review (hourly)
1.40
$
184
$
0%
$
184
100%
$
$
$
91
Cabana - outdoor living area with walls
Ill
7.20
$
967
$
0%
$
600
62%
$
$
$
92
Fuel dispensing system
9.80
$
1,331
$
0%
$
1,331
100%
$
$
$
93
Above ground tanks
9.80
$
1,331
$
0%
$
1,331
100%
$
$
$
94
Carport- 1st 500 sq ft
Ill
5.50
$
744
$
99
13%
$
450
60%
$
$
$
95
Carport - each additional 500 sq ft
Ill
2.40
$
315
$
99
31%
$
250
79%
$
$
$
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 22 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee Fee Unit
Fee Name
No. Type
96 Structural Calculation review (hourly)
Estimated
w' Average Labor
0
z Time Per
Activity (hours)
0.00
Cost
Service
Activity
$
of
Per
-
Current
Fee /
Deposit
$
Existing
Cost
Recovery
%
%
Recommended
$
Recommended
Fee Level
Deposit Cost
Recovery %
%
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Current Fee
$
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Re overy
Fee
$
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Recommended
Fee
$
97 Re -inspection Fee (hourly)
1.00
$
131
$
0%
$
131
100%
$
$
$ -
98 Plan Check (hourly)
1.00
$
131
$ 127
97%
$
131
100%
1,515
$ 192,238
$ 198,781
$ 198,781
99 Inspection (hourly)
0.70
$
92
$ 127
138%
$
92
100%
2,410
$ 305,805
$ 221,349
$ 221,349
100 Hourly review by Engineer
0.00
$
-
$ -
%
$
-
%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
101 Outsourced Plan Check
new City Facilitation of Consultant
0.00
$
35% of
Consultant'
s Fee
%
$
%
$
$
$
new Contractor
n/a
$
Actual Cost
%
Actual Cost
%
$
$
$
new Change of Address
4.00
$
525
$
0%
$
525
100%
$
$
$
new Occupancy Inspection
1.70
$
237
$
0%
$
237
100%
$
$
$
new Sewer and Water
2.70
$
354
$
0%
$
354
100%
$
$
$
Hourly Minimum includes processing
2.80
$
367
$
0%
$
367
100%
$
$
$
MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING
Mechanical
1 HVAC system- residential
2.00
$
262
$ 99
38%
$
262
100%
78
$ 7,756
$ 20,469
$ 20,469
Exhaust hood, vent fan, ventilation system, Heating
2 unit, compressor, or Evaporative cooler
Residential/commercial each
2.50
$
328
$ 99
30%
$
250
76%
110
$ 10,938
$ 36,082
$ 27,500
3 Package unit or split system- residential
1.50
$
197
$ 99
51%
$
197
100%
8
$ 796
$ 1,575
$ 1,575
4 Ductwork only
1.00
$
131
$ 99
76%
$
131
100%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
5 Freezer/cooler-1st 500 sq ft commercial
3.00
$
416
$ 99
24%
$
416
100%
1
$ 99
$ 416
$ 416
6 Freezer/cooler- 501-50,000 sq ft commercial
6.00
$
810
$ 99
12%
$
810
100%
$
$ -
$ -
7 Freezer/cooler-51,000+sgft commercial
7.50
$
1,007
$ 99
10%
$
1,007
100%
$
$
$
8 type II hoods or other ventilation system - commercial
4.00
$
548
$ 99
18%
$
548
100%
$
$
$
9 Exhaust Hood -Type I -commercial
5.50
$
744
$ 99
13%
$
744
100%
$
$
$
10 Dust Collection System- commercial
10.00
$
1,357
$ 99
7%
$
1,357
100%
$
$
$ -
11 Cooling tower or heat exchange- commercial
6.00
$
878
$ 99
11%
$
878
100%
1
$ 99
$ 878
$ 878
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 23 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee Fee Unit
Fee Name
No. Type
Plumbing
Estimated
w' Average Labor
0
z Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost
Service
Activity
of
Per
Current
Fee
Deposit
/
Existing
Cost
Recovery
%
Recommended
Fee
Deposit
Recommended
Level
Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Current Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Re overy
Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Recommended
Fee
1
Sewer /water service connection- residential
1.25
$
164
$
99
61%
$
164
100%
4
$ 398
$ 656
$ 656
2
Plumbing or gas fixtures -first 5 fixtures residential
1.50
$
197
$
99
51%
$
197
100%
34
$ 3,381
$ 6,692
$ 6,692
3
Plumbing or gas fixtures -each additional residential
0.25
$
33
$
99
303%
$
33
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
4
Private sewage disposal system (new/altered- each
residential)
3.00
$
394
$
99
25%
$
394
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
5
Re -piping up to 20 fixtures - residential
2.00
$
262
$
99
38%
$
262
100%
18
$ 1,790
$ 4,724
$ 4,724
6
Water service line- residential
1.25
$
164
$
99
61916
$
164
100916
2
$ 199
$ 328
$ 328
7
Backflow preventer- first 5 residential
1.50
$
197
$
99
51%
$
197
100%
2
$ 199
$ 394
$ 394
8
Backflow preventer- each additional
0.10
$
13
$
99
758%
$
13
100916
$ -
$ -
$ -
9
Water heater - each residential
1.00
$
131
$
99
76%
$
131
100%
59
$ 5,867
$ 7,741
$ 7,741
10
Tankless water heater- residential
1.50
$
197
$
99
51%
$
197
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
11
Graywater system - residential
1.00
$
131
$
99
76%
$
131
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
12
Solar water system - residential
2.50
$
328
$
99
30%
$
328
100%
3
$ 298
$ 984
$ 984
13
Repair- Drain line, sewer line, water service or gas line-
Residential
1.00
$
131
$
99
76%
$
131
100%
10
$ 994
$ 1,312
$ 1,312
14
Sewer connection - commercial
2.00
$
262
$
99
38%
$
262
100%
3
$ 298
$ 787
$ 787
15
Plumbing or gas fixtures -first 5 commercial
3.00
$
394
$
99
25%
$
394
100%
1
$ 99
$ 394
$ 394
16
Plumbing or gas fixtures- each additional commercial
1.25
$
164
$
99
61%
$
164
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
17
Private sewage disposal system- commercial
3.00
$
394
$
232
59%
$
394
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
18
Grease interceptor -commercial
2.50
$
328
$
99
30%
$
328
100%
2
$ 199
$ 656
$ 656
19
Repair drain line, sewer line, water service or gas line-
commercial
2.00
$
262
$
99
38%$
262
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
20
Waterheater- commercial
2.00
$
262
$
99
38%
$
262
100%
1
$ 99
$ 262
$ 262
21
Tankless water heater - commercial
2.50
$
328
$
99
30%
$
328
100%
$
$ -
$ -
22
Backflow preventer- commercial
2.00
$
262
$
133
51%
$
262
100%
$
$
$
23
Solar water system - commercial
6.00
$
787
$
199
25%
$
787
100%
$
$
$
24
Graywater system - commercial
1.50
$
197
$
166
84%
$
197
100%
$
$
$
25
Medical Gas system
7.25
$
951
$
99
10%
$
951
100%
$
$
$
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 24 of 28
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.2
Fee Fee Unit
Fee Name
No. Type
Electrical
Estimated
w' Average Labor
0
z Time Per
Activity (hours)
Cost
Service
Activity
of
Per
Current
Fee
Deposit
/
Existing
Cost
Recovery
%
Recommended
Fee
Deposit
Recommended
Level
Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Current Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Re overy
Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Recommended
Fee
1
Outdoor events- carnival rides, electric generators
2.50
$
328
$
99
30%
$
328
100%
2
$ 199
$ 656
$ 656
2
Meter pedestal
1.25
$
164
$
99
61%
$
164
100%
1
$ 99
$ 164
$ 164
3
Temporary power pole meter panel (each)
1.50
$
197
$
166
84%
$
197
100%
21
$ 3,481
$ 4,133
$ 4,133
4
Temporary power pole- distribution panel (each)
0.50
$
66
$
99
152%
$
66
100916
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
5
Receptacle, switch, lighting fixtures - first 10
1.50
$
197
$
66
34%
$
197
100%
9
$ 597
$ 1,771
$ 1,771
6
Receptacle, switch, lighting fixtures -each additional
fixture
0.25
$
33
$
66
202%
$
33
100%
271
$ 17,966
$ 8,889
$ 8,889
7
Appliances, apparatus- residential
1.50
$
197
$
66
34%
$
197
100%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
8
Appliances, apparatus -Commercial
1.50
$
197
$
66
34%
$
197
100%
2
$ 133
$ 394
$ 394
9
Motors, generators- residential
1.50
$
197
$
99
51%
$
197
100%
4
$ 398
$ 787
$ 787
10
Motors, generators, transformer- commercial
2.50
$
328
$
99
30%
$
328
100%
1
$ 99
$ 328
$ 328
11
Electrical service less than 400 amp - commercial
2.00
$
262
$
66
25%
$
262
100%
5
$ 331
$ 1,312
$ 1,312
12
Electrical service panel 401 amp -1200 amp-
commercial
3.50
$
459
$
66
14%
$
459
100%
2
$ 133
$ 918
$ 918
13
Electrical service panel over 1200 amp- commercial
5.00
$
656
$
66
10%
$
656
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
14
Conduits for future use up to 500'
1.25
$
164
$
99
61%
$
164
100%
$
$
$
15
Conduits for future use each add] 500'
0.50
$
66
$
99
152%
$
66
100%
$
$
$ -
MEP MISCELLANEOUS
1
MEP fee (hourly) includes re -inspection fee
1.00
$
131
$
127
97%
$
131
100%
140
$ 17,765
$ 18,369
$ 18,369
2
MEP Plan check (hourly)
1.00
$
131
$
127
97%
$
131
100%
150
$ 19,034
$ 19,681
$ 19,681
3
MEP Plan check by engineer
0.00
$
-
$
-
%
$
-
%
-
$ -
$ -
$ -
TOTAL
1,867,963
1,873,054
1,834,397
[Notes]
Ili If structural calculations are submitted a calculation review will be
assessed in addition to the base fee.
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building COS, Page 25 of 28
APPENDIX A.3
Cost of Service Analysis — Building and Safety — Fire Fees
Prepared by NBS for City of Rancho Cucamonga
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.3
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building Fire Fees COS, Page 1 of 3
LFeeU nit
Type
D-
Existing
Cost
Recommended
r -
Estimated
Recommended volume of
Annual
Estimated
Annual
Estimated
0
Annual Estimated
Revenuesat
FIRE CONSTRUCTION FEE SCHEDULE
1
Fire Sprinkler Systems for New Construction
[2]
1-20 Heads
per floor or
3.50
$ 459
$ 165
36%
$ 459
100%
73
$ 12,059
$ 33,524
$ 33,524
system
21-100 Heads
per floor or
6.00
$ 787
$ 370
47%
$ 787
100%
33
$ 12,210
$ 25,979
$ 25,979
system
101-200 Heads
per floor or
7.00
$ 918
$ 502
55%
$ 918
100%
4
$ 2,008
$ 3,674
$ 3,674
system
201-350 Heads
per floor or
8.00
$ 11050
$ 568
54%
$ 1,050
100%
4
$ 2,273
$ 4,199
$ 4,199
system
351+ Heads
per floor or
9.50
$ 1,246
$ 700
56%
$ 1,246
100%
4
$ 2,801
$ 4,986
$ 4,986
system
Fire Sprinkler Systems (Production - SFR Tract
2
Homes and Multi -Family)
[2]
1-20 Heads
per floor or
2.00
$ 262
$ 137
52%
$ 262
100%
$
$
$
system
21-100 Heads
per floor or
4.00
$ 525
$ 307
58%
$ 525
100%
97
$ 29,753
$ 50,909
$ 50,909
system
101-200 Heads
per floor or
4.50
$ 590
$ 416
70%
$ 590
100%
11
$ 4,579
$ 6,495
$ 6,495
system
201-350 Heads
per floor or
5.00
$ 656
$ 471
72%
$ 656
100%
2
$ 942
$ 1,312
$ 1,312
system
351+ Heads
per floor or
6.00
$ 787
$ 581
74%
$ 787
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
system
3
Fire Sprinkler Tenant Improvements (Commercial)
[2]
1-4 Heads
per floor or
3.00
$ 394
$ 171
43%
$ 394
100%
5
$ 856
$ 1,968
$ 1,968
system
5-20 Heads
per floor or
4.00
$ 525
$ 238
45%
$ 525
100%
6
$ 1,427
$ 3,149
$ 3,149
system
21-100 Heads
per floor or
5.00
$ 656
$ 309
47%
$ 656
100%
7
$ 2,166
$ 4,592
$ 4,592
system
101-200 Heads
per floor or
6.00
$ 787
$ 568
72%
$ 787
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
system
201-350 Heads
per floor or
7.00
$ 918
$ 568
62%
$ 918
100%
1
$ 568
$ 918
$ 918
system
351+ Heads
per floor or
9.00
$ 11181
$ 700
59%
$ 1,181
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
system
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building Fire Fees COS, Page 1 of 3
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.3
MiscellaneousFSprinklerand Underground Work
4 Standard Hourly Rate
Fee Unit
Type jMff
minimum
' M.
0.00
$
-
rDeposit
$
145
Existing
Cost
Cost
%
Recommended
$
Recommended
Fee Level /
r -
%
Estimated
volume of
6
Annual
Estimated
Current Fee
$ 872
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Recovery Fee
$
Annual Estimat
Revenuesat
Fee
$
5
Hydraulic Calculation
per remote [21
area
1.00
$
131
$
172
131%
$
131
100%
$ -
$
$
6
7
Dry Pipe Valve
Private Underground Fire Service
per valve
0.00
$
-
$
105
%
$
-
%
$ -
$ -
$ -
First 1-5
per outlet/
hydrant riser
5.00
$
656
$
552
84%
$
656
100%
10
$ 5,521
$ 6,560
$ 6,560
Each Additional
per outlet/
hydrant riser
2.00
$
262
$
552
210%
$
262
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
8
Public Underground Fire Service
First 1-5
DCDA./
hydrant
5.00
$
656
$
145
22%
$
656
100%
5
$ 727
$ 3,280
$ 3,280
Each Additional
DCDA./
hydrant
2.00
$
262
$
145
55%
$
262
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
9
Deluge / Pre -Action
per valve
7.00
$
918
$
105
11%
$
918
100%
$
$
$
10
Fire Pump
per pump
7.50
$
984
$
302
31%
$
984
100%
$
$
$
11
Gravity
pertank
6.00
$
787
$
187
24%
$
787
100%
$
$
$
12
Pressure
pertank
6.00
$
787
$
39
5%
$
787
100%
$
$
$
13
Call I, II, & III Stand Pipe
per outlet
2.00
$
262
$
172
65%
$
262
100916
$
$
$
14
Fire Alarm and Sprinkler Monitoring System
0-15 Devices
per system
5.50
$
722
$
172
24%
$
722
100916
52
$ 8,935
$ 37,526
$ 37,526
16-50 Devices
per system
7.50
$
984
$
237
24%
$
984
100%
4
$ 948
$ 3,936
$ 3,936
51-100 Devices
per system
9.50
$
1,246
$
370
30%
$
1,246
100%
3
$ 1,110
$ 3,739
$ 3,739
101-500 Devices
per system
14.50
$
1,903
$
370
19%
$
1,903
100%
2
$ 740
$ 3,805
$ 3,805
each additional 25 Devices up4e4-,GW
per system
1.20
$
157
$
105
67%
$
157
100%
$
$
$
1,9901 Beviees
pe-systmen
960
v
866
eaeh _i 900 Dev:ees
He-
GM
385
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building Fire Fees COS, Page 2 of 3
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building & Safety Department - User Fee Study Fiscal Year 2018
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities
APPENDIX A.3
Miscellaneous pFireSystems, Equipment and Tanks
Fee Unit
s.
Type JMff
' 0.
rDeposit
Existing
Cost
Cost
Recommended
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Estimated
volume of
Annual
Estimated
Current Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenuesat
Recovery Fee
Annual Estimat
Revenuesat
Fee
15 Standard Hourly Rate
minimum
0.00
$
$
145
%
$
-
%
27
$ 3,924
$
$
16 Clean Agent Gas Systems
each
7.00
$
918
$
302
33%
$
918
100%
$ -
$
$
17 Dry Chemical Systems
each
6.00
$
787
$
236
30%
$
787
100%
$ -
$
$
18 Wet Chemical / Kitchen Hood
each
4.00
$
525
$
436
83%
$
525
100%
$
$
$
19 Foam Systems
each
4.00
$
525
$
564
107%
$
525
100%
$
$
$
20 Misc. FD Access
per hour
1.00
$
131
$
171
130%
$
131
100%
$
$
$
21 Refrigerant Monitoring System
each
6.00
$
787
$
302
38%
$
787
100916
$
$
$ -
Reports
22 High Pile Storage
500 - 25,000 sq ft
each
7.00
$
918
$
568
62%
$
918
100916
29
$ 16,477
$ 26,635
$ 26,635
25,001-100,000 sq ft
each
9.00
$
11181
$
568
48%
$
1,181
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
Each additional 100,000 sq ft
each
2.00
$
262
$
568
217%
$
262
100%
$ -
$ -
$ -
Life Safety and FPP
perhour
1.00
$
131
$
145
111%
$
131
100%
4
$ 581
$ 525
$ 525
Hazardous Material Inventory Statement (HMIS)
L24
perhour
1.00
$
131
$
145
111%
$
131
100%
1
$ 145
$ 131
$ 131
Hazardous Material Management Plan (HMMP)
perhour
1.00
$
131
$
145
111%
$
131
100%
$ -
$ -
$Re
-Inspection Fee
TOTAL
perhour
1.00
$
131
$
145
111%
$
131
100%
1
$ 145
111,767
$ 131
227,975
$ 131
[Notes]
For all multi -story projects, the fire sprinkler fee is calculated
[3] per floor based on the number of heads on that floor and the
number of hydraulic calculation areas.
Please add the fee for each Hydraulic Calculation area from the
[2] Miscellaneous Fire Sprinkler and Underground Work to each
floor/per head fees to estimate the total plan check and permit
fees.
The above fees cover typical projects. The fees for certain
unique projects will be determined on a case-by-case basis by
[3] the Building & Safety Services Director. It will be based on the
overhead cost and the time of service provided at the hourly
rate.
[4] The Total Fee breakdown consist of a Technology Fee plus Plan
Review & Inspection Fees (57% Plan Review +43% Inspection).
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2018 Building Fire Fees COS, Page 3 of 3
New and Amended Fees for
various City Departments
June 6, 2018
Background:
Fees are reviewed and updated each year. The following
departments are participating in fee revisions this year:
• Fire District
• Finance
• Library Services
• Community Development
• Planning
• Building & Safety Services
• Engineering Services
Fire District
The Fire District proposes to revise the Special Services Fees,
the Development Services Fees, and Technology Fee; and
establish fees for the All Risk Training Center Services
• Special Services
• Updating cost recovery fees as these were last adjusted in 2010
• Development Services Fees
• All -Risk Training Center
• With the development of the All -Risk Training Center, the Fire District has
developed a user fee schedule to address its classroom rentals and
specialized use opportunities
Finance
Update several fees and add a new fee related to
business licensing functions
• Sales of Goods or Merchandise from Vehicles Permit
• Solicitation Permit
• Appeal Procedure Fee
An update to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is
needed to remove fees specifically referenced in the code and
direct that fees shall be adopted by resolution.
Library Services
With the renovation of the second story of the Paul
A. Biane Library at Victoria Gardens, the 8,135 sq. ft.
multi -use space is now available for rental purposes
• Second Story Room Rental Fees
• Establishing new rental fees
• Non -Pick Up Hold Fee
• Proposal to remove the fee
Community Development
The City contracted with NBS early in 2018 to
perform a comprehensive fee study to review the
current fees for both the Building &Safety and
Planning Departments
• The analysis included the full cost to the City for
providing services
• Implementing a proposed General Plan
Maintenance Fee
• Updating the Technology Fee
Building & Safety Services
Since the last new user fee update in 2012 the
manner in which we process plans and permits has
changed and the way that developers and builders
submit plans has evolved
• Some fees were lowered including:
Residential interior remodels, block walls, room additions.
• Some fees were increased including:
New shell buildings
Tenant improvements
Large refrigeration units and fire system permits
Planning
Based on the fee study analysis, current planning
fees were significantly under -recovered so staff
worked to better realign them with development
patterns
• Subcategories of fees were created
• New service fees were created that have not been
previously recovered
• Deposit based fees
Engineering
Adjustments are recommended to the fee for On -Site
Water and Sewer services
• Transition the fee from the Building &Safety
Department to Engineering Services
• The fee was previously calculated per acreage and
now to be calculated per plan sheet
Outreach
Copies of the Building and Planning fee study were
distributed to:
The Building Industry Association
The Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce
Local Utility Companies
Several Local Home and Commercial Developers
Meetings were conducted with many of these groups as requested
Effective Dates of Fees
Proposed user fees will become effective based on
the schedule below:
• Fire District and Engineering fees will be effective August 6,
20181 60 days from the adoption of the resolution
• Finance fees will be effective concurrent with the effective
date of the proposed ordinance, 30 days after second
reading
• Library fees will be effective July 1, 2018
• Building and Safety Fees, Planning Fees, the General Plan
Maintenance Fee and the Technology Fee for City and Fire
will be effective January 1, 2019
Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council and Fire
Protection District Board take the following actions:
• As the Fire Board, adopt a Resolution to repeal and
adopt user fees for the Fire District
• As the City Council, adopt a Resolution to establish user
fees for Finance, Library Services, and Community
Development
• As the City Council, introduce Ordinance No. 931
DATE: June 6, 2018
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jana Cook, Community Improvement Manager
SUBJECT: FIRST READING AND INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE NO.
930, AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REVISE SIGN
REGULATIONS FOR PUBLIC PROPERTY.
(ITEM WILL BE CONTINUED TO JUNE 20, 2018 CITY COUNCIL MEETING)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends continuing the Public Hearing to the June 20, 2018 City Council meeting. No public
testimony will be heard at this time.
BACKGROUND:
The background on this report will be fully documented in the June 20, 2018 Staff Report.
ANALYSIS:
The sign code amendment involved extensive work by multiple staff in Planning, Engineering, Community
Improvement and the City Attorney's office. Due to conflicting schedules, several of the key personnel
were unavailable for the June 6, 2018 hearing, however, that was not apparent at the time the original
hearing was set. Therefore, it is recommended the item be continued to June 20, 2018 at which time a full
background and analysis will be provided and staff will be present to answer any questions.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Not applicable.
Page 383