The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2000/10/18 - Agenda Packet City Council Agenda October 18, 2000 1 All items submitted for the City Council Agenda must be in writing. The deadline for submitting these items is 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, one week prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's Office receives all such items. A. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call: Alexander Biane Curatalo __ Dutton __., and Willjams__ B,~. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS 1. Presentation of a Proclamation to PJ & Jim Clark, celebrating their 60th Wedding Anniversary. 2. Presentation of Certificates to Red Ribbon Week Button Design Winner and Honorable Mention Recipients. 3. Proclamation declaring October 23-31, 2000, as Red Ribbon Week in Rancho Cucamonga. C. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council. State law prohibits the City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The City Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual. D. CONSENT CALENDAR The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed by a Councilmember or member of the audience for discussion. 1. Approval of Minutes: September 20, 2000 2. Approval of Warrants, Register Nos. 9/20/00 and 10/4/00 and Payroll 1 ending 9/28/00 for the total amount of $3,528,633.72. 3. Approval to receive and file current Investment Schedule as of 13 September 30, 2000. 4. Approval of Alcoholic Beverage Application for Off-Sale Beer and Wine 19 for Ultra-Mart Gas Station (transfer of license), Monica Eiman & Victor Ghattas Tadros, 7996 Archibald Avenue. City Council Agenda October 18, 2000 2 5. Approval to authorize the advertising of the "Notice Inviting Bids" for 91 Infield Renovation of Three Softball Fields at the Rancho Cucamonga Adult Sports Complex, to be funded from Fund 46 (133). RESOLUTION NO. 00-209 22 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR INFIELD RENOVATION OF THREE SOFTBALL FIELDS AT THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADULT SPORTS COMPLEX AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS 6. Approval to authorize the advertising of the "Notice Inviting Bids" for the 26 Monte Vista Street Improvements between Amethyst Street and Archibald Avenue, to be funded with Community Development Block Grant funds, Account No. 28-4333-9721. RESOLUTION NO. 00-210 29 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE "MONTE VISTA STREET IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN AMETHYST STREET AND ARCHIBALD AVENUE" IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS 7. Approval of a Resolution adopting the Five-Year Capital Improvement 35 Program for Fiscal Years 2000/01 through 2004/05 and Twenty-Year Transportation Plan beginning in Fiscal Year 2000/01, as required for Measure "1" funds, and approval of a Resolution amending the Five- Year Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 1998/99 through 2002/03. RESOLUTION NO. 00-211 37 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2000/01 THROUGH 2004/05 AND TVVENTY-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PLAN BEGINNING IN FISCAL YEAR 2000/01 FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MEASURE 'T' I FUNDS .,~~ City Council Agenda October 18, 2000 3 RESOLUTION NO. 00-212 43 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 1998/99 THROUGH 2002/03 8. Approval of a Resolution amending Resolution 00-170, the Resolution 46 of Intention to Establish Community Facilities District No. 2000-01 (South Etiwanda), to modify the types of facilities authorized to be financed by such Community Facilities District. RESOLUTION NO. 00-170A 47 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 00-170, THE RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ESTABLISH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-01 (SOUTH ETIWANDA), TO MODIFY THE TYPES OF FACILITIES AUTHORIZED TO BE FINANCED BY SUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 9. Approval of Change Order No. 1 to Holmes and Narver, Inc., for the 49 preparation of a project study report at Base Line Road and the 1-15 Freeway, and appropriate $63,000 from Fund No. 22, to be funded from Account No. 22-4637-9922. 10. Approval of Improvement Agreement, Improvement Securities and 52 Ordering the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. I and 6 for CUP 98-30, located on south side of Feron Boulevard, east of Hermosa Avenue, submitted by Northtown Housing Development Company. RESOLUTION NO. 00-213 55 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES FOR CUP 98-30 RESOLUTION NO. 00-214 56 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 FOR CUP 98-30 City Council Agenda October 18, 2000 4 11. Approval of Agreement (CO 00-073) between the City of Rancho 63 Cucamonga and Verizon (formerly GTE) to Underground existing Overhead Utilities along Hermosa Avenue from 4th Street to 350 feet south of 8th Street. RESOLUTION NO. 00-215 66 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETVVEEN THE CITY AND VERIZON (FORMERLY GTE) TO UNDERGROUND EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES ALONG HERMOSA AVENUE FROM 4TM STREET TO 350 FEET SOUTH OF 8TM STREET 12. Approval and execution of Program Supplement No. 002-M1 to Administering Agency-State Agreement No. 08-5420 between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and State of California to provide funding for preliminary engineering, construction and construction engineering to expand the parking and south loading platform at the City's Metrolink Station at the southwest corner of Milliken and the AT&SF Railroad. RESOLUTION NO. 00-216 69 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND SIGNING OF PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 002-M1 TO ADMINISTERING AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT NO. 08-5420 BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TO EXPAND THE PARKING AND SOUTH LOADING PLATFORM AT THE CITY'S METROLINK STATION LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND THE AT&SF RAILROAD 13. Approval of Improvement Agreement Extension for Parcel Map 15234, located on the north side of Seventh Street, between Utica and Toronto, submitted by Joy's For Us, Inc. RESOLUTION NO. 00-217 72 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPRQVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR PARCEL MAP 15234 City Council Agenda October 18, 2000 5 14. Approval to accept Improvement, release the Faithful Performance 74 Bond, and file a Notice of Completion for Improvements for CUP 97-41, submitted by David Delrahim, located on the southwest corner of Hermosa Avenue and Arrow Route. RESOLUTION NO. 00-218 77 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR CUP 97-41 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 15. Approval to accept the FY 1999/2000 Local Street Rehabilitation Slurry 79 Seal, Contract No. 00-109 as complete, release the Bonds and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and approve the Final Contract amount of $210,036.91. RESOLUTION NO. 00-219 81 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR FY 1999/2000 LOCAL STREET REHABILITATION SLURRY SEAL, CONTRACT 00-019, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 16. Approval to accept Improvements, release the Faithful Performance 83 Bond, and file a Notice of Completion for Improvements for DR 95-33, submitted by Arrow Center L..L.C., located south of Arrow Route and east of White Oak. RESOLUTION NO. 00-220 86 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHQ CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR DR 95-33 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK E. CONSENT ORDINANCES The following Ordinances have had public hearings at the time of first reading. Second readings are expected to be routine and non- controversial The Council will act them upon at one time without discussion. The City Clerk will read the title. Any item can be removed for discussion. No Items Submitted. City Council Agenda ' October 18, 2000 6 F. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. The Chair will open the meeting to receive public testimony. 1. ANNEXATION 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request 87 to approve annexation of an approximately 504+/- acre portion of San Bernardino County unincorporated area generally located north of Highland Avenue between Hanley Avenue and Rochester Avenue - APN: (see attached description). RESOLUTION NO. 00-221 187 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ANNEXATION 00- 01 (LAFCO 2864) AND ORDERING TERRITORY ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 2. ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND 191 SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-01 - JPI - A request to add multi-family residential as a permitted use in the Mixed Use Planning Area IX of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, located on the northwest corner of 6th Street and Milliken Avenue. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified in June 1994. An addendum to the EIR is being prepared to allow multiple-family residential uses as an additional permitted use in Planning Area IX. The addendum is being prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) -APN: 290-272-17. ORDINANCE NO. 638 (first reading) 239 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-01, TO ADD MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AS A PERMITrED USE IN THE MIXED USE PLANNING AREA IX OF THE SUBAREA 18 AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF 3. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION FORMING AND 242 ESTABLISHING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF A LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS, AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION DECLARING NECESSITY TO INCUR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS AND SUBMITTING PROPOSITION TO QUALIFIED ELECTORS City Council Agenda October 18, 2000 7 RESOLUTION NO. 00-222 246 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, FORMING AND ESTABLISHING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000- 02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF A LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS RESOLUTION NO. 00-223 258 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING NECESSITY TO INCUR A BONDED INDEBTEDNESS, SUBMITTING TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) A PROPOSITION TO INCUR A BONDED INDEBTEDNESS SECURED BY A SPECIAL TAX LEVY TO PAY FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL FACILITIES IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000- 02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) AND A PROPOSITION TO ESTABLISH AN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR SUCH DISTRICT, AND GIVING NOTICE THEREON G.~. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items have no legal publication or posting requirements. The Chair will open the meeting to receive public testimony. No Items Submitted. H.~. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Chair may open the meeting for public input. 1. APPROVAL TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS RECEIVED FROM THE SAN 263 DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION, CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR CHILDHOOD INJURY PREVENTION, FOR A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,000 TO CONDUCT COMMUNITY EDUCATION PROGRAMS TO PREVENT/REDUCE ACCIDENTS AT OUR SKATE PARK FACILITY. (FISCAL YEAR2000-2001). City Council Agenda October 18, 2000 I. COUNCIL BUSINESS The following items have been requested by the City Council for discussion. They are not public hearing items, although the Chair may open the meeting for public input. 1. PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES 265 UPDATE J. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING This is the time for City Council to identify the items they wish to discuss at the next meeting. These items will not be discussed at this meeting, only identified for the next meeting. K. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council. State law prohibits the city Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual. L. ADJOURNMENT I, Debra J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on October 12, 2000, seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. September 20, 2000 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Regular Meetinq A. GALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council was held on Wednesday, September 20, 2000 in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. The meeting was called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. by Mayor Alexander. Present were Councilmembers: Paul Biane, James Curatalo, Bob Dutton, Diane Willlares, and Mayor Wi!liam J. Alexander. Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager; James Markman, City Attorney; Larry Temple, Administrative Services Director; Charles Scott, St. Information Systems Specialist; Lorraine Phong, Information Systems Analyst; Brad BuIler, City Planner; Sal Salazar, Associate Planner; Joe O'Neil, City Engineer; John Thomas, Plan Check Manager/Fire; Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director; Paula Pachon, Management Analyst III; Dave Moore, Recreation Superintendent; Jodi Sorrell, Marketing Manager; Captain Rodney Hoops, Police Department; Deputy Fire Chief Bob Corcoran, Rancho Cucarnonga Fire Protection District; Duane Baker, Assistant to the City Manager; Jenny Haruyama, Management Analyst I; and Debra J. Adams, City Clerk. B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS B1. Presentation of a Proclamation and Certificates to the Rancho Cucamonga Little League Junior Division All-Star Team in honor of their District and Section 6 Championship. Not present for presentation. B2. Presentation of Proclamations thanking Festival 2000 sponsors for their generous donations and support of the City's effort to provide family-oriented entertainment activities. Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director, made the presentation to the sponsors. Jodi SorreH, Marketing Manager, assisted with the power point presentation to thank the sponsors for their generous donations. B3. Presentation of a Proclamation commending Stephanie Voss on her State 4-H Championship Horse Show accomplishment. Mary Voss, Stephanie's mother, made a video presentation commending her daughter for her accomplishments. Mayor Alexander presented the Proclamation to Stephanie. City Council Minutes September 20, 2000 Page 2 C. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC C1. John Lyons of Etiwanda stated he had previously spoke at the City council meeting about the traffic near Etiwanda High School and wanted to thank the Council for their assistance to help with this situation. He also commented on the opening of all the lanes on Haven near the freeway construction, D. CONSENT CALENDAR D1. Approval of Warrants, Register Nos. 8/30/00 and 9/6/00 and Payroll ending 8/31/00 for the total amount of $3,808,742.50. D2. Approval to receive and file current Investment Schedule as of August 31, 2000. D3. Approval to authorize the advertising of the "Notice Inviting Bids" for the FY 2000/2001 Bus Bay Improvements at various locations, to be funded from Account No. 14-4158-9946. RESOLUTION NO. 00-177 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE "FY 2000/2001 BUS BAY IMPROVEMENTS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS" IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS D4. Approval to authorize the advertising of the "Notice Inviting Bid" for the Metrolink Station Expansion, Phase II Project, to be funded from Account No. 151-4637-9932. RESOLUTION NO. 00-178 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, FOR THE "METROLINK STATION EXPANSION, PHASE I1" IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS D5. Approval of disposition of a portion of City-Owned Property located on the east side of Rochester Avenue, north of Base Line Road, submitted by Richmond American Homes. RESOLUTION NO. 00-179 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, TO BE SURPLUS AND A BURDEN ON THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO EXECUTE THAT CERTAIN DEED, A COPY OF WHICH IS AftACHED HERETO AS EXHIBIT "A", AND TO CAUSE THE SAME TO BE DELIVERED TO THE PERSONS NAMED THEREIN City Council Minutes September 20, 2000 Page 3 D6. Approval to appropriate funds received from the California Department of Conservation through a Grant from the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act. ITEM REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCILMEMBER WILLIAMS. DT. Approval to appropriate $66,500 awarded by the California State Library into Library Expenditure Account. ITEM REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCILMEMBER DUTTON. D8. Approval of a Resolution authorizing the destruction of City Records pursuant to California Government Code Section 34090, the City's Records Retention Schedule, and other applicable legal citations. RESOLUTION NO. 00-180 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF CITY RECORDS WHICH ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED AS SET FORTH IN CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 34090 AND OTHER APPLICABLE LEGAL REFERENCES D9. Approval of a request from the Rancho Cucamonga Professional Firefighters Association for the City to Co-Sponsor a Charity Softball Game on September 24, 2000 at the Epicenter Stadium and to waive associated fees and charges. D10. Approval of Map, Improvement Agreement, Improvement Security, and Ordering the Annexation to Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 and 8 for Tract Map No. 15911, located at the northeast corner of East Avenue and the Southern Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way, submitted by Ryland Homes. RESOLUTION NO. 00-181 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TRACT MAP NUMBER 15911, IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY RESOLUTION NO. 00-182 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 8 FOR TRACT 15911 Dll. Approval to accept Bids, appropriate $21,000 from Fund Balance 23 (Drainage) and award and authorize the execution of the Contract in the amount of $67,458.60 ($61,326.00 plus 10% contingency) to the apparent low bidder, 4-Con Engineering (CO 00-068), for the construction of the Hermosa Avenue Street and Storm Drain Improvements on the east side of Hermosa Avenue 2000 feet south of Wilson Avenue, to be funded from General Funds (Maintenance), Account No. 01--4647- 9940 and the appropriation from Fund Balance 23. D12. Approval of Professional Services Agreement with Haro Engineering & Construction, Inc. (CO 00-069), to provide FY 00-01 Topographical Design Survey for street improvements at eleven different locations (see map) throughout the City, to be funded from Account Numbers: 32-4637-9968 Arrow @ 1-15 ($2,420), 01-4647-9941 Amethyst Ped ($992), 23-4637-8016 Almond Trail ($1 230) 32- 4637-9974 Lemon ($3,372), 32-4637-9972 Hellman @ 9tn ($873), 32-4637-9973 Helms (~992)' 32- 4637-9978 Terra Vsta Pkwy ($2 896), 32-4637-9969 Center - 6t" to 7th ($1 111), 32-4637-~970 Center - 7th to 8th ($1,111 ), 32-4637-9975 Marine ($1,944), and 32-4637-9964 26lh ($1,944). City Council Minutes September 20, 2000 Page 4 D13. Approval of Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 13951, located east side of Beryl, north of Manzanita and west of Hellman Avenue, submitted by CCRC 30, LLC. RESOLUTION NO. 00-183 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMQNGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 13951 D14. Approval of Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 14381, located on the northwest corner of Etiwanda and Wilson Avenues, submitted by Mastercraft-Cucamonga II, LLC. RESOLUTION NO. 00-184 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 14381 D15. Approval to accept Improvements, release the Faithful Performance Bond, accept a Maintenance Bond, and file a Notice of Completion for Improvement for Tract 15797-1, submitted by Tava Development DBA Citation Homes, located on the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane. RESOLUTION NO. 00-185 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 15797-1 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK D16. Approval to accept the Terra Vista Planned Community - Mountain View Park Improvement Project from Kaufman and Broad, as complete, release the Faithful Performance Bond and accept the Maintenance Bond, and authorize the filing of a Notice of Completion. RESOLUTION NO. 00-186 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL QF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY - MOUNTAIN VIEW PARK PROJECT, AS COMPLETE, AND AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK D17. Approval to accept Foothill Boulevard Landscape Medians Phase I from Vineyard Avenue to 600 feet west of Hermosa Avenue, including landscape only between Hellman Avenue and Archibald Avenue, Contract No. 99-078 as complete, and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and approve the final Contract amount of $983,057.25 City Council Minutes September 20, 2000 Page 5 RESOLUTION NO. 00-187 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD LANDSCAPE MEDIANS PHASE I FROM VINEYARD AVENUE TO 600 FEET WEST OF HERMOSA AVENUE, INCLUDING LANDSCAPING ONLY BETWEEN HELLMAN AVENUE AND ARCHIBALD AVENUE, AND AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF A NOTICE QF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK D18. Approval to accept the Modification of Traffic Signals and Intersection Lighting at Carnelian Street and 19th Street (SR 30), Contract No. 00-12, as complete, and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and approve the final contract amount of $29,500.00. RESOLUTION NO. 00-188 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE MODIFICATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND INTERSECTION LIGHTING AT CARNELIAN STREET AND 19TM STREET (SR 30), AS COMPLETE, AND AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK MOTION: Moved by Biane, seconded by Williams to approve the staff recommendations in the staff reports contained within the Consent Calendar with the exception of items D6 and D7. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. DISCUSSION OF ITEM D6. APPROVAL TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS RECEIVED FROM THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION THROUGH A GRANT FROM THE CALIFORNIA BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND LITTER REDUCTION ACT. Councilmember Willjams asked about the grant for litter reduction. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer, stated this relates to the recycling of bottles and cans. Councilmember Willjams asked if there was something that can be done so that litter can be collected at bus bays. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer, stated he is pleased to inform her that there is a plan to install trash enclosures at all the bus shelters and that the trash haulers will pick up the trash free of charge. Councilmember Williams asked if there is a graffiti patrol at the bus stops. Joe Q'Neil, City Engineer, stated yes, MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Biane to approve item D6. Motion carried unanimously DISCUSSION OF ITEM DT. APPROVAL TO APPROPRIATE $66,500 AWARDED BY THE CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY INTO LIBRARY EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT. Councilmember Dutton stated he wanted to draw attention to this because it is the grant for the book mobile and felt it was very important. City Council Minutes September 20, 2000 Page 6 MOTION: Moved by Dutton, seconded by Williams to approve item D7. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. E. CONSENT ORDINANCES No Items Submitted. F, ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS F1. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00-03A - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to change the General Plan land use designation from Flood Control/Utility Corridor to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 64 acres of land (abandoned Southern California Edison corridor) generally located north of SR 30, on the east side of the northerly prolongation of Day Creek Boulevard approximately 300 feet wide by 8,000 feet in length. APN No. 225-161-64, 225-101- 41,225-071-61, and 225-082-03. The County of San Bernardino Board of Supervisors previously certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in 1991 and a Supplemental EIR (SEIR) on October 26, 1999. The City of Rancho Cucamonga in conjunction with this project has prepared an addendure to the SEIR. The proposed amendment is intended to create consistency between the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and the County approved University Planned Development. Related files: Development Agreement 00-02, Annexation 00-01, and ENSPA 00-01. Staff report presented by Sal Salazar, Associate Planner. Mayor Alexander opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing the City Council was: Ben Anderson, UCP, Inc., stated they are very pleased they are moving forward with this and supported staff's recommendation. There being no further response, the public hearing was closed. Councilmember Biane stated this is part of a large puzzle for this project and that it will be coming back in the future for more actions. He thanked LAFCO for their support of this. RESOLUTION NO. 00-189 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00-03A, A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR FOUR PARCELS OF LAND TOTALING 64 ACRES IN SIZE FROM UTILITY CORRIDOR TO LOW RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF SR 30 AND ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET WIDE BY 8,000 FEET IN LENGTH, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 225-161-64, 225~101-41,225-071-61, AND 225-082-03 City Council Minutes September 20, 2000 Page ? MOTOIN: Moved by Biane, seconded by Curatalo to approve Resolution No. 00-189. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. F2. ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to change the Etiwanda North Specific Plan zoning designation from Utility Corridor to Low Residential (2.4 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 64 acres of land (abandoned Southern California Edison corridor) generally located north of SR 30, on the east side of the northerly prolongation of Day Creek Boulevard approximately 300 feet wide by 8,000 feet in length APN No: 225-161-64, 225-101-41,225-071-61, and 225-082-03. The County of San Bernardino Board of Supervisors previously certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in 1991 and a Supplemental EIR (SEIR) on October 26, 1999. The City of Rancho Cucamonga in conjunction with this project has prepared an addendure to the SEIR. The proposed amendment is intended to create consistency between the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and the County approved University Planned Development. Related files: Development Agreement 00-02, Annexation 00-01, 'GPA 00-03A. FOR DISCUSSION QF THIS ITEM REFER TO ITEM F1. ORDINANCE NO. 636 (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-01, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS MAP FROM UTILITY CORRIDOR TO LOW RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF SR 30 AND ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET WIDE BY 8,000 FEET IN LENGTH, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 225-161-64, 225- 101-41,225-071-61, AND 225-082-03 Debra J. Adams, City Clerk, read the title of Ordinance No. 636. MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Biane to waive full reading and set second reading of Ordinance No. 636 for October 4, 2000. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. F3. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION FORMING AND ESTABLISHING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-03 (RANCHO SUMMIT) AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF A LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION DECLARING NECESSITY TO INCUR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS AND SUBMITTING PROPOSITION TO QUALIFIED ELECTORS Mayor Alexander reported this is the time and place for the public hearings to take place relating to the formation of CFD 2000-03 (Rancho Summit). He added the public hearings relate to the formation of the proposed community facilities district and the authorization to levy special taxes within such district, and to incur a bonded indebtedness to pay for the acquisition of authorized public facilities. He asked the City Clerk to report on the notice of the public hearings and then for the staff report to be given. Debra J. Adams, City Clerk, stated the Notice of Public Hearing had been given in the form and manner as required by law and that a Certificate of Compliance is on file relating to the (i) Publication of Notice of Intention to form Community Facilities District and authorize the levy of a special tax, and (ii) Publication of Notice of Hearing to Incur Bonded Indebtedness. Staff report presented by Duane Baker, Assistant to the City Manager. City Council Minutes September 20, 2000 Page 8 Mayor Alexander opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. RESOLUTION NO. 00-190 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, FORMING AND ESTABLISHING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-03 (RANCHO SUMMIT) AND AUTHORIZING SUBMI'I'I'AL OF LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS RESOLUTION NO. 00-191 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING NECESSITY TO INCUR A BONDED INDEBTEDNESS, SUBMITTING TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-03 (RANCHO SUMMIT) A PROPOSITION TO INCUR A BONDED INDEBTEDNESS SECURED BY A SPECIAL TAX LEVY TO PAY FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL FACILITIES IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-03 (RANCHO SUMMIT) AND A PROPOSITION TO ESTABLISH AN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR SUCH DISTRICT, AND GIVING NOTICE THEREON MOTION: Moved by Curatalo, seconded by Willjams to approve Resolution No. 00-190 and 00-191. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. G. PUBLIC HEARINGS No Items Submitted. H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS No Items Submitted. I. COUNCIL BUSINESS I1. PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATE ACTION: Report received and filed. 12. REPORT OF DUMPING ON ETIWANDA NORTH OF HIGHLAND Staff report presented by John Thomas, Plan Check Manager/Fire. Councilmember Biane brought up that on Summit to the west, he felt the same thing was happening and asked for Building and Safety to check this out. City Council Minutes September 20, 2000 Page 9 ACTION: Report received and filed. 13. REVIEW OF HISTORY OF SLUMP STONE WALL ISSUE LOCATED AT 6549 EGGLESTON PLACE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA. Staff report presented by John Thomas, Plan Check Manager/Fire. He noted a correction in the staff report on page 151, stating the date in the last paragraph should be November 10, 1998 instead of 1999. Councilmember Curatalo asked why Mr. Georgiou did not attend the July 27 meeting. John Thomas, Plan Check Manager/Fire, stated he thought it was because Mr. Georgiou did not have enough time to prepare for the hearing and the disapproval of the members of the Board of Appeals. Councilmember Biane asked about the timeframes for filing an appeal after the wall is built. James Markman, City Attorney, stated it is a ten day timeframe for this particular issue. He continued to read a code section regarding the ten day statute of limitations. He stated the code does apply unless there are changes to the procedural law and then the City has to go with the new procedural law. Mayor Alexander opened the meeting for public input. Addressing the City Council was: Mr. Georgiou referred to his appeal he filed April 19, 1999. He asked if the council would hear his appeal or not. He continued to give his own chronology of the events that has taken place. James Markman, City Attorney, felt Mr. Georgiou was playing a game and that the timeframe for filing his appeal was not met. He added Citation Homes did not object to the Council hearing this matter and was willing to work with the City on resolving things. He stated the issue is if the wall was built safely. He felt the Council should adopt a motion that Mr. Georgiou's letter of April 19, 1999 was not a timely filed appeal in the view of the City Council. Mayor Alexander talked about the City Council giving Mr. Georgiou a hearing and that they did this as a courtesy instead of the Appeals Board hearing the matter. MOTION: Moved by Curatalo, seconded by Biane to conclude that Mr. Georgiou's letter of April 19, 1999 did not constitute an appeal and was not filed in a timely manner. Councilmember Dutton commented from the transcript of the February 23, 2000 meeting stating that the Council did hear Mr. Georgiou's appeal on that date. He continued to go through the transcript pointing out various important facts and stated he would go along with the motion. Mayor Alexander felt every courtesy has been extended to Mr. Georgiou. He stated the City feels the wall was put up appropriately. Councilmember Biane felt the City has done everything they can to try to assist Mr. Georgiou. He felt the construction was done as it should be. He pointed out again that the City has done everything possible to help Mr. Georgiou. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. City Council Minutes September 20, 2000 Page l0 J. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING No items were identified for the next meeting. K, COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC No communication was made from the public. L. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Moved by Wdliams, seconded by Biane to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitfed, Debra J. Adams, CMC City Clerk Approved: * IO~)~-ZO00 03:32pm ;rom-$ASMF LA 35295 2136877828 T-7;8 P.OOt/O02 F-881 SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, HEAGHER & F'LOM LLP 300 SO~ GRAND AVENUE LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA ~007 I -3 144 ENA~U Lf~er~sk~d~.com ~ }{~ACSIMtLE ~NSM~AL SHS~ I{ PLEASE DELIVER TREE FOLLOWING PAGEE(S) TO: CiW ofRancho Cucamon2a c~; }~,n~ho Cucamomza OA~: OctOb~ 18. 2000 ~,~,~ ~o.; (909) 477-2846 F~: 1 .i~ F~cr ~.: S~te 3400 ~z~.~.~ .o.: 986210/0100 osa~ O~AL: (213} 687-5000 TOTAL NUMBER OF PAG~ INCLUDING COVeR(S); 2 I iBtend to come ~ toniiht's Ci~ Council ~eetin2 ~d pr~ent ~is letter in pe~on, / October 28, 2000 VIA FACSIMILE (909~ 477-2846 Jack Lam~ City Manager City ofKancho Cucamonga P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: Ranthe Cucamonga Metrolink Station Dea~ Mr. Lam: I moved to the community of Rancho Cucamonga in May of 1999. Inasmuch as I work in the denton areaof Los Angeles, I began to take thc Metrolink train. It was my understa~iding that in the six months previous to May, 1999 a petition had been presented to the City requesting that the parking lot be expanded and that the unfinished portion bc paved and completed- Since that time I have spoken to Mr. Ken Fung in the City Engineering Department at least 1/2 dozen times regarding the parking area. Hc has been most kind and very helpful in his 'progress reports." At last report, he 'was ~nticipating that by this November the conlxact for repaying the lot and expanding the station would be "let." Yesterday, I was riding the train with a friend I met at the station who lives in Hesperin- I inquired as to why I hadn't scan her in quite a long time on the train. She indicated that she had fallen at the Mc~ro link parking lot. She had tennis shoes on, was running to make the 7:39 u'ain to LA, and uipped and fell flat on her face. She was dazed and disoriented and had to seek medical attention. Her problem continued for at least a two week period. I believe she is in the procress of obtaining medical records to forward to the City ofKancho Cucamonga- Also, another friend of mine h'tat commutes from Phelan has a pem~ancnt handicapped designation. She takes the 7:15 a.m. train to Los Angeles. By that time, every day, all the handicapped spaces ~ taken. This results in her having to walk either an extra-long distance or walk through the uneven dirt and stones of the unpaved parking lot. At this point m me I believe we need your intersession and the City CounciPs intercession to get this lot graded, paved and finished. It is a health hazard to both human beings and their cars. How can we. as h-a4. riders. assist you in ~ettin~ the lot finished and cuicklv??? Thank you for your consideration in thc above. Mrs, Linda Facer 4993 Crarrctt Avenue Ranthe Cucamonga, CA 91739 FOR PERIOD: OO-ZO-OO COOl01) RUN DATE: OB/ZO/00 PAGE: /ENDOR NAHE iTEM DESCRIPTION NARR NO WARRo ANT, O0 CHECKI OVERLAP 2867 STATE ENVIRONHENTAL MGHT., INC. SERVICE AND SUPPLIES 154810 674°96- ((( 15A811 - 155665 ))> 12750 EEGNIER, JEAN BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 15566A~ ((( 155665 - 156412 33153 H ~ L CHARTER CO., INC MEETING 156613~ 525oQQ 2682 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE POSTAGE HETEE MONTHLY SERVICES 156414~ 4,SQQ.QQ ((( 156415 - 156A19 A635 A & K PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTO DEVELOPING A SUPPLIES 8 15642Q 15.58 I AA EQUIPHENT RENTALS CO., INC. VEHICLE MAINTENANCE/SUPPLIES 1S6421 '142.16 2732 ABC LOCKSHXTHS MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES J 1564Z2 654.69 6305 ADAHSONw RONALD INSPECTION SERVICES I 1564Z5 83Zo00 SSOg AIR CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1564Z4 50°00 3448 ALL NELDXNG MAINTENANCE REPAIRS 166425 ZGZoSO Z644 ALPERT'S PRINTXNG OFFICE SUPPLIES 1564Z6 Z04.95 1430 AMERICAN 6USXNESS FORHS OFFXCE SUPPLIES i 156427 4,15T,81 5658 AHERZCAN FIRST AID SUPPLIES 156428 37.58 652 AHERZCAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION APA HENBERSNXP DUES 8 156629 963.00 12301 ANDERSON, JoDON OEPOSXT REFUND 156430 500°00 22303 ARHADAt PATRICIA DEPOSIT REFUND 156431 500°00 C(( 156431 - 156431 667 ARRONHEAD CREDIT UNION VISA NONTHLY BILLINGS # 156433 3tEll,SO 22294 ARSENAULTe LTNNE RECREATION REFUND 156434 29°00 16 ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES i 156435 15,090o00 .ZZ3OO ATLAS-ALLIED DEPOSIT REFUND 156436 lwO00oO0 C(< 156437 - 156637 Gl15 AUFOAU CORPORATION PLAN CHECK SERVICES i 156438 379531o50 ((< 156A39 - 156439 4102 8 g K ELECTRIC NHOLESALE MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 8 15644.0 5,156o75 A475 BARNES g NOBLE LIBRARY SUPPLIES 156441' 291o89 5942 BARSTOOLS ETCo RECREATION SUPPLIES 1S644Z 3o21 6748 BEARINGS & DRZVESw ZNC. NEHBERSHIP DUES 156445 15.80 44A1 BEST BUY COo~ ZNC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 156444 409.43 ;12293 BOCK, ROB CASH AOVANCE 156A45 lSOoOO A369 BRODART BOOKS LIBRARY SUPPLIES 8 156466 Z09.97 ;12301 BUFALINO, NICK REFUND PARKING CITATION 156467 30°00 4410 BURNS INTERNATIONAL SECURITY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES I 156448 2,Z11,55 1001 BURTRONZCS OFFICE SUPPLIES I 156449 886°06 ~!2299 C.Po CONSTRUCTION, CO. DEPOSIT REFUND 156450 1,009.00 1851 CAL NESTERN PAINT NAZNTENANCE SUPPLIES 156451 Z,010o31 5164 CALIFORNIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION CALZF LIBRART ASSOC fitGo 156452 2OQ.OQ S164 CALIFORNIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION CALIF LIBRARY AS$OC HYGo IS6453 265.OO 5164 CALIFORNIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION CALZP LIBRARY AS$OC HTGo 156454 337o00 SIE4 CALIFORNIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION CALIF L16RARY AS$OC NTGo 156655 190o00 5164 CALIFORNIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION CALIF LIBRARY AS$OC HTGo 156456 125o00 5164 CALIFORNIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION CALZF LIBRARY ASSGC MTGo 156457 260°00 5164 CALIFORNIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION CALZF LIBRARY AS$OC HTG. 156458 265.00 6713 CALIFORNIA OVERNIGHT RECREATION REFUNDS I 156459 46.00 6612 CALIFORNIA STATIONERS RECREATION REFUND I 156660 48.66 6765 CON GOVERNKENT, ZNCo BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 156661 193o19 68 CENTRAL CITIES SIGNS, ZNCe HAZNTENANCE SUPPLIES I 156462 646°50 6719 CENTRAL NZCROFZLH RECREATZON REFUNDS 156463 55,95 FOR PERIOD: OO-Z~OQ COO/Q2) RUN DATE: QO/2O/OD PAGE: FENDOR NAME ZTEM DESCRZPTZQN WARR NO NARR, ART, 4r~ CHECKR OVERLAP 22304 CNARRQNm DZRK DEPOSIT REFUND 156466 ZSO.QO 6052 CHARTER CORMUNICATTONS ADYERT/SXNG FEE 0 156665 2,021.08 6095 CHZLDCRAFT EDUCATZON CARP, RECREATZON REFUND 156666 11o14 73 CITRU$ NOTORS DNTARZOe 1NC, VEHICLE NAZNTENANCEISUPPLZE$ i 156467 4~170.66 74 CZTY RENTALS EQUIPMENT RENTAL/SUPPLZES 156~60 13,90 22296 CLARION HOTEL REGZSTRATZQN 156465 255,94 22297 CLARTON'UNZVER$ZTY OF PENN$TLVANZA REGZSTRATZON 156470 140,00 4279 CLARKe DEBORAH REZNBURSE FOR BUSZNESS EXPENSE 156471 37°34 22295 CLXGNETTe DAROLYN RECREAT[ON REFUND 156472 45,00 643 CONPUTERLAND COMPUTER NAXNTENANCEISUPPLXES # 156473 332o90 2362 CONSERCOe XNCo 5ERVXCEIREPAXRS 0 156474 527,54 Z2258 CTXLT TRAXNXNG REGXSTRATXON i 156475 16320o00 <<< 156476 - 156477 85 CUCAMONGA CO NATER DXST MONTHLY NATER BELLENOS I 156470 32t514o40 239 D G K CONCRETE CO STREET MAZNTENANCE i 156479 3s975.58 2511 D A R E AMERICA O. AoR,E, HATEREAL 0 256480 3156ZoZQ lOS DAN GUERRA S ASSOCXATES CONTRACT 5ERVZCE$ W Z56481 lOsQ38oOO 6734 DAVZSe CZNDY REZHBURSENENT 156482 ZOODOg 2Z90 DEER CREEK CAR HASH VEHXCLE NAZNTENANCEISUPPLZES 156483 126,00 41395 OELATDRREt MARITZA RECREATZQN REFUND i 156484 02,50 60 DELTA DENTAL DENTAL XNSURANCE 156495 270656.V6 4366 DENCOs ENC, OFFXCE SUPPLZES 156486 14ego 4544 DZCKe ERXC EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH i 156487 75,00 42069 DECKEYe MARTXN TRAVEL G NEETZNGS 156488 200.00 3364 EZGHTH AVENUE GRAPHZCS OFFZCE SUPPLZE$ 156489 270.Z2 3614 ELXTE TOHZNG TONXNG SERVZCE 156490 tOO,DO 41396 EMBASSY $UZTES AZRPORT HOTEL TRAVEL & MEETZNG5 156491 295,56 5137 ENPXRE MOBZLE HONE SERVZCE PRDFESSZONAL SERVZCES 156492 4,680o00 ZZO ENXNG IRRIGATZON PRODUCTS ZRRXGATZON SUPPLZES t 156493 2e281o50 5917 FASTENAL COMPANY MAZNTENANCE SUPPLIES 156494 62,03 124 FENCE CRAFT OF UPLANDs ZNC, MAZNTENANCE SUPPLZES 156495 45,20 61397 FZANOe ROBERT REFUND 156496 lOY, OO 184 FIELDMANe ROLAPP 6 ASSOCZATES PROFESSZONAL SERVXCES 156497 30049o14 2909 FZLTER RECYCLZNG $ERVXCEe ZNC, NAZNTENANCE SUPPLXES 196498 110.00 4371 FXSHER $CZENTXFZC MAINTENANCE SUPPLZE$ J 156499 176o14 6685 FOOTHELL 8EVERAGE CONPNAY RECREATZON SUPPLZES 156500 55°09 4~62 FOOTHILL FANELY SHELTER FARELY SHELTER 156501 ZOOcOO 2840 FORD OF UPLANDs ZNC, ¥ENZCLE MAZNTENANCE I 156502 19959o71 98 FORD PRXNTTNG & MATLENDs ZNC MAINTENANCE t OPERATZONS 156503 812,33 6772 FOREHOST PRODUCTZONS RECREATXON REFUND 156504 151o51 1082 FRANKLZN COVEY CO, OFFZCE SUPPLZE$ I 156505 83,45 5833 FRZTTS FORD EQUXPNENT 156506 35e277,30 4540 GALE GROUPs THE LZBRARY BOOKS i 156507 5737 GANE ROOK GALLERY RECREATXON SUPPLXE$ 156508 28°62 3356 GARCXAs VXVXAN MXLEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 156509 21,45 41401 CARDMERe OANN CONTRACT SERVXCE$ 156510 39,00 1684 GENTRY 8ROSs [NC, PROGRESS PAYMENTS 156511 159p153o95 4463 GLOBAL kGUZPMENT COMPANY OFFZCE EGUXPNENT 156612 497°55 41396 GONZALEZs CARLOS RECREATION REFUND 156513 135o00' 41399 DOSSAGER ROBZN RECREATZON REFUND e 156514 92,00 3827 GREEN ROCK PONER EGUZPNENT MAXNTENANCE $UPPLZE$ 8 156515 945.75 FDR PERZQD: 09-20-00 COO/OZ) RUN DATE: 09/28/00 PAGE: IENDOR NAME ETEM DESCRZPTZON NARR NO WARRo ANT° ~Q CHECK8 OVERLAP 61ADO GREEN, DONNA RECREATZON REFUND 156516 105.00 6583 H.V. GARTER CO. 8USINESS LZCENSE REFUI~D 8 15651? 462.76 2855 HAVEN NZHE E LZQUOR CO. SUB-CQNNZTTEE NEETZNGS 8 256538 210.15 33152 HERHANDEZ, STEPHANZE RECREATION 156539 26~00 A724 HE-NAY SAFETY, ZNC. MAZNTENAHCE SUPPLZES e 356520 ABAS HELLSlOE CGNMUNZTT CHURCH MONTHLY RENT 156521 Z,QOQ.QQ 1A67 HOBART. CORPQRATZON ~AZNTENANCE SUPPLZES 15652Z 89.00 158 HOLLZDAY ROCK CO., ZNC. MAXNTENANCE SUPPLZES 8 156523 811.53 6587 HOLMES A NARVERs ZNCo RECREATZON REFUND 156526 49092,00 ZZ55 HOLT'S AUTO ELECTRIC MAXNTENANCE SUPPLZE$ i 156525 183o18 <<< 156526 - 156526 ))) 4033 HONE DEPOT CREDXT SERVZCE MAXNTENANCE $UPPLXES I 2565Z7 Z,029o87 33147 HOMES, UL, LLCo MZSC 156528 1,676,60 123A HOSERAN MAINTENANCE SUPPLZES 8' 186529 95.07 AB5 HTDRQ-$CAPE PRODUCTS, 1NC LANDSCAPE NAINTENRNCE SUPPLIES e 156530 4188 I D BURR MAZNTENANCE 5UPPLZE$ 156531 24°08 4254 XBR CORPDRRTZON MAZNTENANCE SUPPLXE$ 186532 ZlO~O0 908 ZNLAND MEOZATZON BOARD LANDLORD/TENANT DZSPUTE RESOLD I 156533 1,997o37 2315 ZNLAND IHOLESALE NURSERT MAZNTENANCE $UPPLZES 186534 140o07 3A52 ZHTMAVAZA ROCK t SAND NAZNTENANCE $UPPLZE$ 156535 2507 ZNYENSY$ BUZLOZNG $TSTEH$ ZNCo $ERVZCE/SUPPLIE$ 156536 10,109,00 5616 ZSJ MEHBERSHIP I 156537 ZTOoOO 1941 JACOBSEN DZVISZON OF TEXTRON, 1NCo MAZNT SUPPLIES I 156538 173.86 6565 JOHNSONs CHARLOTTE SUBSCRXPTZON RENEHAL 156539 407.00 33146 JOSEPH, STEPHANEE RECREATZOM 156560 155o00 179 KAZSERFQUNDATION HEALTH PLAN NEDZCAL ZNSURANCE 156561 31,968o61 6674 KELLEY, KR15TY RECREATZON REFUND 356561 150o00 6674 KELLEY, KRZSTY RECREATZON REFUND 156543 7.00 33139 KELLNER, ERZC REFUND 8 156544 147,95 5059 KXNKO'S COPZES RECREATZON SUPPLZE5 356565 93°76 1024 KBCH MATERZALS CONPANT MAZNTEMANCE SUPPLZES 156546 19861,69 6090 KONG, SOPHAK BUSZNESS LICENSE REFUND 156547 480,00 4982 KORANDA CORSTRUCTXON C.D. BoGo 1S6568 4,680.00 55A5 L S A ASSOCXATES, ZNCo PRQFESSXONAL SERVXCES # 156569 5,738°49 193 LAIRD CONSTRUCTZDN CO PROFESSEDHAL SERVZCES 156550 500°00 (<( 156551 - 256551 >>> 321 LANDSCAPE UEST, ZNCo LANDSCAPE MAXNTENANCE I 156552 172,181.83 8A9 LANSDN PRODUCTS, XNCo MAZNTENANCE SUPPLZE$ I 156553 381o87 197 LEAGUE OF CALXFDRNXA CZTXES ANNUAL DUES 156554 980,00 33150 LEAVZTT, TZNA RECREATXON 156555 156o00 979 LEUXS OPERATEND CORPo REFUND OF OEVELUPNENT FEES 156556 19o80 331A5 LZAOe FRED RELEASE OF DEPO$ZT 156557 884,00 5664 LXLBURN CORPORATEON PROFESSXONAL SERVXCES I 156556 58576o00 Z048 LZTTLE TEKE5 CDNHERCZAL PLAY STS NAZNTENANCE SUPPLXE$ 156559 337o15 1A55 LONG*$ DRUGS FZLM PROCESSXNG 256560 9.69 5662 LOS ANGELES COCA COLA BTL. CO. RECREATXON SUPPLXE$ 156563 260o62 549 MARXPOSA HORTXCULTURAL ENToZNCo LANDSCAPE NAZNTENANCE i 15656Z 3,315.65 72 MARK GHRES, ENCo VEHZCLE NAZNTENANCE SUPPLZE5 I 156563 230.75 6727 MARSHALL PLUNB;NG REHA6, PROGRAM 8 156564 985oZ6 250 MARTXNEZ TONXNG AND AUTOHQTXVE TONXNG SERVXCES I 156565 385.00 3871 MATT'S HARDWARE MAXNTENANCE SUPPLXE$ i 156566 51,1Q FOR PERZUD: 09-2Q-'UO COO/OR) RUN DATE: 09/20/00 PAGE: 6 fENDOR NAME ZTEM DESCRZPTZQN NARR NO UARR. ART. ~0 CHECKR OVERLAP 6085 MCARDLE~ KEYIN BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 156567 ZQ.QQ 33135 NCNANE, GARY RECREATZDN 156568 75~00 6170 MICROAGE COMPUTERHART 1994 CTE DUES 156569 78.88 6214 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART RECREATION REFUND # 156570 Z~169.03 585Z HZDHEST TAPE LIBRARY SUPPLTES 0 156571 239.92 331A8 MISAC DUES 156572 180.00 3860 HQBZLE NZNIe ZNC. STORAGE SUPPLZES I 256573 Z61,84 1756 MUDREt DAVE REINBo/FOUNOERS DAY SUPPLIES 156574 2QQoOQ 33152 NORRZSONe JODZE RECREATION 156575 50°00 84Z NOUNTAZN VZEN SMALL ERGo REPAIR RAZNTENANCE SUPPLZES I 156576 63°95 30072 fT BALOY UNITED MAY RECREATION 156577 ZDoOO 32367 NAHMMA REGISTRATION 156578 150o00 ZZAB NAPA AUTO PARTS VEHICLE MAINTENANCE I 156579 690~58 6766 NATZDNAL NEZGHGORHOUD HATCH INSTo LOCAL PERMIT STREANLINZNG MT6 156580 166o84 331A9 NEYEDA PRIMA MEETING 156581 iOO,O0 3600 NIELSENe NETTle NAINTENANDE SUPPLIES 156582 ZO0,OO 433 NZXON-EGLX EQUZPMENT VEHZCLE NAZNTENANCE I 156583 571o19 6752 NORTH COAST MEDZCAL RECREATXON REFUNOS I 156564 31837 OAKSTONE LEGAL & BUS, PUDLZCATXON SUBSCRXPTXON 156585 4853 OCLCe INCo CORE SERVICES CHARGES 156586 125o00 ((( 1B6587 - 156587 523 OFFXCE OEPQT OFFXCE SUPPLIES i 156588 1w993o64 4142 ONTARIO HINNELSON COo HAINTENANCE REPA2RS 156565 5661 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDHARE MAINTENANCE SUPPLZES 156590 9°86 ((( 15659] - 156591 235 OMEN ELECTRXC MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES I 156592 6e762052 BT6 PADMORt PAULA RECREATXON REFUNDS 156593 ZOODO0 6287 PACIFICARE OF CALIFORNIA RECREATION REFUND 156594 36t568,57 5A09 PARTSNASTERe XNC, HAXNTENANCE SUPPLXES 156595 507.35 757 PEP BOYS VEHZCLE MAINTENANCE SUPPLZES 156596 5720 PERVO PAINT CO, MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES t 156597 Z~067,29 6205 PETERNAN LUMBER EARTHQUAKE PREPAREONESS KIT I 156598 281,19 6148 PIRONe SHAUN CONTRACT SERVlCES 156599 186,00 272 PITNEY BONES POSTAGE METER RENTAL 156600~ 527°35 255 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO VEHICLE NATNTENANCE g SUPPLXES I 156601 19983°97 3952 POMONA ZNL VALLEY CNCL OF CHURCHES HE$T END HUNGER PROGRAM 156602 693 PONERSTRZDE BATTERY CORe INCo VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 156603 103o36 758 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTIONw INCo NAINT/RECREATION SUPPLIES I 156604 33142 PRECISION BUXLT POOLS RELEASE OF OEPOSZT 156605 ZSO,OO 65 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES i 156606 14o82 5899 QUALZTY ONE ENGRAVERS OFFICE SUPPLIES 156607 16,16 6569 QUINNe SHERLINE BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 156608 336°86 ((( 156609 - 156609 251 R & R AUTOHOTIVE VEHICLE MAINTsSUPPLIESASERVICE I 156610 50095o96 345 R D 0 EQUXPNENT CO/POMERPLAN RAXNT SUPPLXES i 156611 2e458,56 12799 Rg8 RAXNEONS RECREATXUN REFUND 156612 19000°00 11357 RADXSSO~ HOTEL SACRAMENTO CUNFERENCEe HOTEL RESERVATXONS 156613 792°96 11624 RAXLS-TU-TRAXLS CUNSERVANCT SUBSCRXPTXON 156614 TO RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER NENDERSHXP NEETXNG 156615 70 RANCHO CUCAHDNGA CHAMBER MEMBERSHXPHEETXNG 156616 100o00 12750 REGNXERe JEAN 8UEXNESS LXCENSE REFUND 156617 12o00 FOR PERZOD: O9-ZO-O0 CO0101) RUN DATE: OOIZOIOO PAGE: STEM DESCRZPTZDNMARR NONARRo ART° ........ . .................................... ................... ....... .....................-.... ......,. ........... ~ CHEC·B OVERLAP 1Z814 RJP GENERAL CQNTRACTZNG RECREATION REFUND 156618 leOOOoOO 3314 RODXNSON FERTZLZZER LANDSCAPE SUPPLXES e 156619 Z,720o75 626 ROBLESe RAUL Po, SR- TZRE REPAZR R 1566Z0 195o00 16 ROTART CDRPORATZON NAZNTENANCE SUPPLXES 156621 20~98 5324 ROTHe FREDRZCK, PHoD, CONSULTXNG FEES t 1566ZZ 3,768°00 12800 ROTHe LANZ RECREATZON REFUND 156623 115o00 1Z92 S ~ S ARTS AND CRAFTS RECREATZON SUPPLZES 156624 16.53 AA38 S C A C E O ANNUAL NENBERSHZP DUES 156626 12613 SALCEDO, LOUANA RECREATZON REFUND 156626 33.00 5536 SAN ANTONIO MATEREALS NAXNTENANCE SUPPLXES 156627 87°53 581 SAN BERN COUNTY CAL-ZD PROGRAM 156629 55o00 581 SAN BERN COUNTY CAL-ZD PROGRAM 0 156629 5.030o62 150 SAN BERN COUNTY pUBLZC HEALTH DEPTo ANZNAL CONTROL SERVICES 156630 60eSBOoOQ 301 SAN BERN COUNTY SHERZFF$ C0NTRACT $HERZFFS SERVICE e 156631 RBOeBZ6oOO 12802 SCDLERZ. GAlL RECREATZON REFUND 156632 51o00 12601 SD SU FOUNDATXONICCCZP RECREATXON REFUND 156633 320~00 12803 SEA LODGE HOTEL RECREATXON REFUND 15663A 414.39 1105 SEAL FURNXTURE t SYSTEMS 1NCo DPFXCE SUPPLZES # 156635 100,A76o57 6252 SIERRA $PRZNG$ BUSINESS LECENSE REFUND 156636 114.00 12804 SEGNUND-YUHAS. ELZZABETH RECREATZON REFUND 156637 150o00 351 SEGN SHOP, THE NAINT SUPPLIES 156638 53°9· <<< 156635 - 156649 1432 SOUTHERN CALXPORNZA EDXSON MONTHLT ELECTREC 6ELLS I 156650 11.338.45 12806 SPECXAL OZSTRZCTS ZNSTZTUTE OVERPATNENT ON 8U$oLXCo 156651 5A5.00 3017 STATE OF CALZFORNXA UNEMPLOYMENT ZNSURANCE 156652 667°00 3017 STATE OF CALZFORNZA UNENPLOYNENT ZNSURANCE 156653 30°00 3632 STEELNORKERS OLDTXNER$ FOUNDATEON OLDTXNERS FOUNDATZON i 156654 1e732.25 5281 STERZCYCLEe XNC. SHARPS PROGRAM I 156655 312o10 6131 SUPER PC MEMORY pUDLXCATZON I 156656 Ze56A-28 5410 T & O ZNSTALLATXON$ SUPPLZE$ 156657 2344 TARGET YOUTH PROGRAN G DAY CAMP SUPPL I 156658 110o77 615B TECHNULOGT SERVXCE$ CONSULTXNG GRP 8U$ZNE$S LXCENSE REFUND 156650 0,183.61 12807 TEDESCD, PHYLLXS L.AoZNAUGURAL TALGO TRAXN RXDE I 156660 51.00 3542 TERNXNZX XNTERNATXDNAL NONTHLT PEST CONTROL SERVXCE I 156661 108.00 X2808 TODD, NENDY RECREATXON REFUND 156662 SBoOO 2737 U C REGENTS POCKET GUZDE 156663 A)ZoO0 2737 U C REGENTS POCKET GUXDE 156666 640.00 5E55 U S BANK TRUST LEASE PAYMENT t 166665. 0,800.00 6060 U S T MONXTOR REPAXR RECREATZON REFUND I 156666 50126o75 2958 UNP$ ARE US ASSOCZATZON UNP SERVZCES I 156667 Z,452o75 3457 UNZFZRST UNZFORN $ERVZCE UNIFORN SERVZCES · 156668 Z,574.91 5601 UNZQUE MANAGEMENT $ERVZCE$, ZNC. MANAGEMENT SERVZCE$ 156669 267o01' 5520 UNXGUE pAVING MATERZALS OF CAoeZNC. NAZNTENANCE SUPPLZES t56670 226o28 1Z26 UNXTED pARCEL SERVXCE UPS SERVZCE 0 156671 65o17 lZBOB UNTZe KEVXN RECREATZON REFUND 156672 108o00 881 VANCE CORPDRATZON BASELERE ROAD MZDENXNG I 156673 136,073o19 <(( 136674 - 156675 137 VERXZO~ CALXFDRNZA MONTHLY TELEPHONE 6XLLXNG$ I 156676 1,084,66 <<< 156677 - 156677 213 NAXZE. KLEEN-LZNE CORP MAXNT SUPPLXES I 1S6678 80380.86 12658 RHEATONe MANGY RECREATZON REFUND 156670 T,9Z CXTT OF RANCHD CUCAI LZST.OF NARR~ FOR PERIDD: Og-2~OO CO01Ol) RUN DATE: 09/:'0/00 PAGE: 6 ..... .... ...... ............... ....... .....---;;;~-;;;~;;;;~ .....................:;;;.~-----.----~;;;:-;~;:-----.---.--'----"' :~:..~::~ ......... ....... .............. ....... ...... ............ ............................---- ...........,... ............... ~ CHECKe OVERLAP 1281Q NZLLZAMSw FLOR RECREATZDN REFUND 15668Q 53.Q0 1222815 HISDON, RZCNARD RECREATZON. REFUND 156681 500.DO 122811 WOODS, MARZVEL RECREATION REFUND 1566822 89oQO 809 XEROX CQRPORATZDN COPY NACHXNE 5UppLXES/$ERVZCE 8 156683 98351~1~ 128122 ZAMORA~ ADAN RECREATZON REFUND 186684 1022.SQ 3~8 ZEP NANUFACTURZNG COMPANY VENZCLE MAINT SUPPLZES 156685 73.89 O0 TOTAL 1~,920945&~05 CiTY OF RANCMO CUCAMONGA LIST OF MARRANTS FOR PERIOD: lO-O~r-OO COO/Q1) RUN DATE: lOIO5/OO PAGE: 1 VENDOR NAME 1TEN DESCRIPTION NARR NO UARRo ANT, ~ CMECKB DyERLAP 4949 C L O U T REGISTRATION 156686~ 64.00 4982 ~QRANDA CQNSTRUCTEDN C.DoE.Go 156687~ 6568 KASNEFINEJAO, FAMISH BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 5 156688~ 1,505,00 6569 QUZNNw SHERLXNE BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 156689~ 306.25 6565 JOHNSON, CHARLOTTE SUBSCRIPTION RENEHAL 156690~ 341.00 6090 KONG, SQPNAK DUSTHESS LICENSE REPUND 156691~ 4EQ.OQ 179 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN MEDICAL INSURANCE 156692~ 33,308.26 I 744 NATIONAL DEFERRED DEFERRED CONP 1566930 Z,41Z.OQ (<( 156694 - 156695 >>> 21608 CALPELRA ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP 156696~ 375.00 t 3286 PRINCIPAL LIFE MEDICAL/DiSABILITY iNSURANCE 1566970 87,061.79 <<( 156698 - 156701 >>> 4635 A & K PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTO DEVELOPING 6 SUPPLIES 0 156702 6481 A A AUTOMOTIVE RECREATION REFUND 156703 241 A-1 ALL AMERICAN ROOFING REFUND 156704 108.00 1098 A.G. ENGINEERZNG~ iNC. PROFESSXONAL SERVICES 156705 I AA EQUIPMENT RENTALS CO., INC. VEHICLE MAiNTENANCE/SUPPLIES 8 156706 37,13Z.89 ~ 2732 ABC LOCKSMITHS MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES I 156707 2,055.35 217 ACT OZSTRIEUTION BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 156708 14 ACTION TRAVEL AGENCY AIRLINE TICKETS 0 156709 R54.QQ 6309 ADANSONw RONALD INSPECTION SERVICES I 156710 Zw336oQ0 2838 ADIRONDACK DIRECT RECREATION EQUIPMENT 156711 204.95 b 6OZO AERO iNDUSTRIES, iNC. BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 8 156712 224.29 5509 AiR CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 156713 Z,419.61 1167 ALL'CITiES FENCE COMPANY MAENTENANCE REPAIRS 156714 14,150.00 R 6354 AMAZON.COM UNZFORH APPLICATION REFUND 156715 leQOQ.QQ 1430 AMERICAN 8USINESS FORMS OFFICE SUPPLIES 156716 871.16 22 AMERICAN PUBLIC NORKS ASSOCIATION APHA MEMBERSHIP 156717 Z7.50 · 219 ANDERSON AUTOMOTIVE, DAVID BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 156718 6Q.QO 4A17 APG COMPANY PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 156719 2,610.00 5807 ARCHITERRA DESZGN GROUP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES I 156720 1,39Z.QQ ~ 1291 ARCUS DATA SECURITY DATA STORAGE 156721 397.25 310 ARROV TRUCK BODIES & EQUIP 1NC MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 1EBTZZ 104.78 667 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION VISA MONTHLY BILLINGS # 1567Z3 2,712.98 6115 AUFBAU CORPORATION PLAN CHECK SERVICES I 156724 13,832.50 402 AUTO RESTORATORS VEHICLE MAINTENANCE I 156725 876°89 410Z B g K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE NAINTENANCE SUPPLIES i 1567Z6 668.91 ~ 6747 B AND R AUTO SERVICE BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND B 156727 977.15 · Z4Z Oo~oRoCo ANNUAL RENEHAL 156728 85.00 236' BACKUS TRUCKING, CHUCK BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 156729 333 6ARAJAS, LAURA ANN RECREATION REFUND 156730 · 4475 BARNES-g NOBLE LIBRARY SUPPLIES J 156731 330.04 2863 BEE REMOVERS pROFESSIONAL SERVICE 156732 · 220 BEGINNING PIANO BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 156733 4323 BELLSOUTH NIRELES$ DATA LoPo CONHUNICATXON CHARGE I 156734 3~573.33 2820 BERNELL HYDEAULICS, INCo MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES I 156735 177.50 ; 6441 BEST BUY CO., INC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 156736 86.19 240 BEVILLE'S AIR CONDITIONING CAR RENTAL 156737 22°88 6527 BEYONDoCQM SOFTHARE J 156738 ~9.46 41' BISHOP COMPANY MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 156739 853o18 4369 ERQDART BOOKS LIBRARY SUPPLIES e 156740 709o10 CITY OF RANCMO CUCAMONGA LEST OF NARRANT$ FOR PERZOO: 10-06-00 (001015 RUN DATE~ 10/05/00 PAGE~ Z VENDOR NANE ZTEM DESCRZPTZON WARR NO WARM. ANT. ;~ CMECKE OVERLAP 237 BRQDKER ASSDCZATES BUSZNESS LZCENSE REFUND 156761 94°50 2660 BURRUS,, LZSA XNSTRUCTOR PAYNENT ]56761 5166 BUSZNESS SPECZALTXES NAZNTENANCE SUPPLZES ]56763 611o12 1668 C A P C A MEMBERSHZP DUES ]567A6 300°00 6063 C D G HATEMEALS, ZNC. MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 156765 282°00 6713 CALZFORNZA OYERNZGNT RECREATION REFUNDS 1567A6 10.50 299 CALPERS CONFERENCE 2000 CONFERENCE ]56767 390°00 66~6 CARRE,N, LZSA RECREATXON REFUND 1567A8 150o00 33A CASTZLLO, UZANE RECREATZON REFUND ]567A9 ZS.OO 6166 CASTZLLOt JESSZE SUBSCREPT]ON ]56750 250°00 6510 CON,N, ]NCo RECREATZON REFUNDS 156751 68 CENTRAL C]TZES SZGNS, ZNC. MAZNTENANCE SUPPLIES ]56751 816o01 306 CERTZFXED AUTO CARE, ZNC. VENZCLE MAINTENANCE 8 156753 93.26 ]061 CHARPEON ANARDS G SpECZALZTZES ENGRAVED PLAQUE 156756 359°89 713 CHICK'S SPQRTZNG GOODS XNC RECREATZON SUPPLXES 8 156755 361.86 6095 CNZLDCRAFT EOUCATZDN CORP. RECREATZON REFUND 156756 36°66 AZ79 CLARK. DEOORAH REZMBURSE FaR BUSINESS EXPENSE 156757 37°95 4654 CLAYTON, JANXCE CASH ADVANCE ]56758 75.00 335 COLEMAN, ANNA RECREATXON REFUND 156755 ZOODO0 2670 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY VEMXCLE NAXNTENANCE SUPPLZES I ~56760 643 COMpUTERLAND COMPUTER MAXNTENANCE/SUPPLXES I ]56761 4,143.]4 930 CORONA CLAY COHPANY MAZNTENANCE SUPPLXES 156761 6316 CORPORATE EXPRESS OPFXCE PRODUCTS GFFXCE SUPPLXES 156763 37.15 256 COSSET PROPERTY SVCS/N & N ELECTRXC BUSZNESS LXCENSE REFUND ~56766 6.56 ZZ1 CRAXG DZSTRZEUTZON CENTER, JENNY BUSZNESS LXCENSE REFUND ]56765 ~36o80 138 CRUZ & ASSOCXATES 8USZNESS LZCENSE REFUND 156766 3,050°00 ((( 556767 - 156770 85 CUCAMONGA CO NATER DZST MONTHLY MATER BZLLXNGS I ]56771 398607o29 319 DAHLEN, IRES RECREATZON REFUND ]56771 67o15 316 DAVZESe REOECCA RECREATXON REFUND ]56773 80°00 6~306 DE LA O, DDRZS RECREATZON REFUND ]5677A 60~00 6661 DEL NECMANXCAL SERVZCE & REPAZR I ~56775 815.88 60 DELTA DENTAL DENTAL XNSURANCE X56776 178486.Z6 107 DETCD OFFZCE SUPPLZE$ ~56777 66°65 3]8 DZVERSZF]ED pACZFXC DEV GROUP REFUND ]56776 665°00 6676 DOOR HARDMARE SERV3CES NAZNTENANCE SERVXCE/SUPPLZES I 256779 988°66 3869 OUROe KELLY 'pROFESSiONAL SERVZCES ]56780 ZSOeO0 15]0 FAXRV[EN FORD M&ZNTENANCE VEHlCLE 156761 31e281o56 316 FAN, LXN RECREATZON REFUND ]56781 60.00 5517 FASTENAL COMPANY NAZNTENANGE SUPPLIES I ]56783 161o56 6556 FENESSE pERSONNEL ASSOCIATES PERSONNEL SERVZCES 8 ~5676A 6,966°88 3088 FZRST STOP MOTORSPORTS, ZNC. VEHZCLE MAINTENANCE I 156785 3,177o76 1860 FORD OF UPLAND, ZNCo VENXCLE NAZNTENANCE I 156786 603°90 3356 OARCZAR VXVXAN NZLEAGE REZMBURSENENT 156787 27°95 316 6LUCK, JANET REFUND 156788 ZOQ,OO 1Z45 DONSALVES & SON, JOE A. LEGiSLATiVE SERVZCES 156789 Z,3QOoOQ 650 GRAXNGER, ~oW. NAXNTENANCE $UPPLXES 156790 586.18 6016 GRANT,.RXTA CONTRACT SERVXCES 156791 115.00 6686 GUARDZAN MEDXCAL pREMXUM 156792 1,009o86 326 GUZRAN, ELZSEO;L CONTRACT SERVZCES 156793 75o08 6383 H~Vo CARTER COo BUSXNESS LZCENSE REFUND I 156796 5,ZZ3.60 CITY OF RANCNO CUCAMONGA LIST OF NARRANTS FOR PERIOD: 10-04-00 COO/Q1) RUN DATE: lO/O5/QO PAGE: 3 VENDOR NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION NARR NO NARRo AMTo / Q~ CNECK8 OVERLAP ZEB HAHELe ELEEN RECREATION 8 156795 3Io00 5699 HARALANBDS BEVERAGE COMPANY RECREAYION SUPPLIES I 156796 1855 HARRINGTON'INCo, Roe. UNENPLOYMENT COMPENSATION $VCS 15679T 600°00 IT1 HARMISw FRANK RECREATION 156798 30°00 · ~62 HCS-CUTLER STEEL COo EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE I 156799 395o21 289 HENDERSONe OTHELLA RECREATION 156800 40.00 4845 HILLSIDE CQNNUNITY CHURCH NDNTHLY RENT 156801 19000°00 I 4928 HOCKEY NEST RECREATION 156602 le418o31 Z255 HDLT°$ AUTO ELECTRIC MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 156803 118o53 3633 HOMELESS OUTREACH PRGMS E EDUCATION MONTHLY SENVICES 156804 lt428o00 9 4416 MOODe KARTE REIMBURSEMENT 156805 520o00 3636 HOUSE OF RUTH 93/94 CDBG CONTRACT 156806 633°00 161 HDYT LUMBER COot SeND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES I 156807 36.91 32365 HUNTe JENN/PER REIMBURSEMENT 156608 16.ZA 293 HURTAOOe EVA RECREATION 156809 68°00 4254 IBM CORPORATION MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES I 156810 6e323o62 ) 4T18 INLAND TOP SOIL MIXES MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 156811 107o75 122 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN ADYERTISZNG I 156812 4,733o99 223 INLAND VALLEY MEDICAL LABORATORY BUSINESS LICENSE 156813 1Z.DO 2315 INLAND HMOLESALE NURSERY NAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 156816 58.30 3ASZ INTRAVAIA ROCK & SAND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 156815 150.00 2507 INVENSY$ OUZLDING SYSTEMS ZNCo SERVICE/SUPPLIES I 156816 76e116o90 I 612 JAESCHKE INCow CoRD VEHICLE MAINTENANCE t 156817 311575o79 320~3 JANECAw LINOA REIMBURSEMENT 156818 11o1~ 282 JELZNEKw NINA REIMB. PLAYSCHOOL SUPPLIES 156819 30°00 I 175 JOBS AVAILABLE ADVEMTISEMENTS 156820 119o60 6565 JDHNSONm CHARLOTTE SUBSCRIPTION RENENAL 156811 88.00 6595 KERREYe JULES RECREATION REFUND 156822 IAOoOO · 283 KERNIN, OEBRA RECREATION 156823 55.00 273 KZEHLe KATHY RECREATION 156824 30°00 225 KOLOR$ AUTOMOTIVE PAINT BUSINESS LICENSE. 156825 7°00 } 6090 KDNG, SOPHAK 6U$ZNESS LICENSE REFUND 156826 480°00 4242 LAIDLMNTRANSZTw INCo TRANSPORTATION SERVICES 156827 263o31 339 LANe JACK LEAGUE MEETING 156828 29°20 311 LANDSCAPE HEST9 ZNCo LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE I 156829 3tAOZ.70 4755 LARSON, KIRK REIMBURSEMENT 156830 6065 LEGAL DEFENSE FUND RECREATION REFUND 156831 380.00 ) 6327 LEHIS OPERATING CORPORATION RECREATION REFUND 158832 8.50 '291 LINEMERGER. ANGELA RECREATION 156833 10o00 4861 LITERACY VOLUNTEERS OF AHERICA9 INC MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 15683~ 208.15 p 1455 LDNG'S DRUGS FILM pROCESSING t 156835 '76o47 5662 LOS ANGELES COCA.COLA BTLo CO. RECREATION SUPPLIES 8 156836 187o64 226 N-& A INDUSTRIAL CONCRETE BUSINESS LICENSE 156837 23.50 · 330 H-S CMSN.DRANER CORPo MISC 156838 868o91 290 HABZNI, NARIA RECREATION 156839 40°00 716~ MANELAw ROSARIO REFUND PERS DEDUCTION I 156840 91o41 ((( 156841 - 1568&1 D 549 HARIPQSA HORTICULTURAL ENT. INCo LANDSCAPE NAINTENANCE I 156842 56,514.77 TZ HARK CNRIStZNCo VEHICLE HAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 156843 81.60 5831 NARKETZNG SERVICES ZNT'L MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES I5684& 145o06 ~TZ7 HAMSHALL pLUMBING REHAEo pROGRAM I IS6845 le513-25 CITY OF RANCHO CUCANQNGA LIST OF MARRANTS FOR PERIOD; lO-OA-O0 (OOIOl) RUN DATE: 10/05/00 PAGE: 6 VENDOR NAME ZTEN DESCRIPTION MARR NO MARR. ANT. ~ CHECAB OVERLAP 250 NARTTNEZ TONING AND AUTOMOTIVE TONING SERVICES · 15684.6 90.00 ZBS MARTZNEZ, HERLZNDA RECREATION 156867 5283 MATER, COBLE C PALHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICE I I56866 ZsA6Z.SO 5300 MAYER, COBLE G PALHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 156869 911.50 t Z70 NENDOZA, ROSA RECREAIION 166850 200.00 316 NERKLEY, BARBARA RECREATION 156851 150o00 5852 RIONEST TAPE LIBRARY SUPPLIES B IS6852 169.93 b 6ETA MOBILE STORAGE'GROUPs ZNCo EQUIPMENT RENTAL 156853 135o36 1171 MOTOROLA CONMUNo L ELECos INC MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 156856 292,95 30072 NT BALDY UNITEO MAY RECREATION 156855 ~ 2ZAB NAPA AUTO PARTS VEHICLE NAZNTEMANCE 0 156856 779.96 6687 NATZONeS RENT SETTLEHENT OF CLAIM 156857 10o67 227 NERY M.D** INCo GS BUSINESS LICENSE 156858 62.10 5301 NEM UEST SIGNAL MAINTENANCE 156859 5sZOQoOO A33 NIXON-EGLI EQUIPMENT VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 156860 17o02 6853 OCLC, INCo CORE SERVICES CHARGES 156861 ) 523 OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE SUPPLIES I 156862 353°89 6586 OLtVA. PHILIP RECREATION REFUND I 156863 680°00 67Z3 ORANGE PRODUCTS CORPo RECREATION REFUNDS 156866 19301o9A <(( 156865 - 156865 5661 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDMARE MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES t 156866 1,567.08 331 OREGON LIBRARY ASSOCATZON SUPPLIES 156867 23°00 '2 235 OMEN ELECTRIC MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES I 156868 15,691o79 2921' P A P A PESYZCZDE APPLZCATOR$ SEMINAR i IS6869 297°00 230 P.SoRo ZNCo REFUND OVERPAYMENT 156870 0.01 ~ 1661 PACIFIC BELL MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 156871 338 pACIFIC EQUZPT G IRRIGATION, INCo MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES t 1568YZ 339.65 1823 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE 136873 1,351o69 · 6668 pAINTING THE TORN RECREATION REFUND 156876 69693.00 296 PAREs JUDY RECREATION B 156875 53°00 5609 PARTSRASTER, INCo MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES I 156876 313o55 ~ 687 PATTON SALES CORPo MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES B 156877 95°03 757 PEP BOYS VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 8 156878 67°76 3293 pERFORMANCE AUTO BODY VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 156879 199o61 5720 pERVO PAINT C0. MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES I 156880 160o17 6267 PETE'S ROAD SERVICE VEHICLE SERVICE G SUPPLIES t 156881 5,003.75 6205 PETERMAN LURBER EARTHQUAKE PREPAREDNESS KIT I 156882 ) 2987 pHOENIX GROUP INFORMATION SYSTEMS MONTHLY SERVICE i 156803 602o15 6211 pIONEER-STANDARD ELECTRONICS RECREATION REFUND I 156886 2s208o88 791 pRi/DELTACARE MEDICAL INSURANCE 156885 ls156o98 · 3952 pOMONA INL VALLEY CNCL OF CHURCHES NEST END HUNGER pROGRAM 156886 587.25 693 pONERSTRZDE BATTERY CO.t iNC. VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 156887 58.13 332 pROGRAM REGISTRAR, TGCZ MEETING 156888 675°00 · 583 pROTECTION SERVICE INDUSTRIES pROTECTION SERVICES-LIONS CNTR t 156889 188.36 65 pRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES B 156890 295 pRYOR RESOURCES INCo MEETING 156891 177.00 ~ 233 PUTRAN CONSTRUCTION, THEODORE G. BUSINESS LICENSE 156892 30.25 5899 QUALITY ONE ENGRAVERS OFFICE SUPPLIES 156893 6106 QUZLL CORPORATION SUPPLIES 156096 26.07 618 R.N A GROUP SOIL TESTING SERVICES 156895 672.00 RECREATION SUPPLIES I 156896 78.53 ' 264 RALpHS'GROCERY COMPANY CZTT DF RANCHO CUCAHDNGA LIST OF MARRANTS FOR PERIOD: 10-0~-00 C00101) RUN DATE= 10/05100 PAGE= VENDOR NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION WARR NO HARR, ART. ~ CHECKR OVERLAP 70 RANCNO CUC ANQNGA CHAMBER RENDERSHIP flEETING 8 156697 400.00 6058 RANCHO SCREEN PRINT ~ EHBROIDERY RECREATION REFUND I 156898 255°53 6130 RUM LOCK & KEY SERVICE MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES i 156899 7.79 298 REALTY BANCORP EQUITIES CUP OVERPAYMENT 156900 216o00 t~ 5665 REGULATION COMPLIANCEs INC. TRAINING SERVICES 156901 2w965.00 11069 RESOURCE ONE SUPPLIES 156902 28.90 5914 REXEL CALCON ELECTRICAL 5URPLIES ELECTRICAL. SUPPLIES 8 156903 935.71 I 5618 RICHAROSe MATSONe & GERSHDN LEGAL SERVICES 8 156906 37,515.32 276 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT PRINTS I 156905 181o55 626 ROBLE$, RAUL P., $Ro TIRE REPAIR 156906 162.50 ~ 6009 ROEOTRDNXCS XNC. RECREATION REFUND 156907 36.61 6673 ROTH STAFFING CONPANZES, ZNC RECREATION REFUND 156908 6BZ.SO 6706 RUSH9 CHRZ$ XNSTRUCTOR PATNENT 156909 269o18 5765 SAFELITE GLASS CORP. SERVICE AND SUPPLIES e 156910 797.86 6770 SAFENAY SIGN EUSXNESS LXCENSE REFUND 156911 139609.50 216 SAN BERN COUNTY MONTHLY SERVICE 156911 3t586.53 ~ 300 SAN BERN COUNTY REIHB PARKING CITATIONS 8 156913 19000.00 1028 SAN OERN COUNTY OFFICE OF TAX COLL- TAX PAYNENT 156916 8m661.83 301 SAN BERN COUNTY SHERIFFS CONTRACT SHERIFFS SERVICE 156915 10w013.21 6719 SAN BERNARDZNO COUNTYeCENTRL NICROF RECREATION REFUNDS 8 156916 111o90 132 SAN DIEGO ROTARY BROOM CO, 1NC HAINT SUPPLIES 156917 116.99 11E26' SAVE-A-LOT BUSINESS LICENSE REFUNDS 156916 7.50 ~ 253 SCNNF VEHICLE TONING 156919 85.00 1105 SEAL FURNZTURE& SYSTEMS ZNCo OFFXCE SUPPLIES B 156910 26,157o76 6777 SEVERSON PRODUCTS COMPANY RECREATZDN REFUND 156921 109.37 ~ 6253 SHALZHAR TOURS ~ CHARTER RECREATION TRIP 156922 Z1.11 1EZ9 SHARED TECM. FAIRCMXLD TELECON, ZNC TELEPHONE SERVICES I 156923 585.00 302 SHARP, CORRZNE RECREATION REFUNDS I 156926 33.R0 6776 SHELBY'S CAR STEREO AND ALARMS RECREATION REFUND 156925 616.00 156 SNIPLET, BONNZE REZMB FOR POLICE DEPT SUPPLIES 156926 63.09 351 SIGN SHOP, THE HAZNT SUPPLIES I 156917 81.56 ~ 1327 SMART & FINAL DAY CAMP SUPPLIES 156018 261.10 319 50 CALIF GAS COMPANY MONTHLY GAS 8ILLS I 156929 613o83 lZSgO $ORRELL, JODZ BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 156930 57.97 12590 SORRELLe JODZ 6USXNE$S LICENSE REFUND 156931 176.68 ((¢ 156932 - 156940 1432 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDZSDN MONTHLY ELECTRIC RILLS I 1569~1 60,676.02 ~ 1~32 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON HONyHLV ELECTRIC BILLS 156961 6,616.86 6315 SOUTHNEST AERIAL t CRANE INSPECTORS RECREAlZON'REFUND I 156963 1,996.35 ~176 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION HAZARDOUS ~ASTE DISPOSAL I 15696& 1,516e00 · 3017 STATE OF CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE I 156965 300.00 3017 STATE DF CALIFORNIA UNEHPLOYHENT INSURANCE 156066 60°00 3817 STATE OF CALZFORN[A UNEHPLDYHENT INSURANCE 156967 68.00 · 3058 STATE OF CALIFORNIA UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK 156968 576.00 2312 STATEHIDE RENT A FENCE, INC. HAINTE~ANCE SUPPLIES 156969 61.13 23~6 TARGET YOUTH FROGRAN &OAY CANP SUPPL I 156950 16Ao66 } 836 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCTS HAZNT SUPPLIES 156951 3e176.21 6159 TECHNOLOGY SERVICES CONSULTING GRP BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 8 156951 18,295o69 39AZ TERMZNIX. INTERNATZDNAL NONTHLV PEST CONTROL SERVICE I 156953 260°00 61~6 THE THANKS COMPANY RECREATION'REFUND 156956 355.E5 6230 TITAN INDUSTRIAL FOOTNEAR CDRP. RECREATION REFUND I 156955 531o21 CiTY OF RANCND CUCAHDNGA LIST OF MARRANTS FOR PERZOO: 10-06-00 (00/01) RUN DATE: 10/05/00 PAGE: 6 VENDOR RARE ZTEN DESCRIPTION UARR NO HA·No ANT, ~; CNECKE OVERLAP A351 TOBIN, RENEE RECREATION REXNDURSENENT 256956 11o87 1919 TONARK SPORTS ENC. NAZNTENANGE SUPPLIES e 156957 1eZ71o10 6738 TRZNZTY DZVERSZFZED, INC. SUPPLXES 156958 151o69 3388 TRUGREEN - LANDCARE REGIDNAL PRDFESSXDNAL SERVICES 0 156959 380A86oO0' 306 TULEY, TERRY RECREATZON REFUND 156960 65°00 6556 TURCH &ASSDCZATES, DAVID CYBDRG PAIRaLL TRAZNZNG 156961 4,QOO~OQ 1737 U C REGENTS POCKET GUZDE I 156962 9QoQQ 4558 U S GUARDS CO.t ZNC. SECURITY GUARD SERVZCE I 156963 3,143.75 6060 U S T NQNXTOR REPAZR RECREATZON REFUND R 156964 770°57 6788 UNDERGROUND 5VCo ALERT OF SO, CALZF UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT I 156965 754.60 5437 UNXFERST UNZFDRN SERVXCE UNTFQRN SERVICES 0 156966 1,906.19 5133 UNZSTRUT SUPPLIES 156967 601o95 [ZZ6 URITED PARCEL SERVICE UPS SERVICE I 156968 280°76 311 UNITEO PLUNBZNG PLUNBZNG REPAIR g SUPPLIES 156969 Z9o54 3864 UNITED RENTALS RENTAL 156970 1,197.12 307 URXNCHD, ALEJANDRA RECREATION REFUND 156971 55,00 306 VAN BREUKELEN, E J RECREATXDN REFUND · 156971 35.00 3161 VAN TECH NAZNTENANCE SUPFLIES 156973 1,601o23 6531 VERZZDN CONTRACT SERVICES 0 156976 11,178o71 <(< 156975 - 156976 1]7 VERZZON CALZFORNXA HUNTHLY TELEPHONE DELLENDS I 156977 3,672o21 <<( 156978 - 156978 6661 VERZZON MERELESS BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND I 156979 1,111o00 312 VETERANS CGNNUNZCATION SERVXCES XNC BUSINESS LICENSE REFUND 156980 5.78 699 VISIOM SERVXCE PLAN - (CA) HDNTHLY VZSIUN SERVXCE BELLEND 156961 8,590o32 5870 VLSYSTENS, ZNCo CONFUTE· HARDUARE I 156982 188.18 313 HALKEN, TERRXLYN RECREATION REFUNDS 156985 60.00 4002 HASTE NANAGENENT HASTE NANAGEHENT I 156984 1,752o56 213 UAXXE, KLEEN-LZNE CORP NAINT SUPPLIES 0 156985 1,875.61 218 NESTERN HXGNUAY PRODUCTS, XNC NAINT SUPPLXES 6 156986 495.55 5ZZZ HNXTE CAP NAXNTENANCE SUPPLXES 156987 691o33 ZIZ UZLLDAN'ASSOCZATE$ pROFESSIONAL SERVICES i ~56988 Z0,616oll 509 XEROX CORPORATION CUPY HACHENE SUPPLIES/SERVICE I 156989 5658 XPECT FIRST AID SUPPLIES 156990 168.28 ZOZ~ YORK INDUSTRIES GRAFFITZ RENUVER 156991 A76o10 4377 ZOUR, DRETT CENT XNSTRUCTOR 156991 T5o00 6562 ZUNAR INDUSTRIES, 1NCo NAZNTENANCE SUPPLIES 6 ~56993 Z,217.50 · ~ TOTAL 93Ae116o70 City of Rancho Cucamonga City of Rancho Cucamonga Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary September 30, 2000 Par Market Book % of Days to YTM YTM Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv, Local Agency Investment Funds 18,687,849.67 18,687,849.67 18,687,849.67 16.99 I I 6.416 6.505 Certificates of Deposit/Neg - Bank 5,325,532.00 5,334,901.16 5,325,532.00 4.84 365 236 6,923 7.019 Federal Agency Issues - Coupon 78,000,000.00 76,941,19402 77,964,843.75 70.88 1,666 1,030 6.150 6.235 TreasuW Securities - Coupon 8,000,000.00 7,980,93689 7,971,250.00 7.25 726 412 6.092 6.177 Mortgage Backed Securities 42,986.77 43,957,57 40,151.61 0.04 7,914 3,103 9.759 9.894 Investments t10,056,368.44 108,988,839.31 109,989,627.03 100.00% 1,254 773 6.229 6.316 Cash and Accrued Interest Passbook/Checking 1 +668,580.18 1,668,580.18 1,668,580.18 I I 1.973 2000 (not included in yield calculations) Accrued Interest at Purchase 3,945.00 3,945,00 Subtotal 1,672,525.18 1,672,525.18 Total Cash and Investments 111,724,948.62 110,661,364.49 11 t ,662,152.21 1,254 773 6.229 6.316 Total Earnings September 30 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date Current Year 578,121.39 1,776,353.63 Average Daily Balance 111,839,743.70 113,622,065.33 Effective Rate of Return 6.29% 6.21% I certify that this report accurately reflects all City pooled investments and is in cemformity with the investment policy adopted October 20, 1999. A copy of the investment policy is available in the Administrative Services Department. The Investment Program herein shown provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six months estimated expenditures. The month-end market values were obtained from (IDC)-Interactive Data Corporation pricing sen/ice. The artached Summary of Cash nvestments with Fiscal Agents as of the prior month's end is provided under the City official Investment Policy. The provisions of the individual bond documents j~rt h d S~fthC~ City of Rancho Cucamonga Portfolio Management Page 2 Portfolio Details - Investments September 30, 2000 Average Purchase Stated YTM Days to Maturity CUSIP Investment # Issuer Balance Date Par Value Market Value BOok Value Rata Moody's 360 Maturity Date Local Agency Investment Funds 00005 LOCALAGENCYINVSTFUND 18,687,849.67 18,687,849.67 18,687,849.67 6505 6.416 1 Subtotal and Average 18,804,516.34 18,687,849.67 t8,687,849.61 18,687,849.67 6.416 1 CerUficates of Deposit/Neg. - Bank 06050EJG1 1061 BANKOFAMERICA 03/15/2000 1,810,532.00 1,807,590.97 1,810,532.00 6.560 6560 165 03/15/2001 06050EMS1 1064 BANKOFAMERICA 06/05/2000 2,000,000.00 2,006,372.60 2,000,000,00 7.330 7,330 247 06/0512001 06050ERH0 1070 NATIONSBANK NA 08102/2000 1,515,000.00 1.520,937.59 1,515,000,00 6.820 6820 305 08/02/2001 _~.hf~f.! and Average 5,325,532.00 5,325,532.00 5,334,901.16 5,325,532.00 6,923 236 Federal Agency Issues - Coupon 31331RAA3 00988 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 03/2711997 2,000,000.00 2,003,509,83 2,000,000.00 6.620 6.529 542 03/27/2002 31331RDX0 00996 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 07/1711997 2,000,000.00 1,991.451.72 1,999,375.00 6.240 6,162 654 07/17/2002 31331RMS1 01002 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 0110711998 1,000,000.00 991,869.97 1,000,000,00 6.330 6243 828 01/07/2003 3133IRMA0 01004 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 01106/1998 2,000,000.00 1,988,727.72 2,000.000.00 6,220 6,135 827 01/06/2003 31331RUG8 01022 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 05/27/1998 2,000,000.00 1,978,96973 1.999,375.00 6.290 6.211 968 05/27/2003 31331R065 01036 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 12/15/1998 2,000,000.00 1,945,443.73 2,000,000.00 5,660 5.582 1,170 12/15/2003 31331R2Y0 01042 FEDEBALFARMCREDITBANK 03/16/1999 3,000,000.00 2,929,766.69 3,000,000.00 5,930 5.849 1,262 03116/2004 31331R306 01045 FEDEBALFARMCREDITBANK 04/0711999 2,000,000.00 1,965,841.98 1,997,500.00 5.850 5.805 918 04/07/2003 31331R4R3 01046 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 04/2811999 4,000,000.00 3,894,611.82 3,997,500,00 5.850 5.784 1,304 04/27/2004 31331R7E9 01052 FEDERALFARMCREDITBANK 06/2111999 2,000,000.00 1,989,291,99 2,000,000,00 6.375 6.288 628 06/21/2002 3133M2US4 01003 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 01/06/1998 1,000,000.00 989,375.00 1,000,000.00 6.230 6145 827 01/06/2003 3133M6NE4 01035 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 12/08/1998 2,000,000.00 1,936,875.00 2,000,000.00 5,530 5.454 1,163 12/08/2003 3133M75D4 01038 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 01121/1999 1,000,000.00 966,875.00 1,000,000.00 5.510 5.435 1,207 01/21/2004 3133M86L3 01043 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 03123/1999 3,000,000,00 2,954,062,50 3,000,000.00 5.755 5.676 722 09/2312002 3133M8B78 01044 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 04/0611999 2,000,000,00 1,938.750.00 2,000,000.00 5.700 5.622 1,283 0410612004 3133M94J8 01050 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 06/1711999 3,000,000+00 2,970,000+00 2,984,531.25 6.230 6,265 1,355 06/1712004 3133M9501 01051 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 0612111999 2,000,000.00 1,983,750.00 1,999.375.00 6,150 6,077 628 06/21/2002 3133M96K3 01053 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 06/28/1999 2,000,000.00 1,976,250.00 1,996,875.00 6,480 6.428 1,366 06/28/2004 3133MgCG5 01054 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 07113/1999 1,000,000.00 995,625.00 1,000,000.00 6.040 5.957 285 07113/2001 3133MARK7 1059 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 02/25/2000 2,000,000.00 2,006,875.00 1,999,687,50 7.000 6.910 877 02/25/2003 3133MBHV2 1062 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 05/25/2000 2,000,000.00 2,030,000.00 1,994,375+00 7.890 7,850 1,688 05/16/2005 3133MBMa6 1067 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 06/13/2000 1,000,000.00 1,005,000,00 1,000,000+00 7.550 7,447 803 12/13/2002 3134AILB4 00994 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG. CORP, 06/2511997 3,000,000,00 2,992,500.00 3,000,000.00 6.630 6.537 480 01124/2002 3134A1H45 01000 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG, CORP, 10/22/1997 2,000,000,00 1,983,125,00 2,000,000.00 6,320 6.233 751 10122/2002 3134A2PN2 01030 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG. CORP. 08/2011998 2,000,000.00 1,964,375,00 2,000,000.00 6,050 5,967 1,053 08/20/2003 3134A2XJ2 01033 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG. CORP. 11124/1998 2,000,000.00 1,949,375.00 2,000,000.00 5.790 5,711 1,149 11/24/2003 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date: lo/10r2c(0 - 15:56 PM {PRF_PM2) SymReptV5.01f City of Rancho Cucamonga Portfolio Management Page 3 Portfolio Details - Investments September 30, 2000 Average Purchase Stated YTM Days to Maturity CUSIP Investment # Issuer Balance Date Par Value Market Value Book Value Rata Moody's 360 Maturity Date Federal Agency Issues - Coupon 3134A2N20 01037 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG. CORP. 0111411999 2,000,000,00 1,958,125.00 2,000,000.00 5.600 5.523 835 01/1412003 3134A3NS1 01047 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG, CORP. 05/04/1999 5,000,000.00 4,867,187.50 5,000,000.00 5.900 5.819 1.311 05/04/2004 312902ZL6 1066 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG. CORP, 06/13/2000 2,000,000.00 2,004,573.97 2,000,000.00 7.610 7.506 438 12/1312001 31364FC33 01016 FEDERALNATLMTGASSN 05104/1998 3,000,000.00 2,968,772.74 3,000,000.00. 6,280 6.194 946 05/05/2003 31364FG96 01018 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 05119/1998 2,000,000.00 1,982,203.98 2,000,000.00 6.125 6.O41 960 05/19/2003 31364GEE8 01032 FEDERALNATLMTGASSN 10/06/1998 2,000,000.00 1,950,121.77 2,000,000.00 5.670 5.592 1,100 1010612003 31364GJM2 01034 FEDERALNATLMTGASSN 12/01/1998 2,000,000.00 1,939,583.74 2,000,000,00 5.520 5.444 1.156 12/01/2003 31364GTJ8 01039 FEDERALNATLMTGASSN 02/11/1999 4,000,000.00 3,903,327.64 3,996,25000 5.860 5.801 1,228 02/11/2004 31364KP71 1065 FEDERALRATLMTGASSN 66/06/2000 3,000,000.00 3,045,000.00 3,000.000.00 7.875 7,767 1,709 06/06/2005 Suntotal and Average 77,964,843.75 78,000,000.00 76,94t,194.02 77,964,843.75 6,150 1,030 Treasury Securities - Coupon 312902E96 1072 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG. CORP. 08107/2000 2,000,000.00 2,005,311.89 1.997,812.50 7.050 7.012 675 08/07/2002 9128275H1 01049 TREASURY NOTE 06/09/1999 4,000,000.00 3,971,250.00 3,977,500.00 5.250 5.478 242 05131/2001 9128275X6 1058 TREASURY NOTE O1/31/2000 2,000,000.00 2,004,375.00 1,995,937.50 6.375 6.396 487 01/31/2002 S~,hfnf.l and Average 7~971,250.00 8,000,000.00 7,980~936.89 7,97t,250.00 6.092 4t2 Mortgage Backed Securities 313401VVVV7 00071 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG. CORP. 02/2311987 4,285.70 4.321.t0 4,254.88 8,000 8.219 457 0110112002 31360BJ21 00203 FEDERALNATLMTGASSN 09/15/1987 36,512,87 37,437.38 33,728.76 8.500 10018 3,622 09/01/2010 36215WX74 00002 GOVERNMENTNATIONALMORTGASSN 06123/1986 1,896.11 1.904.45 1,870.04 8,500 8,778 226 05/15/2001 36215XZS4 00069 GOVERNMENTNATIONALMORTGASSN 05123/1986 292.09 294.64 297.93 9.000 8.547 165 03115/2001 Subtotal and Average 40,821.43 42,986.77 43,957.57 40,151.61 9.759 3,103 Total I~vestmenbt and Average 110,100,963.52 110,056,368.44 108,988,839.31 t09,989,627.03 6.229 773 Portfolio CiTY CP Run Date: 10/10/'2CC0 - 15:56 PM (PRF_PM2) SymRept V5.01f City of Rancho Cucamonga Portfolio Management Page 4 Portfolio Details - Cash September 30, 2000 Average Purchase Stated YTM Daysto CUSIP Investment# Issuer Balance Date Par Value Market Value Book Value Rate Moody's 360 Maturity Cash Accounts 00180 BANK OF AMERICA 1.668,580.18 1,668,580.18 2.000 1973 1 Cash Subtotal and Average Balance 1,732,780.18 Cash Account Tote~ 1,668,580.18 Accrued Interest at Purchase 3.945.00 3,945.00 Subtotal 1,672,525.18 1,672,525.18 Total Cash and lnvestmente 111,839,743.70 111,724,948.62 110,661,364.49 t11,662,152.21 6.229 773 City of Rancho Cucamonga Portfolio Management Page 5 Investment Activity By Type September 1, 2000 through September 30, 2000 Beginning Stated Transaction Purchases Sales/Maturities Ending CUSIP In,u~,.w.~# Issuer Balance Rate Date orDeposlts orWithdrawals Balance Local Agency Investment Funds (Monthly Summary) 00005 LOCAL AGENCY INVST FUND 6.505 1 ,O0O,OO0.00 2,500,000,00 Subtotal 20,187,849.67 t,000,060,00 2,500,000.00 18,687,849.67 Savings/Miscellaneous Accounts (Monthly Summary) 00180 BANK OF AMERICA 2.000 3,379,000.00 3,078,000.00 Subtotal 1,367,580.t 8 3,379,000,00 3,078,000.00 1,668,580.18 Certificates of Deposit/Neg. - Bank Subtotal 5,325,532.00 5,325,532.00 Federal Agency Issues - Coupon Treasury Securities - Coupon Mortgage Backed Securities Portfolio CITY CP PM (PRF_PM3) SyrnRept VS01f City of Rancho Cucamonga Summary of Cash and Investments with Fiscal Agents For the Month Ended August 31, 2000 Trustee and/or Purchase Maturity Cost Bond Issue Payinq Af:lent Account Name Investment Date Date Yield Value Assessment District No 93-1 US Bank Imprvmnt Fund First American Treasury Obligation 814197 N/A* 6.00% $ 257,311.00 Masi Plaza Imprvmnt Fund Cash N/A N/A N/A 0.78 Reserve Fund First American Treasury Obligation 8/4/97 N/A* 6.00% 249,278.00 Reserve Fund Cash N/A N/A N/A 0.54 Redemp. Fund First American Treasury Obligation 8/4/97 N/A 6.00% 147,521.00 Redemp. Fund Cash N/A N/A N/A 0.85 $ 654,112.17 PFA RFDG Rev Bonds series US Bank Expense Fund First American Treasury Obligation 7/1/99 N/A* 6.00% $ 26,463.00 Cash N/A N/A N/A 0.39 1999A(Sr)&1999B(Subord) SubResrv. Fund FirstAmericanTreasuryObligation 7/1/99 N/A* 6.00% 611,018.00 Cash N/A N/A N/A 0.27 Sr. Resrv, Fund First American Treasury Obligation 7/1/99 N/A* 6.00% 1,147,871.00 Cash N/A N/A N/A 0.94 Redemption Fund First American Treasury Obligation 7/1/99 N/A* 6.00% Cash N/A N/A N/A Revenue Fund First American Treasury Obligation 3/2/00 N/A* 6.00% 90,477.00 Cash N/A N/A N/A 0,82 $ 1,875.831,42 TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS WITH FISCAL AGENTS $ 2,829,943.59 * Note: These investments are money market accounts which have no stated maturity date as they may be liquidated upon demand. ".,.. i'lhnancelCash with Fiscal Agents xls 10/10/00 5:50 PM State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE(S) ABe 211 {6/99) TO: Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control File Number: 368113 3737 Main Street Receipt Number: 1290149 Suite 900 Geographical Code: 3615 Riverside, CA 92501 Copies Mailed Date: July 19, 2000 (909)782-4400 Issued Date: DISTRICT SERVING LOCATION: RIVERSIDE First Owner: TADROS MONICA EIMAN Name or Business: Location of Business: 7996 ARCHIBALD AVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA-, CA 91730 County: SAN BERNARDINO cityot aanehoeucamong8 Planning Division Is premise inside city limits? Yes Mailing Address: 11651 TOPAZ RD (If different from VICTORVILLE, CA 92392 premises address) Type of license(s): 20 Transferor's license/name: / Dropping Partner: Yes__ No ~ Transaction Tvne Fee Type Master Dun Date Fee 20 OFF-SALE BEER AN'[ OKIGINALFFES NA Y 0 07/19/00 $100.00 20 OFF*S ALE BEER ANE ANNnj.~, FEE NA Y 0 0 7 / 19 / 0 0 $ 34.00 Total $134.00 Have you ever been convicted of a felony? N o Have you ever violated any provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, or regulations of the Department pertaining to the Act? No Explain any "Yes" answer to the above questions on an attachment which shall be deemed part of this application. Applicant agrees (a) that any manager employed in an on-sale licensed premise will have all the qualifications of a licensee, and (b) that he will not vioIate or cause or permit to be violated any of the provisions of the Alcohoqc Beverage Control Act. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of SAN BERNARDINO Date: July 19, 2000 Under penalty of perjury, each person whose signature appears below. certifies and says: (1) He is an applicant, or one of the applicants. or an executive officer of the applicant corporation, named in the foregoing application, duly authorized to make this application on its behalf: (2) that he has read the foregoing and knows the contents thereof and that each of the above statements therein made are true; (3) that no person other than the applicant or applicants has any direct or indirect interest in the applicant or applicanfs business to be conducted under the license(s) for which this application is made; (4) that the transfer application or proposed transfer is not made Io satisfy the payment of a loan or to fulfill an agreement entered into more than ninety (90) days preceding the day on which the transfer application is filed with the Department or to gain or establish a preference to of for any creditor or transferor or to defraud or injure any creditor of transferor; (5) that the transfer application may be withdrawn by either the applicant or the licensee with no resulting liabilitytothe Department. Applicant Name(s) Applicant Signature(s) TADROS MONICA EIMAN "~t&"~' '/'/"~Z/~/) /.~Z '~,Z2~ ,,'T_-a._~.~.~-.._~c TADROS VICTO ,/ ..-------~ /q ~ ~ ~ ~ o "' ~AD o. s,e~, ~.~. ~2~/~ Application: Type 20 (Off Sale Beer and Wine) Applicant: Moni~ Eiman Tadros and Victor Gha~as Tadros Address: 7996 Archibald Description: Existing business; transfer of li~nse; CUP 00-05 ,Site and Surroundin.q Zoninc;: Site: General Commercial North: Low Residential South: Specialty Commercial East: Low Residential West: Low Residential THE CiTY OF ~ANCIIO CUCAMONGA Staff Report DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Jeff Barnes, Parks and Landscape Maintenance Superintendent SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE THE ADVERTISING OF THE wNOTICE INVITING BIDS" FOR INFIELD RENOVATION OF THREE SOFTBALL FIELDS AT THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADULT SPORTS COMPLEX TO BE FUNDED FROM FUND 46 (133) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve plans and specifications for the infield renovation of three softball fields at the Rancho Cucamonga Adult Sports Complex and authorize the City Clerk to advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids". BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: These three softball fields receive play virtually seven days per week, 365 days per year. Now in their eighth season, the fields are ready to be shut down for a short period, surveyed, regraded and resodded at the infield/ouffield interface. The renovation period has been coordinated with the Community Services Staff. Engineering Staff has developed plans and specifications for the project and is now ready to advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids". William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JB:ju Attachment 21 RESOLUTION NO. ~- :2, a ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR INFIELD RENOVATION OF THREE SOFTBALL FIELDS AT THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADULT SPORTS COMPLEX AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to construct certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has prepared plans and specifications for the construction of certain improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the plans and specifications presented by the City of Rancho Cucamonga be and are hereby approved as the plans and specifications for the "lnfield Renovation of Three Softball Fields at the Rancho Cucamonga Adult Sports Complex". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for doing the work specified in the aforesaid plans and specifications, which said advertisement shall be substantially in the following words and figures, to wit: "NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS" Pursuant to a Resolution of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the said the City of Rancho Cucamonga will receive at the Office of the City Clerk in the offices of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, on or before the hour of 2:00 P.M. on November 8, 2000, sealed bids or proposals for the "1 nfield Renovation of Three Softball Fields at the Rancho Cucamonga Adult Sports Complex" in said City. Bids will be publicly opened and read in the office of the City Clerk, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, marked, "Bid for "ln~eld Renovation of Three Softball Fields at the Rancho Cucamonga Adult Sports Complex". A Pre-Bid Job Walk is scheduled for Monday, November 6, 2000, at 9:00 AM at the Rancho Cucamonga Adult Sports Complex, 8408 Rochester Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91729, where bidders may present questions regarding the Bid Documents: Plans, Proposals, Specifications. PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the Contractor is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public work is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such 2Z RESOLUTION NO. Page 2 prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are available to any interested party on request. The Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. Pursuant to provisions of Labor Code Section 1775, the Contractor shall forfeit, as penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of said Labor Code. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him. Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing trades- men in any apprenticable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance ofthe contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not be less than one to five except: A. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to the request of certificate, or B. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to five, or C. When the trade can show that it is raplacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or D. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticable trade on such contracts and if other Contractors on the public works site are making such contributions. The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply Resolution No. 00-209 Page 3 of 5 Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code. Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 17773.8. The bidder must submit with his proposal, cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an amount equal to at least ten percent (10% of the amount of said bid as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said cash, cashier's check, certi- fied check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. If the City of Rancho Cucamonga awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any shall be returned to the lowest bidder. The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said work shall be one hundred pement (100%) of the contract price thereof, and an additional bond in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price for said work shall be given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished for the performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be.done under contract which may be entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of said work. No proposal will be considered from a Contractor to whom a proposal form has not been issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Contractor shall possess any and all contractors licenses, in form and class as required by any and all applicable laws with respect to any and all of the work to be performed under this contract;~_. __ ~, including but not limited to a Class "A " License (General Engineering Contractor) or Class "C- 27" (Landscaping Contractor) in accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regutation adopted pursuant thereto. RESOLUTION NO. Page 3 with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code. Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 17773.8. The bidder must submit with his proposal, cash, ceshier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an-amount equal to at least ten percent (10% of the amount of said bid as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. If the City of Rancho Cucamonga awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any shall be returned to the lowest bidder. The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said work shall be one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price thereof, and an additional bond in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price for said work shall be given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished for the performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be done under contract which may be entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of said work. No proposal will be considered from a Contractor to whom a proposal form has not been issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Contractor shall possess any and all contractors licenses, in form and class as required by any and all applicable laws with respect to any and all of the work to be performed under this contract; including but not limited to a Class "A" License (General Engineering Contractor) or Class "B" or AC-10 (electrical, general) in accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regulation adopted pursuant thereto. The Contractor, pursuant to the "California Business and Professions Code", Section 7028.15, shall indicate his or her State License Number on the bid, together with the expiration date, and be signed by the Contractor declaring, under penalty of perjury, that the information being provided is true and correct. RESOLUTION NO. Page 4 The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Copies of the plans and specifications, available at the office of the City Engineer, will be furnished upon application to the City of Rancho Cucamonga and payment of $35.00 (THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS), said $35.00 (THIRTY- FIVE DOLLARS) is nonrefundable. Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed when said request is accompanied b payment stipulated above, together with an additional nonreimbursable payment of ~'15.00 (FIFTEEN DOLLARS) to cover the cost of mailing charges and overhead. The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In accordance with the requirements of Section 9-3.2 of the General Provisions, as set forth in the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, the Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld (performance retention). The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, reserves the right to reject any and all bids. Questions regarding this Notice Inviting Bids for Infield Renovation of Three Softball Fields at the Rancho Cucamonga Adult Sports Complex may be directed to: Jeff Barnes, Parks and landscape Superintendent 9153 Ninth Street Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 477-2730, ext. 4180, or FAX (909) 477-2736 By order of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Dated this 18th day of October 2000. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, this 18th day of October 2000. William J. Alexander, Mayor ATTEST: Debbie J. Adams, City Clerk ADVERTISE ON: OCTOBER 24, 2000, AND OCTOBER 31, 2000 ~ANCHO C UCA MONGA ENGINEEDING DEPAI~TMENT Su fRepo DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Jerry A. Dyer, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE THE ADVERTISING OF THE "NOTICE INVITING BIDS" FOR THE MONTE VISTA STREET IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN AMETHYST STREET AND ARCHIBALD AVENUE TO BE FUNDED WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS, ACCOUNT NO. 28-4333-9721 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the plans and specifications for the Monte Vista Street Improvements between Amethyst Street and Archibald Avenue, and approve the attached resolution authorizing the City Clerk to advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids." BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The Project will re-construct the existing pavement surface along with the construction of curb & gutter, sidewalk, drive approaches and street lights. This portion of Monte Vista Street is an older neighborhood within the City that has 52 homes that front onto the street, which require on-site work in order to match the new improvements. The project will be funded with Community Development Block Grant Funds (Account No. 28-4333-9721). Staff has determined that the project is Categorically Exempt per Article 19, Section 15301 (c) of the CEQA guidelines. The project plans and specifications were completed by staff and approved by the City Engineer. The Engineer's estimate is $364,000, including a 10% contingency, plus an additional $32,000 required for Construction Administration which includes construction survey, soils and material testing, street lights, printing, and advertising in the minority CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: NOTICE INVITING BIDS-MONTE VISTA OCTOBER 18, 2000 PAGE 2 papers. Legal advertising is scheduled for October 24, 2000 and October 31, 2000, with a bid opening at 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 14, 2000. Respectfully submitted, ~. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JAD Attachments: Vicinity Map and Resolution EXHIBIT "A" Mon~ ~r~a S~ Monte Vista Street Improvements VICINITY MAP RESOLUTION NO. ~ ~" e / ~) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE "MONTE VISTA STREET IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN AMETHYST STREET AND ARCHIBALD AVENUE" IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to construct certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has prepared plans and specifications for the construction of certain improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the plans and specifications presented by the City of Rancho Cucamonga be and are hereby approved as the plans and specifications for "MONTE VISTA STREET IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN AMETHYST STREET AND ARCHIBALD AVENUE". BE IT FATHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for doing the work specified in the aforesaid plans and specifications, which said advertisement shall be substantially in the following words and figures, to wit: "NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS" This project is Federally financed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (24 CRF, Part 57) for the purpose of providing improvements pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act and is subject to certain requirements including the payment of Federal prevailing wages, compliance with "Section 3 - Affirmative Action Requirements", Executive Order #11246 and others. The aforementioned are described in the "Special Federal Provisions" section of the bid documents. Additional information pertaining to the Federal requirements is on file with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Community Development Department. Pursuant to a Resolution of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that said City of Rancho Cucamonga will receive at the Office of the City Clerk in the offices of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, on or before the hour of 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 14, 2000, sealed bids or proposals for the "MONTE VISTA STREET IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN AMETHYST STREET AND ARCHIBALD AVENUE" in said City. RESOLUTION NO. October 18, 2000 Page 2 Bids will be publicly opened and read in the office of the City Clerk, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia 91730. Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, marked, "Bid for Construction of the MONTE VISTA STREET IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN AMETHYST STREET AND ARCHIBALD AVENUE". A MANDATORY PRE-BID MEETING is scheduled for Tuesday, November 7, 2000, at 2:00 p.m., at the City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia 91730. All Prime Contractors are required to have a representative attend and sign in at the pre-bid meeting. Failure to comply with this attendance and sign-in requirement will result in the Bidder's proposal being found non-responsive to the required bid procedures. At the pre-bid meeting, Section 3 requirements will be explained to facilitate completion of the required Section 3 documents in the bid proposal. Award of the project will be contingent on the content on these Section 3 documents. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: The City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby notifies all bidders that it will affirmatively ensure that in any contract entered into pursuant to this advertisement, minority business enterprises will be afforded full opportunity to submit bids in response to this invitation and will not be discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, sex, or national origin, in consideration for the award. MINIMUM WAGE RATE: Notice is hereby given that this project is funded with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development funds and that the rate of wages for each craft or type of workman or mechanic employed under this contract shall be not less that as specified under the U.S. Department of Labor General Wage Decision in the locality in which the work is to be performed as modified within ten (10) days prior to the bid opening date as required under the Davis-Bacon Act. Notwithstanding the conditions hereinabove, the California Labor Code Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 & 2, stipulates that not less that the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for each craft or type of workman or mechanic needed to execute the contract in the locality in which the work is to be performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work as determined by the Director of Industrial Relations of the State of California shall be paid to all workmen employed. Where a discrepancy exists between the federal and state prevailing wage rates, the policy of the California Department of Labor is to require that the higher of the two prevailing wage rates shall apply. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are available to any interested party on request. The Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. RESOLUTION NO. October 18, 2000 Page 3 Pursuant to provisions of Labor Code Section 1775, the Contractor shall forfeit, as penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, not more than fit~y dollars ($50.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages herein before stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of said Labor Code. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him. Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprenticable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the public work's project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices tO journeymen in such cases shall not be less than one to five except: A. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to the request of certificate, or B. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to five, or C. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or D. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or joumeymen in any apprenticable trade on such contracts and if other Contractors on the public works site are making such contributions. The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of RESOLUTION NO. October 18, 2000 Page 4 Apprenticeship, San Francisco, Califomia, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with and be govemed by the laws of the State of Califomia having to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of Califomia as amended. The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work herein before mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code. Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 17773.8. The bidder must submit with his proposal, cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an amount equal to at least 10% of the amount of said bid as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said cash, cashiers' check, certified check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. If the City of Rancho Cucamonga awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any shall be returned to the lowest bidder. BONDS: The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said work shall be 100% of the contract price thereof, and an additional bond in an mount equal to 100% of the contract price for said work shall be given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished for the performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be done under contract which may be entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of said work. No proposal will be considered from a Contractor to whom a proposal form has not been issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. RESOLUTION NO. October 18, 2000 Page 5 On the date and at the time of the submittal of the Bidder's Proposal the Prime Contractor shall possess any and all contractor licenses, in form and class as required by any and all applicable laws with respect to any and all of the work to be performed under this contract; Including but not limited to a Class "A" License (General Engineering Contractor) or a combination of Specialty Class "C" licenses sufficient to cover all the work to be performed by the Prime Contractor in accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (Califomia Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and roles and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. The Contractor, pursuant to the "Califomia Business and Professions Code," Section 7028.15, shall indicate his or her State License Number on the bid, together with the expiration date, and be signed by the Contractor declaring, under penalty of perjury, that the information being provided is true and correct. The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia. Copies of the plans and specifications, available at the office of the City Engineer, will be furnished upon application to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and payment of $35.00 (THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS), said $35.00 (THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS) is non reldable. Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed when said request is accompanied by payment stipulated above, together with an additional non reimbursable payment of $15.00 (FIFTEEN DOLLARS) to cover the cost of mailing charges and overhead. The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In accordance with the requirements of Section 9-3.2 of the General Provisions, as set forth in the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, the Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld (performance retention). The City ofRancho Cucamonga reserves the right to reject any or all bids. By order of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Dated this 18tn day of October, 2000 Publish Dates: October 24 and October 31, 2000 RESOLUTION NO. October 18, 2000 Page 6 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia, this 18th day of October, 2000. William J. Alexander, Mayor ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, City Clerk I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 18th day of October, 2000. Executed this 18th day of October, 2000, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk ADVERTISE ON: October 24 and October 31, 2000 RANC h O CUCAMO NGA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT S Repo DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2000/01 THROUGH 2004~05 AND TWENTY-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PLAN BEGINNING IN FISCAL YEAR 2000/01 AS REQUIRED FOR MEASURE "r' FUNDS AND APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998/99 THROUGH 2002~03 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Local Measure 'T' Five-Year Capital Improvement Program and Twenty-Year Transportation Plan as requested by SANBAG to provide a public record of the intended use of Local Measure "1" Funds, and approve the attached resolution amending Local Measure "r' Five-Year Capital Improvement Program for FY 1998/99 through 2002/03. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: Measure "1", the county-wide transportation sales tax program, requires that each local jurisdiction receiving revenues annually adopt a Five-Year Capital Improvement Program and a Twenty-Year Transportation Plan which outlines the specific projects upon which those funds shall be expended. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN/TWENTY-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PLAN October 18, 2000 Page 2 Staff has prepared the attached Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan schedule to be adopted by City Council and kept on file with the San Bernardino Associated Governments for informational purposes. The Five-Year list has been over-programmed to allow for spillage and to insure that the adopted plan contains ample projects for Measure "1" expenditures. If changes are necessary (additions or deletions), the plan may be altered at each annual adoption or intermittently with City Council approval. SANBAG has advised us the Twenty-Year Transportation Plan for Local Measure "1" Funds can be a list of projects for a 20-year period or narrative policy statement estimating the types of projects Local Measure "1" Funds are to be used for, and the percentage of funds allocated for each type of project. Since it is difficult to list actual projects 20 years in advance, Staff recommends Council approve the policy statement. Funds were expended for the traffic signal at the intersection of Arrow Route and Red Oak Avenue during FY 98/99, but there was not a specific line item in the Five-Year Plan for it. Therefore, it is necessary to amend the Five-Year Plan for FY 98/99 through 2002/03 to reflect those expenditures. Respectfully submitted, W~il~~ City Engineer WJO:BRH:Is Attachments RESOLUTION NO. O O ' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COLrNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE FIVE- YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2000/01 THROUGH 2004/05 AND TWENTY-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PLAN BEGINNING IN FISCAL YEAR 1 2000/01 FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MEASURE "I" FUNDS On Wednesday, October 18, 2000, on motion by , seconded by ., and carried, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bemardino, finds as follows: WHEREAS, San Bernardino County voters approved passage of Measure "I" in November, 1989 authorizing San Bemardino Associated Govemments, acting as the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority, to impose a one-half of one percent retail transactions and use tax applicable in the incorporated and artincorporated territory of the County of San Bemardino; 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. 89-1 of Authority; and WHEREAS, Expenditure plans of the Ordinance requires each local jurisdiction receiving revenue from the tax to expend those funds pursuant to a Five-Year Capital Improvement Program and Twenty-Year Transportation Plan adopted by resolution of the local jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, Expenditure Plans of the Ordinance also require that each local jurisdiction annually adopt and update the Five and Twenty-Year plans. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California, hereby adopts the Measure "I" Five-Year Capital Improvement Program and Twenty-Year Transportation Plan, a copy of which is attached to this resolution. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEASURE I FIVE YEAR PLAN 2000105 YEAR STREET &LIMITS IMPROVEMENT Cost Estimate ($) 00/01 6th St -Arch~ald to Hermosa Pavement Rehabilitation 159,000 6th St ~ Haven to Milliken Pavement Rehabilitation 339,000 6th St - Milliken to Hyssop Pavement Rehabilitation 421.000 7th St - Milliken to Pittsburgh Pavement Rehabilitation 4.000 8th St - Archibald to Haven Pavement Rehabilitation 7,000 26th St - Center to Haven Pavement Rehabilitation 6,000 ADA Corrective Measures - City Wide Intersection ramps and driveway modifications 103,000 Amethyst St - 19th to Hillside Pavement Rehabilitation __ 360,000 Amethyst St - Hillside to North City Limits Pavement'Rehabilitation and widening 5,000 Arrow Rte - Grove to Baker Pavement Rehabilitation and widening 822,000 Arrow Rte at Hellman Av Remove crossgutter and replace with storm drain 72,000 Arrow Rte - East of Rte 115 Left turn lane for driveway 113,000 Baseline Rd - Vineyard to Hellman Pavement Rehabilitation 135,000 Beryl St - Baseline to 19th Pavement Rehabilitation 2,000 Carnelian St - Vineyard to Base Line Pavement Rehabilitation 212,000 Center St - 6th to 7th Pavement Rehabilitation 7,009 Center St - 7th to 8th Pavement Rehabilitation 10,000 Day Creek BI - Baseline to Highland Construct west roadbed to connect to Rte 30 Frwy 10,000 Foothill BI - Vineyard to Haven Construct median island & bridge widening 682,000 Grove Av - 8th to Foothill Study 17,000 Haven Av - Lemon to Wilson Pavement Rehabilitation 2,900 Hellman Av at 9th St Repair east side of intersection 180,000 Helms Av - Feron to 9th Pavement Rehabilitation 4,009 Lemon Av - Carnelian to Beryl Pavement Rehabilitation 195,000 Local Streets - City Wide Pavement Rehabilitation 425,000 Marine Av - Humbolt to 26th Pavement Rehabilitation 7,000 Milliken Av - 4th to 7th Pavement Rehabilitation and widening 411,009 Pittsburgh Av - 4th to 6th Pavement Rehabilitation 11,000 Pittsburgh Av - 6th to 7th Pavement Rehabilitation 6,000 Rancheria Dr - Grove to Tapia Via Reconstruct 5.000 Page 1 of 3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEASURE I FIVE YEAR PLAN 2000~05 YEAR STREET &LIMITS iMPROVEMENT Cost Estimate ($) Sapphire St -'Moon to Almond Pavement Rehabilitation 2.000 ' Terra Vista Pkwy - Church to Spruce Pavement Rehabilitation 8.000 Vineyard Av - 9th to Foothill Install bus bays 2.000 FY 00/01 Total 4.744,000 01102 26th St - Center to Haven Pavement Rehabilitation 150.000 ADA Corrective Measures - City Wide intersection ramps and driveway modifications 100.000 Haven Av - Baseline to Highland Ph 2 Widen west side, pavement rehabilitation, &storm drain 500.000 Local Streets - City Wide Pavement Rehabilitation 400.000 Pittsburgh Av - 4th to 6th Pavement Rehabilitation 250.000 Terra Vista Pkwy - Church to Spruce Pavement Rehabilitation 200.000 FY 01/02 Total 1.600.000 02~03 ADA Corrective Measures - City Wide Intersection ramps and driveway modifications 100.000 Center Av - 6th to 7th Pavement Rehabilitation 200.000 ' Center Av - 7th to 8th " Pavement Rehabilitation __ 200.000 Etiwanda Av - Foothill to Baseline Ph 1 Street widening and widening of i-15 underpass 100,000 IHaven Av - Baseline to Highland Ph~ Widen west side. pavement rehabilitation. & storm drain 500.000 Local Streets - City Wide" Pavement Rehabilitation 400.000 Wilson Av- Amethyst t~'Haven Design street widening and pavement rehabilitation 100.000 FY 02/03 Total 1.600.000 03104 ~,rchibald Av - S/O Banyan to Hillside Design street widening and pavement rehabilitation 70,000 Etiwanda Av - Foothill to Baseline Ph 2 Street widening and pavement rehabilitation 800.000 Haven Av- Baseline to Highland Ph 4 Widen west side, pavement rehabilitation, & storm drain 500,000 Local Streets - City Wide Pavement Rehabilitation 400,000 Wilson Av - Amethyst to Haven Street widening and pavement rehabilitation 300.000 FY 03/04 Total 2.070.000 04/05 Archibald Av - S/O Banyan to Hillside Acquire right of way 50.000 Etiwanda Av - Foothill to Baseline Ph 3 Street widening and pavement rehabilitation 500.000 Haven Av- Baseline to Highland Ph 5 Widen west side. pavement rehabilitation. & storm drain 500.000 Haven Av - Baseline to Highland East side Pavement Rehabilitation 380.000 ' Local Streets - City Wide Pavement Rehabilitation 400.000 Page 2 of 3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEASURE I FIVE YEAR PLAN 2000~05 YEAR ~STREET &LIMITS IMPROVEMENT J Cost Estimate ($) Wilson Av -/~methyst to Haven Street widening and pavement rehabilitation 300,000 Wilson Aw Haven to Canistel Street widening and pavement rehabilitation 350,000 :Y 04~05 Total 2,4~0~000 [:~'e Ye~:l'~t~' 12,494,000 Measure I Revenue Estimate (5 Yrs.) 7,694,893 Contact: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer (909) 477-2740 Ext, 4065 Page 3 of 3 20 YEAR LOCAL MEASURE 'T' TRANSPORTATION PLAN The 20 Year Local Measure 'T' Transportation Plan for the expenditure of Measure 'T' funds will use the City's General Plan Circulation Element as a base. It is anticipated that the funds will be allocated in the following manner: TYPE OF IMPROVEMENT ~ - Maintenance, Rehabilitation and Repair of 30 Existing Roadways Traffic Signal Improvements 10 Street Widening 20 Intersection Improvements I 0 Railroad Crossing Improvements 10 Slurry and Chip Seal of Existing Streets 20 (See attached City's General Plan Circulation Element) q/ ' ~ ~ !; ] ! ....... ~ Figure III- 3 i L_.i .~ ............ _~.+ ] CIFICULATION PLAN · ,~ ,. ......... :., ...... ~..¢--~, ~::::::........ _~.~,~~ ~o~ ~,~ ........... ' ~ ~ ARTERIAL I EXISTING ~TERCHANGE ~ ~"" ' ..... -- ........ ; O PROPOSED INTERCHANGE ~ ~ ~ ~ FREEWAY INTERCHANGE ~ I I GRADE SEPARATION J .-,* I I ~TERSECTION FOR " ~ POSSIBLE W~ENING ~ .. .................... .~ '~ ~ ~ ~ "~ ~ SPECIAL BOU~VARD "" ~' ' " " " ~" ~ " ~ SPECIAL DESIGN ~ ~ l t/.." =.. :; ..... ~ [223] SPECIAL NPACT mDY ZONE I C~Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RESOLUnON No. - ;Z ! 2. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 1998/99 THROUGH 2002/03 On Wednesday, October 18, 2000, on motion by , seconded by ., and carried, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bemardino, finds as follows: WHEREAS, San Bemardino County voters approved passage of Measure "I" in November, 1989 authorizing San Bernardino Associated Governments, acting as the San Bemardino 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 Bemardino; 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. 89-1 of Authority; and WHEREAS, Expenditure plans of the Ordinance requires each local jurisdiction receiving revenue from the tax to expend those funds pursuant to a Five-Year Capital Improvement Program and Twenty-Year Transportation Plan adopted by resolution of the local jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, Expenditure Plans of the Ordinance also require that each local jurisdiction annually adopt and update the Five and Twenty-Year plans. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California, hereby adopts the Measure 'T' Five-Year Capital Improvement Program and Twenty-Year Transportation Plan, a copy of which is attached to this resolution. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEASURE I FIVE YEAR PLAN 1998103 AMENDED YEAR STREET &LIMITS IMPROVEMENT Cost Estimate ($) 98~99 4th St - Sanffi Anita to Pic-N-SavPavement Rehabilitation 20,00C ADA Corrective Measures - City Wide Intersection ramps and driveway modifications 70,000 Amethyst St - 19th to North City Limits Pavement Rehabilitation 10,000 Archibald Ave at 4th St, Northeast Corner Widen for dght turn lane and deceleration lane 287,000 Arrow Rte from Milliken Av eastedy Widen pavement on north side 5,000 Carnelian St - San Bernardino Rd to Base Line Rd Pavement Rehabilitation 100,000 Day Creek BI - Baseline to Highland Construct west roadbed to connect to Rte 30 FnNy 90,000 Day Creek BI - Baseline to Highland Construct Highland Av realignment 1,743,750 Haven Av - Foothill to Baseline Pavement Rehabilitation 340,000 Haven Av- Baseline to Highland Ph I Widen west side, pavement rehabilitation, &storm drain 5,000 Local Streets - City Wide Pavement Rehabilitation 400,000 Pavement Management System Inventor,/ Inventory City's Pavement Condition 150,000 Signal - Arrow &Red Oak Install traffic signal 60,000 Traffic Signals, City-wide Signals and related improvements 100,000 FY 98~99 Total 3,380,750 99/00 ADA Corrective Measures - City Wide Intersection ramps and driveway modifications 150,000 Amethyst - Highland to north city limits Pavement Rehabilitation 400,000 Arrow Rte - Grove to Baker Pavement Rehabilitation 500,000 Beryl St - Base Line Rd to 19th Pavement Rehabilitation 200,000 Foothill BI - Grove to Vineyard Design median &street widening 1,000,000 Haven Av- Baseline to Highland Ph II Widen west side, pavement rehabilitation, & storm drain 500,000 Local Streets - City Wide Pavement Rehabilitation 500,000 Traffic Signals. City-wide Signals and related improvements 130,000 FY 99/00 Total 3,380,000 Page 1 of 2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEASURE I FIVE YEAR PLAN t998103 AMENDED YEAR ISTREET &LIMITS IMPROVEMENT Cost Estimate ($) 00/01 ADA Corrective Measures - City Wide Intersection ramps and driveway modifications 100,000 Etiwanda Av - Foothill to Baseline Ph 1 Street widening and widening of 1-15 underpass 100,000 Haven Av - Baseline t0 Highland Ph III Widen west side, pavement rehabilitation, &storm drain 500.000 Local Streets - City Wide Pavement Rehabilitation 400,000 FY 00/01 Total 1,100,000 01/02 ADA Corrective Measures - City Wide Intersection ramps and driveway modifications 70,000 Etiwanda Av - Foothill to Baseline Ph I Street widening and pavement rehabilitation 800,000 Haven Av- Baseline to Highland Ph III Widen west side, pavement rehabilitation, & storm drain 500,000 Traffic Signals, City-wide Signals and related improvements 140,000 FY 01/02Total 1,510.000 02/03 8th St - Archibald to Deer Creek Channel Design street and bridge widening and pavement rehab 250,000 ADA Corrective Measures - City Wide Intersection ramps and driveway modifications 100,000 Etiwanda Av o Foothill to Baseline Ph II Construct street widening 500,000 Haven Av- Baseline to Highland Ph IV Widen west side, pavement rehabilitation, & storm drain 500,000 FY 02/03 Total 1,350,000 Measure I Revenue Estimate (5 Yrs.) 6,406,683 Contact: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer (909)477-2740 Ext. 4065 Page 2 of 2 THE CITY OF bANCHO C13CAMONGA St Report DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Duane A. Baker, Assistant to the City Manager SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 00-170, THE RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ESTABLISH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 2000-01 (SOUTH ETIWANDA), TO MODIFY THE TYPES OF FACILITIES AUTHORIZED TO BE FINANCED BY SUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached resolution that modifies resolution 00-170 by expanding the list of facilities that may be financed in this proposed Community Facilities District. This resolution also continues the public hearing that was originally scheduled for October 18, 2000 to November 1, 2000. BACKGROUND The originai resolution 00-170 listed only flood control and storm drain facilities as being authorized for financing. After negotiating with the developer, they have indicated their desire to include other facilities as part of their financing. These other facilities are street, sewer, water, landscaping and park improvements. These additional facilities are allowed to be included under the City policy on CFD financing. Because of the need to make this modification, it was necessary to continue the public hearing on the formation of this CFD from October 18, 2000 until November 1, 2000. Because the City will incur no additional costs for these actions and because these facilities will serve the public need, we recommend approval of this amendment. ~~ S~ RESOLUTION NO. 2000 - / 1 ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 00 - 170 , THE RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ESTABLISH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-01 (SOUTH ETIWANDA), TO MODIFY THE TYPES OF FACILITIES AUTHORIZED TO BE FINANCED BY SUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT WHEREAS, pursuant to a petition submitted by the owner of certain property (the "Petitioner") within the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the "City"), California, the City Council of the City (the "City Council"), adopted Resolution No. 00 - 170 (the "Resolution of Intention") declaring its intention to establish Community Facilities District No. 2000-01 (South Etiwanda) (the "District") pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Act") to finance the acquisition of certain types of public facilities which were described in the Resolution of Intention; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the petition, the Resolution of Intention declared the intention of the City Council to authorize the acquisition of certain flood control and storm drainage facilities; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner has subsequently requested that the City amend the Resolution of Intention to authorize the District to finance the acquisition of certain additional types of public facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND DETERMINED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. Amendmentof the Resolution of Intention. Exhibit A, Description of Public Facilities, to the Resolution of Intention is hereby amended to read as follows: "Description of Facilities Such street, sewer, water, storm drain, landscaping and park improvements within or serving or required as a condition of development of the District as are permitted to be financed by the District by the goals and policies of the City of Rancho Cucamonga regarding the use of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982." Except as expressly provided herein, all other provisions of the Resolution of Intention shall remain in effect. 1 SECTION 3. Public Hearing; Notice. The consolidated public hearing to consider the formation of the District and the authorization to incur a bonded indebtedness originally scheduled to be held on October 18, 2000 is hereby continued to November 1, 2000. Notice of the time and place of the public hearing shall be given by the City Clerk by causing the publication of a Notice of Public Hearing in a legally designated newspaper of general circulation, such publication pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code, with such publication to be completed at least seven (7) days prior to the date set for the continued public hearing. PASSED, APPROVED, And ADOPTED this day of 2000. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: William J. Alexander, Mayor ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk TH E C ITY OF I~,A~TO~O CUCAMO~TC~A Staf:fReport DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Jon A. Gillespie, Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO HOLMES AND NARVER, INC. FOR THE PREPARATION OF A PROJECT STUDY REPORT AT BASE LINE ROAD AND THE 1-15 FREEWAY, AND APPROPRIATE $63,000 FROM FUND NO. 22, TO BE FUNDED FROM ACCOUNT NO. 22-4637- 9922. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve change order No. 1 to Holmes and Narver, Inc. for the preparation of a project study report at Base Line Road and the I-15 Freeway, and appropriate $63,000 from Fund No. 22, to be funded from account No. 22-4637-9922. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS On November 3, 1999, the City Council awarded a contract in the amount of $87,065 to Holmes and Narver, Inc. for the preparation of a project study report to determine the configuration of the freeway interchange needed in the future at Base Line Road and the 1-15 Freeway. As the study has progressed, it has become clear that the existing diamond interchange configuration, even with additional lanes, will not handle the future projected traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. In order to accommodate the future traffic volumes, loop ramps will be required. Therefore, the future Base Line Road at I-15 Freeway interchange will need to look like the interchange at Foothill Boulevard and the I-15 Freeway. SUBJECT: APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO HOLMES AND NARVER, INC. FOR THE PREPARATION OF A PROJECT STUDY REPORT AT BASE LINE ROAD AND THE 1-15 FREEWAY, AND APPROPRIATE $63,000 FROM FUND NO. 22, TO BE FUNDED FROM ACCOUNT NO. 22-4637- 9922. October 18, 2000 Page 2 There is also another issue that further complicates the traffic situation at this interchange. East Avenue intersects with Base Line Road in between the northbound and southbound 1-15 Freeway On/Off Ramps. In order to provide hook ramps, it will require the construction or modification of 5 bridges. Caltrans is requiring that a Structure Advance Planning Study be prepared for each new or modified bridge. This Structure Advance Planning Study includes a preliminary bridge design with plan view, profile view, typical cross sections, foundation design, and a detailed cost estimate. Each Structure Advance Planning Study is a considerable amount of work. In the opinion of City staff, the scope of this project has been greatly expanded, and a change order is justified. Respectfully submitted, William J. O'Neil City Engineer Attachment 1006staff CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HIGHLAND AVE. ·- (SR30) HZGHLAND AVE. =: II PARK LN Ii ~ ,~. VICTDRIA ST. · ~ II ..:.,, ~r' II~sP.~ ;' " ~ :~ ~roject ~ASE LI~ ~OAD II ~ EL[NE AVE z ~ ~11 ~ ~ ~ ~, Location ~ II ~IUIHILL Vicinity Map ,.f/ TH E CITY 0 F I~ANCHO CUCAMONGA Sk fReport DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES AND ORDERING THE ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 FOR CUP 98-30, LOCATED ON SOUTH SIDE OF FERON BOULEVARD, EAST OF HERMOSA AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COMPANY RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving CUP 98-30, accepting the subject agreement and securities, ordering the annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 6, and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: CUP 98-30, )ocated on the south side of Feron Boulevard, west of Hermosa Avenue in the Low Residential District, was approved by the Planning Commission on January 26, 2000. This project is for the development of a 5,672 square foot community center facility on a 0.5 acre of land. The Developer, Northtown Housing Development Company, is submitting an agreement and securities to guarantee the construction of the public improvements in the foilowl'fig amounts: Faithful Performance Bond $12,000.00 Labor and Material Bond $ 6,000.00 Copies of the agreement and securities are available in the City Clerk's office. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CUP 98-30 October 18, 2000 Page 2 A letter of approval has been received from the Cucamonga County Water District. The Consent and Waiver to Annexation form signed by the Developer is on file in the City Clerk's office. Respectfully Submitted, City Engineer WJO:WV:sc Attachment N C~TY OF rr~.~: Cl/P~8-BO RANCHO CUCAMONGA Trr~.~.: VICINITY' PtAP ~G~~G D~ON ~~: RESOLUTION NO. ~::)~) ° 2/,3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES FOR CUP 98-30 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement executed on October 18, 2000, by Northtown Housing Development Company as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located on the south side of Feron Boulevard, west of Hermosa Avenue: and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said real property referred to as CUP 98-30; and WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Securities, which are identified in said Improvement Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, HEREBY RESOLVES as follows: 1. That said Improvement Agreement be and the same is approved and the Mayor is authorized to execute same on behalf of said City and the City Clerk is authorized to attest thereto; and 2 That said Improvement Securities are accepted as good and sufficient, subject to approval as to form and content thereof by the City Attorney. RESOLUTION OO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 FOR CUP 98-30 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, said special maintenance district known and designated as Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 (referred to collectively as the "Maintenance Districts"); and WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" authorize the annexation of additional territory to the Maintenance Districts; and WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation resolutions, an 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 1972 Act related to the annexation of territory to the Maintenance District, Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State of California ("Article XIIID") establishes certain proc.edural requirements for the authorization to levy assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the Maintenance Districts on the territory proposed to be annexed to such districts; 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 Maintenance Districts 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 RESOLUTION NO. CUP 98-30 October 18, 2000 Page 2 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 1972 Act to the annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts and have expressly consented to the annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts; and WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of tl~e owners of the Territory have also expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act and/or Article XIIID applicable to the authorization to the 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 of levy such proposed annual assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts 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 all 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 pamel 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 of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts, 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 B. SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the Maintenance Districts, including the levy of all assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory. Exhibit A Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property To Be Annexed The Owner of the Property is: Northtown Housing Development Corporation, a Califomia Nonprofit Organization The legal description of the Property is: WEST CUCAMONGA TOWN SITE LOTS 7, 8, 9 AND 10, BLK 5 APN 0209-085-04 LOTS 7 THROUGH I0 INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 5 ACCORDING TO THE MAP OF THE TOWN OF WEST CUCAMONGA, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 13 OF MAPS, PAGES 1 AND 2, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, AND THOSE PORTIONS OF ALLEYS VACATED BY THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PER RESOLUTION NO. 99-106 RECORDED MARCH 22, 2000 AS DOCUMENT NO. 20000096332, OFFICIAL RECORDS AND QUIT CLAIMED APRIL 25, 2000 AS DOCUMENT NO. 200000140017 O.R. AND APRIL 19, 2000 AS DOCUMENT NO. 200000133003 O.R. The above described parcels are shown on sheet A-2 attached herewith and by this reference made a part hereof. [CREATE SHEET A-2.' MAp OF TRACT WITH LMD ARFAS HIGHLIGHTED] A-1 EXHIBIT 'A" - ~ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 ~. M~ON 8L VO. · Tt~E&T TY~ ~ ~A. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NORTH COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO Exhibit B To Description of the District Improvements Fiscal Year 2000/2001 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B (COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL) Landscape Maintenance District No. 3b (LMD #3b) represents landscape sites throughout the Commercial/industrial Maintenance District. These sites are associated with areas within that district and as such any benefit derived from the landscape installation can be directly attributed to those parcels within that district. Because of this, assessments required forthis district are charged to those parcels within that district. The various landscape sites that are maintained by this district consist of median islands, parkways, street trees, entry monuments, the landscaping within the Metrolink Station and 22.87 acres of the Adult Sports Park (not including the stadium, parking lots or the maintenance building. STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS) Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (SLD # 1 ) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on arterial streets throughout the City. The facilities within this district, being located on arterial streets, have been determined to benefit the City as a whole on an equal basis and as such those costs associated with the maintenance and/or installation of the facilities is assigned to the City-wide district. 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 sweets dedicated to the City. STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL): Street Light Maintenance District No. 6 (SLD #6) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on commercial and industrial streets throughout the City but excluding those areas already in a local maintenance district. Generally this area encompasses the industrial area of the City south of Foothill Boulevard. It has been determined that the facilities in this district, benefit the properties within this area of the City. The sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on industrial or commercial streets and traffic signals (or a portion thereof) on industrial or commercial streets generally south of Foothill Boulevard. Exhibit B (continued) Proposed additions to Work Program (Fiscal Year 2001/2002) For Project: CUP 98-30 Number of Lamps Street Lights 5800L 9500L 16,000L 22,000L 27,500L SLD #I SLD #6 1 Community Trail Tuff Non-Turf Trees Landscaping DGSF SF SF EA L3B 2 *Existing items installed with original project Assessment Units by District Parcel Acres S1 S6 L3B I 0.5 2 1 1 Exhibit C Proposed Annual Assessment Fiscal Year 2000/2001 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B (COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL) The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $352.80 for the fiscal year 2000/01. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance DisWict No. 3b (Commercial/Industrial): # of Rate Per Physical # of Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment Land I]~e [ Jnit Type Units 1Jnits Factor llnitg Unit Revenue Comm/Ind Acre 1849.01 1.0 1849.01 $352.80 $652,330.73 The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (CUP 98-30) is: 0,50 Acre x 1 A.U. Factor x $352.80 Rate Per A.U. = $176.40 Annual Assessment STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS) The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $17.77 for the fiscal year 2000/01. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial Streets): # of Rate Per Physical # of Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment Land Use Unit Type Units lInits Factor IJnit~ Unit Revenue Single Parcel 16,956.00 1.00 16,956.00 $17.77 $301,310.00 Family Multi- Unit 6,257.00 1.00 6,257.00 $17.77 $111,190.00 Family Commercial Acre 1,999.52 2.00 3,999.04 $17.77 $71,060.00 Total $483,560.00 The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (CUP 98-30) is: 0.5 Acre X 2 A.U. Factor X $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $17.77 Annual Assessment RANCHO CUCAMON GA ]~NGINI~I~ING D~PAI~TMI~NT S ffRepor DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Jerry A. Dyer, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND VERIZON (formerly GTE) TO UNDERGROUND EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES ALONG HERMOSA AVENUE FROM 4TM STREET TO 350 FEET SOUTH OF 8TM STREET RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Agreement between the City and Verizon (formerly GTE) to underground existing overhead utilities along Hermosa Avenue from 4th Street to south of 8th Street, and auffiorizing the City Clerk to attest and the Mayor to sign the agreement, for the Lower Hermosa Storm Drain and Street W~dening Improvements. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The proposed utility undergrounding will be done in conjunction with the City's project to h reconstruct Hermosa Avenue from 4th Street to 350 feet south of 8t Street, which is currently out to bid. The City's contractor will install the conduit in accordance with plans prepared by Verizon. This agreement covers the work by the City and the payment to Verizon for their costs for removing/relocating the existing lines to the new underground conduit. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: UNDERGROUND COMMUNICATION FACILITIES AGREEMENT October 18, 2000 Page 2 A copy of the Underground Communication Facilities Agreement is available in the City Clerk's Office. Respectfully submitted, City Engineer WJO:JAD Attachments: Vicinity Map Resolution (Underground Communication Facilities Agreement) EXHIBIT "A" ~4~O~MENT LIMITS 4TH STREET TO 51~ [g~ree~ ~ 350' SOUTh OF 8~ ST~ET N .T& Lower Hermosa Avenue Storm Drain and Street Widening VICINITY MAP RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND VERIZON (FORMERLY GTE) TO UNDERGROUND EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES ALONG HERMOSA AVENUE FROM 4TM STREET TO 350 FEET SOUTH OF 8TM STREET WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cueamonga has for its consideration an Agreement between the City and Verizon (formerly GTE) to underground existing overhead utilities for the Lower Hermosa Storm Drain and Street Widening Improvements - Phase 1; and WHEREAS, the Agreement is for the placement of underground conduit for the removal/relocation of the existing overhead lines to the new underground conduit along Hermosa Avenue. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia, hereby resolves that said Agreement to underground existing overhead utilities be hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. T H E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Kenneth Fung, Project Manager SUBJECT: APPROVAL AND EXECUTION OF PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 002-M1 TO ADMINISTERING AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT NO. 08-5420, BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TO EXPAND THE PARKING AND SOUTH LOADING PLATFORM AT THE CITY'S METROLINK STATION LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND THE AT&SF RAILROAD RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and execute the attached Resolution that authorizes the execution of Program Supplement No. 002-M1 to administering Agency-State Agreement No. 08-5420 and a certified copy of said Resolution along with the executed original copies of said program supplement be sent to the State of California for their execution. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: This Program Supplement provides the reimbursable funds for preliminary engineering, construction and construction engineering for the Metrolink Station Expansion Phase II Project. The project work consists of ncreasing the number of parking stalls from the existing 330 to nearly 1000 and extending the south loading p atform. The Supplement sets the State reimbursable portion of the project at $295,936.00 and the Federal portion at $2,284,064.00. Reimbursab e funding from the Supplement Agreement shall be deposited in Fund No. 1-230 (old Fund No. 151). City Engineer WJO:KF:sc EXISTING pARKING 330 SPACES NEW pARKING 700 SPACES (APPROX.) & EXTEND SOUTH LOADING pLATFORM METROLINK STATION EXPANSION, PHASE II EXPAND PARKING LOT AND EXTEND SOUTH LOADING PLATFORM RESOLUTION NO. ¢ ~) "' 2,. / ~:) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND SIGNING OF PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 002-M1 TO ADMINISTERING AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT NO. 08-5420, BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TO EXPAND THE PARKING AND SOUTH LOADING PLATFORM AT THE CITY'S METROLINK STATION LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND THE AT&SF RAILROAD WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (hereinafter referred to as "Local Agency") has for its consideration and execution Program Supplement No. 002-M1 to administering Agency-State Agreement No. 08-5420 authorizing reimbursement of State and Federal Share Funds for Preliminary Engineering, Construction and Construction Engineering to expand the parking and south loading platform at the City's Metrolink Station located at the southwest corner of Milliken Avenue and the AT&SF Railroad; and WHEREAS, the State of California, Department of Transportation, District Office 8 (hereinafter referred to as "State") processes and monitors State funded projects; and WHEREAS, as a condition of reimbursement payment of State and Federal Share funds for said project, the City shall approve and execute said Program Supplement No. 002-M1. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, does hereby resolve to: 1.. Authorize the Execution of Program Supplement No. 002-M1 to administering Agency-State Agreement No. 08-5420 for the reimbursement of State and Federal Share Funds for Preliminary Engineering, Construction and Construction Engineering to expand the parking and south loading platform at the City's Metrolink Station located at the southwest corner of Milliken Avenue and the AT&SF Railroad. 2. To authorize the Mayor to sign said Supplement and direct the City Clerk to attach' a certified copy of this Resolution, as well as type in the Resolution Number and Date in the blanks in the third block of said Supplement, and for the return of the original copies of said Supplement to the State of California Department of Transportation along with the certified copy of this Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. METROLINK PARKING LOT AND SOUTH LOADING PLATFORM EXPANSION October 18, 2000 ..... Page 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Local Agency shall also comply with the "Special Covenants or Remarks" attached to said supplement including: 1. It is mutually understood between the parties that this contract may have been written before ascertaining the availability of legislative appropriation of funds, for the mutual benefit of both parties, in order to avoid program and fiscal delays that would occur if the agreement was executed after the determination was made. The total amount of State funds payable by the State shall not exceed $295,936.00 and the total amount of Federal funds payable by the Federal Government shall not exceed $2,284,064.00. This agreement is valid and enforceable only if sufficient funds are made available by the California State Legislature. Said reimbursable funds as received will be deposited into Accounts No. 151-4637-9932 and No. 1-230-303-5650. RANC HO CUCAMONGA ENCINEEI~INC DEPAI~THENT StaffRepo DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Linda R. Beek, Jr. Engineer c~ SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION FOR PARCEL MAP 15234, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SEVENTH STREET, BETWEEN UTICA AND TORONTO, SUBMITFED BY JOY'S FOR US, INC. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, accepting the subject agreement extension and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreements. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: Improvement Agreements and Improvement Securities to guarantee the construction of the public improvements for Parcel Map 15234 were approved by the City Council on September 1, 1999. The developer, Joy's for Us, Inc., is requesting approval of a 12-month extension on said improvement agreements. Copies of the Improvement Agreement Extensions are available in the City Clerk's office. Respectfully submitted, William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:LRB:Is '7/ RESOLUTION NO. ~ ~ - 2. / ? A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR PARCEL MAP 15234 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement Extension executed on September 1, 1999, by Joy's For Us, Inc., as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located on the north side of Seventh Street, between Utica and Toronto. WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said Parcel Map 15234; and WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement Extension is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement Extension. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, hereby resolves, that said Improvement Agreement Extension and said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement Extension on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. Joy's For UsI Inc. 623 Doubleday Ave., Ontario, CA 91761 Te1:(909)390~041 Fax:(909)390-8725 Sep. 21,2000 Ms. Linda Beek Engineering Department The City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: MP 15234 Dear Ms. Beek: joy's for Us would like to request an extension for an additional 12 months due to continued changes by Edison on light pole and power location, which differ from the approval plan. Enclosed herewith please find three copies of Improvement Agreement Extension. We have requested Evertrust Bank to extend 13 months of Faithful Performance Letter of Credit. The revised expiration date is October 1,2001. ETB will send original extension notice to you next Monday (Sep. 25,2000). The L/C of labour and material $4,500.00 will not expire until March 1,2001. We will extend in Feb. 2001 if the job can not be finished by then. Please advise If you have any questions. Sincerely. Joy's For Us, Inc. Sophia Juang Encl. RANC HO CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Linda R. Beek, Jr. Engineer SUBJECT: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR CUP 97-41, SUBMITTED BY DAVID DELRAHIM, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HERMOSA AVENUE AND ARROW ROUTE RECOMMENDATION: The required improvements for CUP 97-41 have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: As a condition of approval of completion of CUP 97-41, located on the southwest corner of Hermosa Avenue and Arrow Route, the applicant was required to complete street improvements. The improvements have been completed and it is recommended that City Council release the existing Faithful Performance Bond. DEVELOPER: David Delrahim 30245 Canwood Street Agoura Hills, CA 91301 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: CUP 97-41 October 18, 2000 Page 2 Release: Faithful Performance Bond 515346S $39,000.00 Respectfully submit{ed, William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:LRB:Is Attachments RECORDING REQUESTED BY: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which interest or estate is: All public rights-of-way within the boundaries of CUP 97-41 2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, P. O. BOX 807, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730. 3. On October 18, 2000, there was completed inthe hereinafter described real property the work of improvement set forth in the contract documents for: CUP 97-41 4. The name of the odginal contractor for the work of improvement as a whole was: DAVID DELRAHIM 5. The real property referred to herein is situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, California, and is described as follows: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HERMOSA AVENUE AND ARROW ROUTE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a DATE /,~d~i~am J. O'Neil ~ City Engineer RESOLUT~O. "O. ~ ~ - Z/~' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR CUP 97-41 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for CUP 97-41, have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. City of Roncho Cucomongo ~ --~ ~ncral City Streets L~_ City Baune~ry ; j Major Streets "'~ ~_i ' ' I RANCH O CUCAMONGA ENGINEEDING D~PAI~TMENT Staff Report DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager ~ FROM: Luclnda Hackett, Assocsate Engine dard Oa×.ca E.dering SUBJECT: ACCEPT THE FY 1999/2000 LOCAL STREET REHABILITATION SLURflY SEAL, CONTRACT NO. 00-019 AS COMPLETE, RELEASE THE BONDS AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY ENGINEER TO FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION AND APPROVE THE FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $210,036.gl RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council acceptthe FY 1999/2000 Local Street Rehabilitation Slurry Seal, Contract No. 00-019, as complete, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion, retain the Faithful Performance Bond, to be used as the Maintenance Bond. authorize the release of the Labor and Materials Bond in the amount of $210,036.91, six months after the recordation of said notice if no claims have been received and authorize the release of the retention in the amount of $21,003.69, 35 days after acceptance. Also, approve the final contract amount of $210,036.91. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The subject project has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The final contract amount, based on project documentation, is $210,036.91, which includes no contract change orders. The original amount approved by Council was $231,040.60. Respectfully submitted, City Engineer WJO:LEH/RO:Is Attachments RECORDING REQUESTED BY: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which interest or estate is: All public rights-of-way within the boundaries of Contract No. 00-019 2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, P. O. BOX 807, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730. 3. On October 18, 2000, there was completed in the hereinafter described real property the work of improvement set forth in the contract documents for: 4. The name of the original contractor for the work of improvement as a whole Was: CALIFORNIA PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE COMPANY, INC. 5. The real property referred to herein is situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bemardino, California, and is described as follows: FY 1999/2000 LOCAL STREET REHABILITATION SLURRY SEAL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a Municipal Corporation, Owner //William J. O'Neil/__,Y" "' ' City Engineer RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FY 1999/2000 LOCAL STREET REHABILITATION SLURRY SEAL, CONTRACT NO. 00-019 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements FY 1999/2000 Local Street Rehabilitation Slurry Seal, Contract No. 00-019, has been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. ---,-, II Map "A" See Map ~ee Map C" See Ma "B"- "E ~.__._,,.,. I ":.i ~i ['~ ' UPLAND ;ee p "G"~ II ~= STREETS r~ PAVHT. ~EHA9. ONTABIO ($LURRY SEAL TYPE H) · ==PARKS F~R PAVHT. R~HAg. ($LURRY ~AL TYPE CZ~ O~ ~C~O CUC~O~Gk RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEEI~ING DEPAI~THENT DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, Ci~ Manager ~: ~lli~m J. O'Neil, Ci~ Engineer BY: Linda R. Beck, Jr. Engineer SU~: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, REL~SE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND, AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR DR 95-33, SUBMI~ED BY ARROW CENTER L. L. C., LOCATED SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE AND ~ST OF WHITE OAK RECOMMENDATION: The required improvements for DR 95-33, have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: As a condition of approval of completion of DR 95-33, located south of Arrow Route and east of White Oak, the applicant was required to complete street improvements. The improvements have been completed and it is recommended that City Council release the existing Faithful Performance Bond. Developer: ARROW CENTER L. L. C. 4343 Von Karman Avenue Newport Beach, CA 92660 Release: Faithful Performance Bond 1483005 $9,500 Respectfully submitted, William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJOLRB:Is Attachments RECORDING REQUESTED BY: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which interest or estate is: All public rights-of-way within the boundaries of DR 95-33 2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, P.O. BOX 807, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730. 3. On October 18, 2000, there was completed in the hereinafter described real properbJ the work of improvement set forth in the contract documents for: DR 95-33 4. The name of the original contractor for the work of improvement as a whole Was: ARROW CENTER L. L. C. 5. The real property referred to herein is situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, California, and is described as follows: SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE AND EAST OF WHITE OAK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a MunicipaL Corporation, Owner CtyE JO i ngineer ' HILLSIDE , HILLSIDE WILgON N BANYAN HIGHLAN UPLAND BABELINE FONTANA DR 95-33 THE CiTY OF eth RANCHO CUCAMONGA 41h ONTARIO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR DR 95-33 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for DR 95-33, have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. 10/16/00 MON 14:49 FAX 949 727 1299 LEE & ASSOCIATES ~001 RECEIVED Etiwanda, CA 91739 October 16, 2'300 0CT 17 2000 Re: LAFCO I'~o. 2864 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY CLERK As a r~s~dent :and w-owner ofproperVy located in San Bemarctino CounW I oppose annexation by the City of Rancho Cttcamonga. My vote is Mainst ann~ation on proposed LAFCO No. 2864. Rum Knight Property Owner 10/16/00 MON 14:49 FAX 949 727 1599 LEE & ASSOCIATES ~002 RECEIVED Bdwanda, CA. 91739 ()ctobcr :1.6, 2000 007' I 7 2000 R~: LAFCO No. 2864 CITy OF RCAiNCHO CUCAMON Ty CLERK GA As a t, esid. ent an~ co-owner of property tocated i~ San Bema~dino County I oppose mmexatjon b~.r the City of P, ancho Cucamonga. My vote is against annexation on proposed LA.FCO No. 2864. M~. & Mrs, John Laleos T H E CITY OF !~ANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AI(3P, City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Salvador M. Salazar, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ANNEXATION 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to approve annexation of an approximately 504+/- acre portion of San Bernardino County unincorporated area generally located north of Highland Avenue between Hanley Avenue and Rochester Avenue - APN: (see attached description). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution of Annexation for approximately 504 acres of land (the project area). BACKGROUND: The following actions preparatory to the annexation of the project area have occurred: In June 2000, The City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bemardino and U.C.P. Inc., entered in to a conditional settlement agreement. On June 7, 2000, the City Council approved a Resolution of Intent to annex the project area. On July 26, 2000, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of a development agreement for the development and construction of 685 residential homes and up to 2 commercial areas within the project area. On August 16, 2000, the City Council approved an Ordinance adopting the Development Agreement for 250 acres of land within the project area. On August 16, 2000, the City Council approved a Resolution of Tax Exchange Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the County of San Bernardino for the project area. On August 22, 2000, the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino approved the Tax Exchange Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the County of San Bernardino for the project area. CiTY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ANNEXATION 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA October 18, 2000 Page 2 On August 23, 2000, the Planning Commission recommended approval 1o amend the General Plan and Etiwanda North Specific Plan designation (pre-zoning document) from Flood Control (FC) to Low Residential (L) for approximately 64 acres of land (former Southern Califomia Edison Right of Way) within the project area. On September 20, 2000 the Local Agency Formation Commission in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) adopted a Negative Declaration of Impact to environment and adopted Resolution No. 2686 unanimously approving annexation of the project area to the City of Rancho Cucamonga (See Attached Resolution). On September 20, 2000, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment and conducted the first reading to change the land use and zoning designation from Flood Control (FC) to Low Residential (L) for approximately 64 acres of land (former Southern California Edison Right of Way) within the project area. ANALYSIS: All required actions regarding the annexation have occurred. CONCLUSION: The City Council's final action prior to LAFCO issuance of the Certificate of Completion is to order the annexation of the subject properly to the City of Rancbo Cucamonga through approval of the attached Resolution. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper and the property was posted. Respectfully submitted, Bred Buller City Planner BB:SS\Is Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Map Exhibit "B" - Initial Study/Addendum, dated August 9, 2000 Exhibit "C" - LAFCO Resolution 2686 Approving Annexation 00-01 Resolution Approving Annexation 00-01 Revised Legal :'~ ~ ~/,cL//'~ ~'~F PAGE I OF 2 EXHIBIT "A" LAFCO 2864-CLTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANNEXATION NO. 00-01 (PANClIO ETIHANDA) BEING A PORTION OF THE SOUTH ONE-HALF OF SECTION 20 AND THE WEST ONE-HALF OF SECTION 29 AND THE EAST HALF ONE-HALF OF SECTION 30, ALL WITHIN TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 20; 1) THENCE NORTH 00°15'11" WEST, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 20, 2636.14 FEET TO THE WEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20; 2) THENCE SOUTH 89026'49" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20, 2649.86 FEET TO THE CENTER ONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 20; 3) THENCE SOUTH 89°26'25" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20, 1517.40 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EXISTING BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; 4) THENCE ALONG THE EXISTING BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE FOLLOWING COURSES; SOUTH 44044'26" WEST, 3558.95 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WESTERLY 330.00 FEET OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20; 5) THENCE SOUTH 00°19'13" EAST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, 35.04 FEET TO A POINT 50.00 FEET NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 20, SAID SOUTH LINE ALSO BEING THE NORTH LINE QF SAID SECTION 29; 6) THENCE SOUTH 89°24'03" EAST, PARALLEL WITH AND 50.00 FEET NORTHERLY OF SAID SOUTH LINE, 990.99 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20; 7) THENCE SOUTH 00004'25" EAST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, 50.00 FEET TO THE SOUTH ONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 20, ALSO BEING THE NORTH ONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 29; 8) THENCE SOUTH 00011'03'' EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29.2655.52 FEET TO THE CENTER ONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 29; 9) THENCE SOUTH 00°01'44" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, 40.00 FEET; 10) THENCE NORTH 89°25'52" WEST, PARALLEL WITH AND 40.00 FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, 985.85 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WESTERLY 330.00 FEET OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; 11) THENCE SOUTH 00°02'19" WEST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, 948.90 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH ONE*HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; 12) THENCE SOUTH 89027'06" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH ONE-HALF, 328.48 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; 13) THENCE SOUTH 00°00'18" WEST, 988.79 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE- QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; 14) THENCE NORTH 89028'20'' WEST, 329.53 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 330.00 FEET OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; 15) THENCE SOUTH 00°01'19" WEST, 659.27 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 29; 16) THENCE NORTH 89°29'09'' WEST, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, 1648.64 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 29, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 30; 17) THENCE NORTH 89°36'29" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 30,662.27 FEET~TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER QF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30; PAGE 2 OF 2 18) THENCE NORTH 00°04'55.' EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE. SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30, 1319.50 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE*QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SAtD SECTION 30, SAID NORTHERLY LINE ALSO BEING ON THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF TRACT 13835 AS RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 262, PAGES 14 THROUGH 18, INCLUSIVE, RECORDS OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO; 19) THENCE NORTH 88'43'16" WEST, ALONG SAID TRACT 13835 BOUNDARY, 3.02 FEET; 20) THENCE NORTH 00°02'02" EAST, ALONG SAID TRACT 13835 BOUNDARY, 329.87 FEET TO THE NORTHE~,ST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 13835; 21) THENCE NORTH 89035'09" WEST, ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT 13835. 660.00 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF ROCHESTER AVENUE, ALSO BEING THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE- HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 30 OF TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH. RANGE 6 WEST, S.B.M.; 22) THENCE NORTH 00°02'05" EAST, ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, 1022.71 FEET TO A POINT LYING 33.00 FEET NORTHERLY OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID EAST ONE-HALF; 23) THENCE SOUTH 89"34'33" EAST, PARALLEL WITH AND 33.00 FEET NORTHERLY OF SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID EAST ONE-HALF, 1327.25 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 30, ALSO BEING THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 29; 24) THENCE NORTH 00°23'58" WEST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 29, 2624.07 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 500.00 ACRES PREPARED IN THE OFFICES OF ALLARD ENGINEERING MARK WARE, L.S. 5820 EXP: 6-30-04 12103 .EXHA.BNDY , - ..... .....,~_.~.~=,o,~.~%~.~.=..-.~ ....~-~ .......... THE COUN~ OF SAN BERNARDINO e ~ ,, ,,, ~ ANN~ ~ No. ~-01 ........ y ~0 No. 28~ ~ ~ .' I ,,' ~ ' ~- ~ .... VICINI~ MAP INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM P~VISED UNIVERSITY PROJ~-CT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT KEPORT CITY OF P, ANCHO CUGAMONOA SAN B~-RNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA LSA Project No. CRG031 SUBMrt-t'£D TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 PREPARBD BY: LSA Associates, Inc. 3403 10th Street, Suite 520 Riverside, California 92562 909.781.9310 LSA August 9, 2000 LSAASSOCIATES. INC, TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................... 1-1 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ............................................ 1-1 1.2 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION .................. 1-1 1.3 FINDINGS OF THIS INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM .................... 1-2 1.4 EXISTING DOCUMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE ..... 1-4 1.5 CONTACT PERSONS .............. - ............................... 1-4 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................. 2-1 2.1 PROJECT SITE SEfI1NG .......................................... 2-1 2.2 PROPOSED DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS ............................ 2-1 2.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................... 2-1 2.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................................... 2-4 3.0 INITIAL STUDY ........................................................ 3-1 3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ............................. 3 - 1 3.2 EXPLANATION TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST 3-14 4.0 LIST OF PREPARERS/REFERENCES/PERSON AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED ..................................... 4-1 LIST OF FIGURES 1 - Project Location ......................................................... 2~2 2 - Revised University Project ................................................. 2-3 8/9/00<(R:\CRG031 ~dev_agreement_is-toc.w~)> i LSAASSOCIATES. INC. REVISED UNIVERSITY PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This Initial Study/Addendum is an addendum to the previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) State Clearinghouse No. 88082915 certified by the County of San Bemardino in June of 1991 for the University/Crest PD and the Supplemental EIR State Clearinghouse No. 98121091 certified by the County of Sen Bernardino on October 26, 1999 for the Revised University Project. These documents, together with all other technical studies end environmental documents incorporated by reference herein, serve as the environmental review of the proposed project, as required pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., and the State and local CEQA Guidelines. Subsequent to approval of the Revised University Project end certification of the Supplemental EIR !he City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) and U.C.P. Incorporated (property owner) have agreed to enter mto a Development Agreement (Appendix A) with the City ofRancho Cucamonga. This addendnm addresses potential environmental impacts which may occur as a result of the Development Agreement (and corresponding modifications to the Revised University Project). Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State and local CEQA Guidelines, the City of Rancho Cucamonga is the Lead Agency, and is charged with the responsibility of deciding whether or not to approve the proposed project (modifications to the Revised University Project as set forth in the Development Agreement). As part of the decision making process, the City is required to review end consider the potential environmental effects that could result from the modification of mitigation measures inchded in the Final EIR end Supplemental EIR prepared for the project site. This EIR Addendure addresses potential impacts which may result from development of the Revised University Project site, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. 1.2 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION In June of 1991, the San Bcmardino County Board of Supervisors certified the Environmental Impact Report for the University/Crest Project Planned Development, PUD No. W121-49 (University/Crest PD). Thc University/Crest PD entitlemerits combined two separately owned properties with 1,238 residential units, commercial, school, park, and epcn space uses. On October 26, 1999, the San Bernard/no County Board of Supervisors approvcd the Revised Preliminary Development Plan W121-49 (Revised University Project), end a Minor General Plan Amendment and zone change. The Reviscd University Project modified previous entitlements to the University/Crest PD. These modifications included: separating the University portion of the University/Crest PD from the Crest portion; adding 64 acres of former Southern California Edison (SCE) property to the project; increasing the number of dwelling units from 575 to 685; revising project design; increasing the size &school and park sites; and modifying the location end size of commercial uses. The Revised University Project eliminated a 675-acre space area from the project, and provided land and funds to provide and maintain for off-site open space. The County certified as accurate, adequate, and 8/9/00((R:\CRG031 klev_agreement_is.wpd)) l - l complete the Supplemental EIR which provided environmental evaluation of the impacts associated with the Revised University Project on October 26, 1999. At this time, the County adopted Facts and Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations. 1.3 FINDINGS OF THIS INITIAL STUD Y/ADDENDUM Pursuant to CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, this Initial Study/Addendum has been prepared in order to determine whether development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will result in a change in circumstances, new impacts, or new information of substantial importance requiring the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR. This addendum reviews any new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Supplemental EIR was certified. It further examines whether, as a result of any changes or any new information, preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR is required. This examination includes an analysis of the provi sions of Section 21166 of CEQA and Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines and their applicability to the proposed project. The focus of the examination is on whether the Supplemental EIR adequately addresses the impacts associated with development of the Revised University Project as entitled and subject to applicable provisions of thc Development Agreement. Pur.suant to CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's CEQA Guidelines, the City's enwronmental review of the proposed project is limited to examining the environmental effects associated with the changes between the previously certified Supplemental EIR and the impacts which may result from implementation of applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. .This focus is due to the fact that the Supplemental EIR has already addressed the environmental ~mpacts of the development of the Revised University Project, and the San Bemardino County Board of Supervisors certified that the Supplemental E1R was adequate and met the provisions of CEQA. Use of an Addendum to a Previously Certified EIR Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines states that an Addendum to an EIR shall be prepared "if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred." Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines identifies the conditions that require preparation of a subsequent EIR. A proposed change in a project will require preparation of a subsequent EIR if: 1. The change in the project is substantial. Substantial changes in the project are those that would require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects, or if a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects has occurred. 2. The circumstances under which the project is undertaken have substantially changed. Substantial changes in circumstances are those defined as those that would require major revisions of the previous EIR in order to describe and analyze new significant environmental 8/9/O0((R:\CRGO31Xdev_agreement_is. wpd)> 1-2 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC, effects, or any changes that would cause a substantial increase in the severity of the previously identified significant effects. 3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could have not been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous E1R was certified, shows: A. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR; B. The significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than identified in the previous EIR; C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or D. Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different ~-om those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. If none of the above conditions are met, the City is not permitted to require preparation of a subsequent EIR. Rather, the City may require preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration or an Addendure, or the City may decide that no further environmental documentation is necessary. This Initial Study/Addandum has evaluated each of the issues addressed in the Supplemental EIR, as well as each of the issues contained in the checklist presented in Seaion 3.0 of this document. Based on this analysis and the information contained herein, there is no evidence that the proposed project requires major changes to the Supplemental EIR. Comparison ofthe previous project with the proposed project, as described in Section 2.3 of this document, indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts associated with implementation of applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. This Initial Study/Addendum relies on use of an Environmental Checklist Form (Form), as suggested in Section 15063 (d)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The Form is used: · To evaluate whether or not there are any new or more severe significant environmental effects associated with implementation of the Development Agreement; and · To review whether there is new information Or circumstances that would require preparation of additional environmental documentation in the form of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, or if an Addandum is appropriate. Section 3.0 of this document contains the Checklist Form and explains the basis for each response to the questions on the Form. 8/9/00((R:\CRGO31\dev_agreement_is.wpd)) 1-3 LSAASSOCIATES,|NC, 1.4 EXISTING DOCUMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE Section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines permits an environmental document to incorporate by reference other documents that provide relevant data. The documents outlined in this section arc hereby incorporated by reference, and the pertinent material is summarized throughout this Initial Study/Addendum, where that information is relevant to the analysis of impacts of the project. All documents incorporated by reference are available for review at City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Department. · Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Revised University Crest Project (SCHNo, 98121091), LSA Associates, Inc., April 15, 1999 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Revised University Project (SCH No. 98121091), LSA Associates, Inc., July 21, 1999 Final Biological Surveys for the University Planned Development and.4djacent Parcels, San Bernardino County, California, Harmsworth Associates, July 28, 1999 Final E. vironmental Impact Report University/Crest Project PUD No. W121-49 SCH No. 88082915, Environmental Perspectives, August 1989 1.5 CONTACT PERSONS The Lead Agency for the Initial Study/Addendum for Revised University Project is the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Any questions about the preparation of this Initial Study/Addcndnm, its assumptions, or its conclusions should be referred to: Salvador Salazar, AICP City of Rancho Cucumonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Tel: (909) 477-2750 8/9/00((R:\CRG031~dev_agreerncnt_is.wpd)) ] _~ 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT SITE SETTING The proposed project entails modifications to the previously entitled Revised University Project as outlined in the Development Agreement. Implementation of the Revised University Project as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site. The Revised University Project site is situated in unincorporated San Bernardino County, adjacent to the City of Rancho Cucamonga (Figure 1). The site is bounded on the north by the Crest portion of the previously approved University/Crest PD, on the west by a SCE utility corridor, on the south by Highland Avenue, and on the east, south of Wilson Avenue, by Hanley Avenue (Figure 2). The project site is located west of the Devore Freeway (I-15) and north of both the San Bernardino Freeway (I-10), and the future State Route 30 (SR-30) in western San Bernardino County. 2.2 PROPOSED DISCRETIONARYACTIONS Approval of the Development Agreement by City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission · Approval of the Development Agreement by the Rancho Cucamonga City Council 2.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is the development of the University Project Site as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. Provisions of the Development Agreement which may result in impacts not identified in the Supplemental EIR include the following: Section 2(B): The extension of City street improvement, lighting, storm drain landscape, and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards to uses within the project site; Section 2(C)( 1 )(a)(ii): The extension of Etiwanda North Specific Plan design criteria to commercial uses located within Area "G;" Section 2(C)(2): The design of the Day Creek Boulevard streetscape shall be modified to be consistent with the Day Creek Boulevard streetscape south of the project site and/or substantially consistent with the City's Day Creek Boulevard Master Plan; Section 2(C)(3): Provision by the Property Owner of funding and/or construction necessary to improve Banyan Avenue from the existing SCE easement, through to Rochester Avenue; Section 2(C)(5): Review and approval by the City of slopes within all landscape maintenance districts and adherence to City standards for slopes in excess of 12.5 feet in height; 8/9/00((R:\CRG031 klev_agreement_is.wpd)) 2- ] Bernardino Angeles National National t Forest # ,~ PROJECT I ~ ' ' -, _/ LOCATION - -- - ' ' ......' . ' ' ' ~, ? - -~ Fontana Upland Rancho Los Angeles County San Bernardino County / Riverside ~ __ _ J County Orange County 6/27/OOCCRGO3i/Addendum) Figure 1 LSA LSA Associates, Inc. Initial Study/Addendum m'~mm'm '~ Revised University Project o. ,.ooo, 2.000. N Project Locat~ .. LEGEND i i ['] SINGLE FAMILY :: (7,200 SF = MINIMUM LOT SIZE) !: PUBLIC (PARK & ELEM. SCHOOL) ~ ~:, COM~4~nCIAL ~:,:, I I NAP 6/27/oorCRoost/,~aaenaum) Fi~re 2 Initial Study/Addendum 4~ evised Universi Project LSAAsmciates, Inc. N Not to S¢~¢ (As ~doptyd3 LSAASSOCIATES. iNC. · Section 2(C)(8): The installation of seven additional "paseos" to provide access to the City trail system; Section 2(C)(9)(c): Modifications to type, extent, location, and/or timing of circulation improvements included in the Revised University Project; and Section 2(D)(1): The timing and funding of circulation improvements to Banyan Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard and the timing and extent of development of the park site. 2.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS The project site remains vacant and undeveloped. Existing physical conditions have not changed since approval of the Revised University Project and certification of the Supplemental EIR in October of 1999. 8/9/00((R:\CRG031\dev_agreement_is.wpd;'> 2-4 3.0 INITIAL STUDY 3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM The following pages contain the Environmental Checklist Form (Form) for the proposed project. The Form is marked with findings as to the environmental effects of the project. A checked box in columns 1, 2, or 3 shall require additional environmental analysis in the form of a supplemental or subsequent EIR. A checked box in columns 4, 5, or 6 shall require preparation of a mitigated negative declaration, a negative declaration, or an addendum. As explained in Section 1.0, this analysis has been undertaken, pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, to provide the City ofRancho Cucamonga with the factual basis for determining, based on the information available, the form of environmental documentation the project warrants. The basis for each of the findings listed in the attached Form is explained in Section 3.2, Environmental Analysis and Explanation of Checklist Responses. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Development Agreement for the Revised University Project 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Salvador Salazar (909) 477-2750 4. Project Location: The Revised University Project site is situated in unincorporated San Bernardino County, adjacent to the City ofRancho Cucamonga. The site is bounded on the north by the Crest portion of the previously approved University/Crest PD, on the west by a SCE utility corridor, on the south by Highland Avenue, and on the east, south of Wilson Avenue, by Hanley Avenue. The project site is located west of the Devore Freeway (I-15) and noah of both the San Bemardino Freeway (I-10), and the future SR-30 in westem San Bemardino County. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: U.P.C., Incorporated 5109 E. La Palma Avenue, Suite D Anaheim, CA 92807 Ben Anderson, Senior Vice President (714) 693-6700 6. General Plan Designation: Planned Development (PD) (San Bemardino County designation) 7. Zoning: WF/PD-3/1; WF/IN (San Bemardino County designations) 8. Description of the Project (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.): The proposed project is the development of the University Project Site as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. Provisions of the Development Agreement which may result in impacts not identified in the Supplemental EIR include the following: 8/9/00((R:\CRG031 ~dev_agreernent_is.wpd)) 3 - 1 LSAA$SOCIATES, INC, Section 2(B): The extension of City street improvement, lighting, storm drain landscape, and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards to uses within the project site; · Section 2(C)(1)(a)(ii): The extension of Etiwanda Noah Specific Plan design'criteria to commercial uses located within Area "G;" Section 2(C)(2): The design of the Day Creek Boulevard streetscape shall be modified to be consistent with the Day Creek Boulevard streetscape south of the project site and/or substantially consistent with the City's Day Creek Boulevard Master; · Section 2(C)(3): Provision by the Property Owner of funding and/or construction necessary to improve Banyan Avenue from the existing SCE easement, through to Rochester Avenue; Section 2(C)(5): Review and approval by the City of slopes within all landscape maintenance districts and adherence to City standards for slopes in excess of 12.5 feet in height; Section 2(C)(8): The installation of seven additional "paseos" to provide access to the City trail system; Section 2(C)(9)(c): Modifications to type, extent, location, and/or timing of circulation improvements included in the Revised University Project; and Section 2(D)(1): The timing and funding of circulation improvements to Banyan Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard and the timing and extent of development of the park site. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting (Briefly describe the project's surrounding.): The property west of the southern extension of Hanley Avenue and north of Highland Avenue in the City of Rancho Cucamonga has a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet (minimum lot average of 10,000 square feet). Lots to the east of this area south of Banyan Avenue and north of Highland Avenue have a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet (minimum lot average of 25,000 square feet). Lots north of Banyan Avenue, east of Hanley Avenue and south of Wilson Avenue have a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet (minimum lot average of 25,000 square feet). Properties to the noah of Wilson Avenue adjacent to the northern SCE easement of the revised University Project have a minimum of 7,200-square- foot lots (minimum lot average of 10,000 square feet). Lots to the south of Highland Avenue, also in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, are planned for 3,000- to 7,200-square-foot sizes, and lots to the west of Day Creek Channel are planned for a minimum of 7,200 square feet. 10. Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement). The following list is not exhaustive, and contains the approvals and permits that may be necessary based on the best available data at the time the Initial Study was prepared. Approval of the Development Agreement by the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission 8/9/00((R:\CRG031~dev_agreement_is.wpd)) 3-2 LSAASSOCIATES, INC. Approval of the Development Agreement by the Rancho Cucamonga City Council Determination: (To Be Completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: The City finds that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [] The City finds that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [] The City finds the proposed proj eel May have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a potentially significant impact or potentially significant unless mitigated an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to addressed. [] The City finds that changes to the project or the circumstances under which the project would be undertaken require major revisions to the previous EIR in order to make the previous EiR adequately apply to the proposed project in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15163. Thus, a SUBSEQUENT EIR shall be prepared. [] The City finds that changes to the project or the circumstances under which the project would be undertaken require only minor revision to the previous EIR in order to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the proposed project in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15163. Thus, a SUPPLEMENTAL EIR shall be prepared. · The City finds that the significant effects that would result from the proposed project have been addressed in an ea~ier EIR, and that none of the determinations set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 can be established. Thus, an ADD ' ersity/Crest Supplemental EIR shall be prepared. Title . , v ' ' ' c Evaluation of Environmental Impacts This Initial Study/Addendum uses an Environmental Checklist Form (Form) to compare the anticipated environmental effects of the project with those disclosed in the previous EIR and to review whether any of the conditions set forth in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR are met. The Form is used to review the potential environmental effects of the proposed project for each of the following areas: 8/9/00((R:\CRG03Bdev_agreement_is.wpd)> 3-3 LSAAS$OCIATES, INC, · Aesthetics · Agricultural Resources · Air Quality · Biological Resources · Cultural Resources · Geology/Soils · Hazards and Hazardous Materials · Hydrology/Water Quality · Land Use/Planning · Mineral Resources · Noise · Population/Housing ' · Public Services · Recreation · TranspormtionFrraffic · Utilities/Service Systems Cumulative Impacts (This Checklist Form topic is discussed in Section 3.0 - Initial Study, Subsection 3.2 - Environmental Analysis, under heading 16 [Mandatory Findings of Significance]). This Initial Study/Addendum is based on an Environmental Cheeklist Form, as suggested in Section 15063 (d)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The Form includes a checklist to indicate whether the conditions set forth in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines that would require a subsequent or supplemental EIR are met, and whether there are new significant impacts resulting from the project. The Form is found in Section 3.0 of this Initial Study/Addendnm. It contains a series of questions about the project for each of the areas. Following the Checklist Form in Section 3.2 is an explanation for each answer on the Form. There are six possible responses to each of the questions included on the Form: 1. Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major Revision of Previous EIR. This response is used when the project has changed to such an extent that major revisions of the previous EIR are required due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or an increase in the severity of the previously identified significant effects. 2. Substantial Change in Circumstances under which Project is Undertaken Requiring Major Revision of Previous EIR. This response is used when the cirenmstances under which the project is undertaken have changed to such an extent that major revisions of the previous EIR are required because such changes would result in the project having new signi ticant environmental effects or would substantially increase the severity of the previously identified significant effects. 3. New Information of Substantial Importance Showing New or Greater Significant Effects Than Identified in Previous EIR~ This response is used when new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified in, shows that the project would have a new significant environmental effect or more severe significant effect than identified in the previous EIR. 8/9/00((R:\CRG031 ~dev_agreement_is.wpd)) 3 4 LSAASSOCIATES. INC. 4. New Information of Substantial Importance Showing Ability to Substantially Reduce Significant Impacts Identified in Previous EIR. This response is used when new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows: A. The significant environmental effects of the project could be substantially reduced through imposition of mitigation measures or alternatives that although previously found to be infeasible are in fact now feasible, but the project proponent declines to adopt them; or B. The significant environmental effects of the project could be substantially reduced through imposition of mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR, but the project proponent declines to adopt them. 5. Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Circumstances and No New Information That PVouM Require the Preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR. This response is used when 1) the potential impact of the project is determined to be below known or measurable thresholds of significance and would not require mitigation, or 2) there are no changes in the project or circumstances and no new information that would require the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166 and Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 6. No Impact. This response is used when the proposed project does not have any measurable environmental impact. The Form and accompanying evaluation of the responses provide the information and analysis upon which the City of Rancho Cucamonga may make its determination that no subsequent EIR may be required for the project. 8/9/00(<R:\CRG031~lev_agreement_is.wpd)> 3-5 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST 1. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic [] [] [] [] [] [] vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, [] [] [] [] [] [] including, but not limited tu, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual [] [] [] [] [] [] character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new soume of substantial light or glare [] [] [] [] [] [] which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmlend. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or [] [] [] [] [] [] Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use [] [] [] [] [] [] or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing [] [] [] [] [] [] environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farraland, to non-agricultural use? 3. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the [] [] [] [] [] [] applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute [] [] [] [] [] [] substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 8/9/O0((R:\CRGO3Bdev_agreemenLis.wpd)> 3-6 LSAASSOGIATES. INC. c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net [] [] [] [] [] [] increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial [] [] [] [] [] [] pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial [] [] [] [] [] [] number of people? 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly [] [] [] [] [] [] or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Depamnent of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian [] [] [] [] [] [] habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally [] [] [] [] [] [] protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited tu, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any [] [] [] [] [] [] native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances [] [] [] [] [] [] protecting biological resources, such as a h'ee preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted [] [] [] [] [] [] Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the [] [] [] [] [] [] significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the [] [] [] [] [] [] significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? 8/9/00(<R:\CRG031klev_agreement_is.wpd>> 3-7 LSAASSOCIATES, ING. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique FI [] [] [] [] [] paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those [] [] [] [] [] [] interred outside of formal cemeteries? 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential [] [] El [] [] [] substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as [] [] [] [] [] [] delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? [] [] [] [3 [] [] iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including [] [] [] [] [] [] liquefaction? iv) Landslides? [] [] [] [] [] [] b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of [] [] [] [] [] [] topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is [] [] El [] [] [] unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table [] [] [] [] [] [] 18- I-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting [] [] [] [] O [] the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [] [] ~ [] [] [] environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [] [] [] [] [] [] environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the 8/9/00<<R:\CRGO31\dev_agreement_is.wpd)> 3-8 LSAASSOCIATES, INC. I 2 3 4 S 6 L~S than c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous [] [] [] [] [] [] waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of [] [] [] [] [] [] hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use [] [] [] [] [] [] plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private [] [] [] [] [] [] airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere [] [] [] [] [] [] with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk [] [] [] [] [] [] of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to intermixed with wilrllnnrlg? 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste [] [] [] [] [] [] discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or [] [] [] [] [] [] interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifar volume or a lowering of the local g~oundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern [] [] [] [] [] [] of the site or area, including through the manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off site? 8/9/00<<R:\CRG031\dev_agreement_is.wpd>> 3-9 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern [] 123 [] [] 13 [] of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute mnoffwater which would [] [] [] [] [] [] exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? [] [] [] [] [] [] g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard [] [] [] [] [] [] area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area [] [] El [] [] [] structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk [] [] [] [] [] [] of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? [] [] rn [] Cl [] 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? [] [] [] [] [] [] b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, [] [] [] [] [] [] policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation [] [] [] [] [] [] plan or natural community conservation plan? 10. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known [] [] [] [] [] [] mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- [] [] [] [] [] [] important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 11. NOISE - Would the project result in: 8/9/00<<R:\CRG031Xdev_agreement_is.wpd>> 3 - l 0 /// LSAASSOGIATES, INC. a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise [] [] [] [] [] levels in excess of standards established in the [] local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of [] [] [] [] [] excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne [] noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient [] [] rn [] [] noise levels in the project vicinity above levels [] existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in [] [] [] rn [] ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above [] levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use [] [] [] [] [] plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, [] within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? i) For a project within the vicinity of a private [] [] [] [] [] airstrip, would the project expose people [] residing or working in the project area to 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, [] [] [] [] [] either directly (for example, by proposing new [] homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing [] [] [] [] [] housing, necessitating the construction of [] replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, [] [] [] [] [] necessitating the construction of replacement [] housing elsewhere? 13. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse [] [] [] [] [] [] physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered gnvemmantal facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? [] [] [] [] [] [] 8/9/O0<<R:\CRG031 ~dev_agreement_is.wpd>> 3 - 11 //Z LSAASSOC|ATES, INC, [ 2 3 4 5 6 L~S Ihan Police protection? [] [] [] [] [] [] Schools? [] [] [] [] [] [] Parks? [] [] [] [] [] [] Other public facilities? [] [] [] [] [] [] 14. RECREATION- a) Would the project increase the use of existing [] [] [] [] [] neighborhood and regional parks or other [] recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or [] [] [] [] [] require the construction or expansion of [] recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 15. TRANSPORTATIONFFRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial [] [] [] [] [] in relation to the existing tratTm load and [] capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a [] [] [] [] [] level of service standard established by the [] county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, [] [] [] [] [] including either an increase in tralT~c levels or a [] change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design [] [] [] [] [] feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous [] intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [] [] [] [] [] [] f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [] [] [] [] [] [] g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or [] [] [] [] D [] programs supporting alternative transportation (e./~.1 bus turnoutst bicycle racks)? 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: 8/9/00<<R:\CRG031 \dev_agreemenLis.wpd>> 3 - 12 /d LSAASSOCIATES, INC. I 2 3 ~ 5 6 a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the [] [] [] [] [] [] applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new [] [] [] [] [] [] water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new [] [] [] [] [] [] storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the conslruction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve [] [] [] [] [] [] the project from existing entitlements and rcsourcas, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater [] [] [] I23 [] [] treatment prorider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? 0 Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted [] [] [] [] C3 [] capacity to accommodate the projent's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and [] [] [] [] [] [] regulations related to solid waste? 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a). POTENTIAL TO DEGRADE: Does the project have [] [] [] [] [] [] the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to dwp below self-sastainthg levels, threatan to eliminate a plant or animal anrra'aanity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate nnpotlant examples of the major periods of Califomia history or prehistory? b). CUMULATIVE IMPACTS: Does the project have [] [] [] [] [] [] impacts that am individual ly limited, but cnmulatively considerable? CCnmuladveIy considerable" means that the ineramental effects of a pmjent am considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, end the effects of probable future pmjccts)? c) ADVERSE IMPACTS ON HUMANS: Does El [] [] [] E~ [] the pmjent have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects an human bein/;sI either directly or indirectly? 8/9/00<(R:\CRG031 \dev_agrcement_is.wpd>> 3 - 13 LSAASSOCIATES. INC. ISSUES: Requiting Requiting Significant Signi~c~tRe~iring 18. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more e~ffects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier E1R or Negative Declardfion (Section 15063(c)(3)(D).) Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Revised University Crest Project (SCH No, 98121090, LSA Associates, Inc., April 15, 1999 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Revised University Project (SCH No. 9812109 O, LS A Associates, Inc., July 21, 1999 Final Environmental Impact Report University/Crest Project PUD No. I'FI 21-49 SCH No. 88082915, Environmental PerspectivesI Au/~ust 1989 3.2 EXPLANATIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST 1. Aesthetics. Would the Project.. a) Haveasubstantialadverseeffectonascenicvista? No Impact. Mitigation measures adopted with the Final EIR designated SR-30 as a scenic corridor. Adherence to applicable Revised University Project and City of Rancho Cucamonga development and/or design standards will reduce potential adverse impacts within the SR-30 viewshed. There are no other scenic highways or vistas that would be affected by development on site. Therefore, no impacts related to scenic vistas or highways will occur. b) Substantiallydamagescenicresources~including~butnotlir~itedto~trees~rochoutcroppings~ and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. The Final EIR does not identify any on-site scenic resources, therefore, development of the Revised University Project, as entitled and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the scale or intensity of permitted uses within the project site. Therefore, no damage to scenic resources will take place. No impact associated with this issue will occur. c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings ? No Impact. The proposed project pertains to implementation of the Development Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucarnonga and the project applicant. Development within the project site will be subject to applicable provisions of the Revised University Project Entitlements and City ofRancho Cucamonga standards (as outlined in the Development Agreement). Implementation of the Development Agreement will ensure the consistency and continuity of design, landscaping, and development standards within the City and would, therefore, have a beneficial effect. No degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the project site would occur. 8/9/O0<(R:\CRGO31\dev_agreernent_is.wpd>) 3-14 //5 LSAASSOCIATES. INC. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? No Impact. As stated in the Development Agreement, City ofRaneho Cucamonga lighting standards will apply throughout the project site. Development of the Revised University Project, as entitled and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the scale or intensity of permitted uses within the project site; therefore, no new source of light or glare beyond that identified in previous environmental documents will be created. No impact associated with this issue will occur. Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to aesthetics. Addendum Determinations Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental E1R are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Stody/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental E1R The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 2. Agricultural Resources. Would the Project.. 8/9/00((R:\CRG031 \dev_agreement_is.wpd)) 3 - 15 LSAASSOCIATES, INC. a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. The Revised University Project envisions development of residential and commercial uses and community facilities within the project site. The project site has not been used for agricultural purposes and is not viewed as an agricultural resource. No agricultural use of land within the project site is planned. Development of the project site as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the mix of planned uses on the project site; therefore, no impact associated with this issue will occur. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The site is not zoned for agricultural use, and is not subject to a Williamson Act contract. Development of the project site as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter current on-site or planned land uses. No impact related to this issue will OCCur, c) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use? No Impact. The project site is not currently used for agricultural production. Development of the project site as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. No impact associated with this issue will occur. Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to agricultural resources. Addendum Determinations Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there i s no evidence that maj or changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIP, are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 8/9/00<<R:\CRG031 \dev_agreemcnt_is.wpd>> 3 - 16 //7 LSAASSOCIATES. ING, No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the proj eel or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 3. Air Quality. Would the Project... a) ~F~uM the pr~ject c~n~ict with ~r ~bstruct implementati~n ~f the ap~~icab~e air quality p~an ? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type and intensity of permitted uses within the project site. No increase in the amount of operational and/or construction emissions will occur. The Final end Supplemental EIRs identified measures which would reduce air quality impacts resulting from development of the Revised University Proj eel. Impacts associated with this issue not identified in the Final and Supplemental EIRs will not occur. b) FF~uldthepr~jectvi~~ateanyairqua~itystandard~rc~ntributesubstantia~~yt~anexisting~r projected air quality violation ? No Impact. The Final and Supplemental EIRs identified measures which would reduce air quality impacts resulting from development of the Revised University Project. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type and intensity of permitted uses within the project site. No increase in the amount of operational and/or construction emissions beyond that estimated in previous environmental documents will occur. In addition, modifying the schedule for traffic/circulation improvements may decrease the amount of local traffic congestion, which could result in a decrease in the number and/or level of CO hotspots. Such a decrease would result in a beneficial impact. c) FF~u~d the pr~~ect resu~t in a cumu~ative~y c~nsiderab~e net increase ~f any criteria p~~~utant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors) ? No Impact. Development of the project site will result in short-term increases in dust and construction equipment exhaust emissions and long-term regional increases in mobile and stationary source emissions. The Final and Supplemental EIRs identified measures which would reduce air quality impacts re~ulting from development of the Revised University Project. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type and intensity of permitted uses within the project site. No increase 8/9/00<(R:\CRG031 klev_agreement_is.wpd>) 3 - ] 7 LSA ASSOCIATES, IN C, in the amount of operational and/or construction emissions beyond that estimated in previous environmental documents will occur. Therefore, no impact related to this issue will occur. d) tVould the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type and intensity of permitted uses within in the project site. No increase in the amount of operational and/or construction emissions beyond that estimated in previous environmental documents will occur. The Final and Supplemental EIRs identified measures which would reduce air quality impacts resulting from development of the RevisedUniversityProject. Theproposedprojectwillnotresultinimpactswhichwerenotidentified and addressed in the previous environmental documents. Therefore, no impact related to this issue will occur. e) D'ouM the projeet ereate objectionable odors affecting a substantlai number of people? No Impact. The Revised University Project envisions development of residential and commercial uses and community facilities within the project site. The proposed project would not generate new odors, in and of itself; however, short-term odor impacts (i.e., diesel fumes, asphalt paving) associated with project construction may occur during construction. These fumes would dissipate quickly, and do not pose a potentially significant odor impact. Commercial and residential uses will be required to adhere to standards which ensure the sanitary and timely disposal of solid waste. Odors associated with these uses would quickly dissipate and would not adversely affect adjacent properties or persons. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not result in the creation of objectionable odors beyond that identified in previous environmental documents. No impact associated with this issue will occur. Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for air quality issues. Addendum Determinations Major E[R Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 8/9/00<<R:\CRG031 ~dcv_agrccrnent_is.wpd>> 3 - 1 g L~AASSOCIATES, INC. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing AbiliO, to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 4. Biological Resources. Would the Project.. a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. The Revised University Project modified the previously approved University/Crest PD by splitting the project into separate University and Crest PDs. This action resulted in modifications to the University Project site which included adding acreage formerly held by SCE; increasing the number of permitted dwelling units; increasing amount of commercial, school, and park acreage; and revising street alignments and lot configurations. The Revised University Project included Area "H," a linear (former) SCE easement, that extends northeast from the project site. With the exception of Area "H," biological assessments were conducted for the Revised University Project site. No plant and/or animal species classified as "endangered" or "threatened" by state or federal programs were identified on site. The Supplemental EIR contained mitigation measure 4.3.1 .C which states, "Until such time as biological habitat studies determine otherwise, the northerly 30 acres of the former SCE easement are presumed to be habitat for species protected by the Califomia and federal endangered species acts, and no development may be permitted." Biological surveys were conducted by Harmsworth Associates in the Spring of 1999. These surveys concluded that the entire Revised University Project site did not support suitable habitat for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino), a federally listed endangered species. In addition, biological surveys of Area "H" did not identify the California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) (fedemily designated as "threatened") or the San Bemardino kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriamiparvus) (federally listed as "endangered'). No federally or state listed plant species were detected during these biological surveys. The findings of these surveys may be referenced in Appendix B of this document. Because biological surveys conducted prior and subsequent to certification of the Supplemental EIR did not identify any state or federally listed threatened or endangered species on site, impact development of the project site as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not result in impacts related to this issue. 8/9/00(<R:\CRG031 ~ev_agreement_is.wpd;'> 3 - 19 LSAASSOCIATES, ING. b) Haveasubstantia~adverseeffect~nanyriparianhabitat~r~thersensitivenaturalc~mmunity identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and ~Fildlife Service? No Impact. Biological surveys conducted prior to and subsequent to certification of the Supplemental EiR did not identify impacts associated with his issue. A "blue-line" stream was identified on site. It was determined that this intermittent watercourse did not fit the normal strearnYwetlands pattem. The vegetation associated with this stream is Riversidean alluvial sage scrub instead of the typical willow/cottonwood riparian association found for most blue-lined streams. Because of the lack ofriparian vegetation, loss of this feature was not deemed significant. Development of the project site as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site. Therefore, the implementation of the proposed project will not have an adverse effect on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. No impact associated with this issue will occur. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 o f the Clean ~rater Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means ? No Impact. Please refer to Response 4Co). d) ~nterfere substantially with the m~vement ~f any native resident ~r migrat~ryfish ~r wi~dlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? No Impact. The Supplemental EIR stated that pattern of commercial and residential development south, east, and west of the Revised University Project site, has lessened the value of the site as a wildlife corridor. The loss of the project site as a potential wildlife corridor was determined to be a less than significant impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Therefore, impacts greater than those identified in the Supplemental EIR will'not occur. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. Please refer to Responses 4(d) and 4(f). J9 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan ? No Impact. Subsequent to approval of the University/Crest PD in 1991, the County of San Bernardino established the North Etiwanda Open Space and Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP) (1994). This program seeks to establish open space areas and to provide connections between open space within a 7,243-acre area located north of the City ofRancho Cucamonga. The Revised University Project site is located within the NEOSHPP program area. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Therefore, impacts grea~er than those identified in the Supplemental EIR will not occur. Refined Project Mitigation Measures 8/9/00((R:\CRG031~dcv_agreement._is.wpd)} LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new signi ticant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to biological resources. Addendure Determinations Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that maj or changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the projeet or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 5. Cultural Resources. Would the Project... a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the signi~cance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? No Impact. The project site is currently vacant. This condition is similar to that which existed at the time the University/Crest Final EIR and Revised University Project Supplemental EIR were certified in 1991 and 1999 (respectively). While the University/Crest PD Final EIR stated the subjeet property and surrounding area are highly sensitive for historic resources, moderately sensitive for historic structures, and have a low sensitivity for prehistoric remains relative to the presence of cultural materials, no such resources where identi fled on site. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site. Development within the project site will be required to adhere to applicable local, state and federal requirements 8/9/00((R:\CRG031Xdev_agreement_is.wpd)) 3 -21 pertaining to the identification, preservation and/or disposition of historical resources. Because no historic resources were previously identified on site, development of the project site as entitled and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement will not cause a substantial change in the significance of a historic resource. No impact related to this issue will occur. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? No Impact. The project site is currently vacant. This condition is similar to that which existed at the time of the University/Crest Final EIR and Revised University Project Supplemental EIR were certified in 1991 and 1999 (respectively). Development of the Revised University Project as entitled will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site. Development within the project site will be required to adhere to applicable local, state and federal requirements pertaining the identification, preservation and/or disposition of archaeological resources. Because no archaeological resources were previously identified on-site, development of the project site as entitled and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement will not cause a substantial change in the significance of a historic resource. No impact related to this issue will OCCur. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unlque geologic feature? No Impact. The project site is currently vacant. This condition is similar to that which existed at the time the University/Crest Final EIR and Revised University Project Supplemental EIR were certified in 1991 and 1999 (respectively). Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site. The 1991 Final EIR included Mitigation Measure No. 73 which mandated the retention of a qualified vertebrate paleontologist to develop a Paleontological Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) prior to the issuance of grading permits. This mitigation was carded forward in the Supplemental EIR. Because the proposed project will not result in a change in the type or scale of uses, and development of the Revised University Project will adhere to applicable provisions of Mitigation Measure No. 73, no impact associated with this issue will occur. d) Disturb any human remains, including those inferred outside of formal cemeteries? No Impact. The 1991 Final EIR and Supplemental EIR did not identify on-site human remains. Development of the Revised University Project, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not result in changes to the type or scale of permitted uses. Because on-site human remains have not been identified prior or subsequent to certification of the Supplemental EIR, and because development within the project site will be required to adhere to applicable local, state, and federal regulations, standards and guidelines pertaining to the identification, preservation and/or disposition of human remains, no impact associated with this issue will occur. Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to cultural resources. Addendure Determinations 8/9/00((R:\CRGO31Xdev_agreernent_is.wpd)) 3-22 LSAASSOCIATES, INC. Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental El:P, are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 6. Geology and Soils. Would the Project.. a) Exp~sepe~ple~rstru~turest~p~tentialsubsta~tialadverseeffe~ts~in~~udingtheris~~fl~ss~ injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent A!quist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State 6eologist for the area or based on other substantial evldenee of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. No Impact. Development of the project site as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses. As stated in the Supplemental EIR, the Revised University Project site does not lie in a fault zone area. No further impacts associated with this issue are anticipated. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? No Impact. Development of the project site as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses. As stated in the 8/9/00((R:\CRG031'xdev_agreement_is.wpd)) 3-23 /aq LSAASSOCIATES, INC, previously approved Supplemental EIR, development of the Revised University Project will be designed and constructed in accordance with requirements of the latest edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) for Seismic Zone 4. Therefore, implementation of the Development Agreement will not result in ground shaking impacts greater than that identified in the Supplemental EIR. iil) Selsmic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Nolmpact. Liquefaction occurs when loose, unconsolidated, water laden soils are subject to shaking, causing the soils to lose cohesion. The possibility of liquefaction occurring at a project site is dependent upon the occurrence of a significant earthquake in the vicinity, sufficient groundwater (within 40 feet of the ground surface) to cause high pore pressures, and on the grain size, plasticity, relative density, and confining pressures of the soil at the project site. Groundwater depths at the project site are approximately 250 feet below ground level. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site, or significantly affect local groundwater levels. Therefore, no impact greater than that identified in the Supplemental EIR will occur. iv) Landslides? No Impact. Elevations on the project site range from approximately 1,500 feet at the south end of the site to approximately 1,850 feet along the northern project boundary. The project site i s relatively fiat, sloping generally to the south at an overall gradient of approximately 5 percent. The Development Agreement, Section 2(C)(5) requires City review and approval of selected slopes within the project site. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses witlfm the project site. Adherence to City standards p~aining to slope design will not result in impacts greater than that addressed in the Supplemental EIR. Therefore, no impact related to this issue will occur. b) Would theproject result in substantial soll erosion or the loss of topsoil? Nolmpact. The soils identified on the project site have a slight potential for wind or water erosion. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Construction activities in the project area would not increase this potential beyond that addressed in the Supplemental EIR. No further impacts are anticipated. c) tf ouM the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that wouM becotne unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? No Impact. Please Refer to Responses 6(a)(iii), 6(a)(iv) and 6(d). Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. As stated in the previously approved Supplemental EIR, development of the Revised University Project will be designed and constructed in accordance with requirements of the latest edition of the Uniform Building Code CLIBC) for Seismic Zone 4. No impacts greater than that addressed in the Supplemental EIR will OCCur. 8/9/O0(<R:~CRG03 lXdev_agreement_is.wpd;,) 3-24 LSA ASSOCIATES. 1NC. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. The geotechnical report prepared for the Supplemental EIR addressed impacts associated with expansive soil s and identi fled requirements that related to grading operations. These requirements will be incorporated into the grading operations as required to obtain the necessary grading permits. No impacts greater than those identified in the Supplemental EIR will occur. e) Would the project ha.ve soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. The site is not currently served by sanitary sewers. Sanitary sewer service will be provided by Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD). Wastewater flows will be conveyed to facilities operated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA). Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the planned method of waste water disposal. Because the Revised University Project will not utilize septic or altemative methods ofwastewater disposal, no impact associated with this issue will occur. Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related geology and/or soils. Addendum Determinations Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that major changes to the Final and/ur Supplemental EIR are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Stody/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new 8/9/00((R:\CRG031Xdev_agreement_is.wpd)) 3-25 ~SAASSOCIATES. INC, information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring maj or revisions ofthe Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible altematives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. WouM the Project.. a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site; therefore, no impact related to this issue greater than that addressed in the Supplemental EIR will occur. b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? No Impact. Please refer to Response 7(a). c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials~ substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less than Significant Impact/No New Information or Changed Circumstances Requiring Preparation o fan EIR. The Revised University Project includes a 6.44-acre elementary school site. Construction and occupation of proposed on-site land uses will result in the generation o fair emissions from motor vehicles, construction equipment, and commercial uses. The Supplemental EIR identified and mitigated air quality impacts resulting from the construction and occupation of on-site uses. Development of the project site as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site. Therefore, no increase in the level of air pollutants or in the frequency and/or amount of hazardous material transport, sale, or storage is anticipated. Because these factors remain unchanged, no impacts beyond those identified in the Supplemental EIR will occur. d) Wouid the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Nolmpact. The Final and Supplemental EIRs did not identify any hazardous materials site within the boundaries of the Revised University Project site. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subjeet to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Developers of the project site will adhere to 8/9/00((R:\CRGO31~dev_agn:ement_is.wpd>> 3-26 LSAASSOGIATES, INC. applicable local, State, and federal standards related to the identi~cation, remediation and/or disposal of hazardous materials. Therefore, no impact related to this issue will occur. e) Would the project be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a publlc airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The Revised University Project site is located approximately 5.5 miles northeast of Ontario International Airport, 8.0 miles west of Rialto Municipal Airport, and 8.5 miles noaheast of Cable Airport (Upland). Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of perrnitted uses within the project site. No impact associated with this issue will occur. J) Would the project be located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. Please refer to Response 7(e). g) Wouldtheprojectimpairimplementatlonof orphysicallyinterferewithan adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than Significant Impact/No New Information or Changed Circumstances requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Development Agreement, Section 2(C)(3), Section 2(C)(9), and Section 2(D)(1) specify the extent and timing of specific circulation improvements which were not included in the approved Revised University Project. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Compliance with emergency access requirements of the San Bemardino County Fire Department (SBCFD), San Bemardino County Shcriffs's Department (SBSD), and/or the City ofRancho Cucamonga will ensure that emergency response to the site will not be hampered. Therefore, no impact beyond that identified in the Supplemental EIR will occur. h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbaniZed areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. A combination of climate, topography, vegetation, and development pattern can create fire risks in the vicinity of the Revised University Project. The project site is currently vegetated with a variety of weeds, annual grasses, shrubs, and other forms of plant material. This vegetation will be removed to allow for the construction of homes, commercial sites, and community facilities. All new construction will comply with applicable standards of the Uniform Fire Code, regulations of the San Bemardino County Fire Department (SBCFD) and/or City of Rancho Cucamonga. No impact beyond that addressed in the Supplemental EIR will occur. Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to hazards or hazardous materials. Addendum Determinations 8/9/00((R:\CRGO31htcv_agreemcnt_is.wpd>> 3-27 LSA ASSOGIATES, INC. Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that maj or changes to the Final and/or Supplemental E1R are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final andor Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental E1Rs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. & Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the ProjecL.. a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? No Impact. Development within the project will adhere to applicable provisions of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (N'PDES) permit as required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Santa Aria Region. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subjeet to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Therefore, impacts associated with this issue will be no greater than that identified in the Supplemental EIR. b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table levd (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses orplanned uses for which permits have been granted) ? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. No increase in the amount of water required to service the project site or the amount of impermeable surfaces is anticipated. Therefore, development of the project site will not result in 8/9/00((R:\CRG031Xdev_agreement_is.wpd)) 3-28 LSAASSOCIATES. INC, impacts related to groundwater supply and/or recharge beyond that identified in the Supplemental EIR. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course oft stream or river, in a manner which wouM result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses, or substantially modify the configuration of residential and commercial areas. Therefore, substantial alteration of existing drainage patterns beyond that i denti fled in the Supplemental EIR will not occur. d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in fiooding on- or off-site? No Impact. The Revised University Project includes on-site storm water facilities that will be designed, installed, and maintained to adequately handle the ultimate drainage anticipated for the area. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses, or substantially modify the configuration of residential and commercial areas. Therefore, no impact greater than that addressed in the Supplemental EIR will occur. e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of exlsting or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runof~. No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses, or substantially modify the configuration of residential and commercial areas. No significant increase in the amount of impermeable surfaces is anticipated. Development within the project will adhere to applicable provisions of the NPDES permit as required by the RWQCB. No impact beyond that addressed in the Supplemental EIR will occur. J9 Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? No Impact. Please refer to Response 8(e). gO Place housing within a lO0-year fiood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? No Impact. The project site is not within a 100-year flood hazard area. No impact will occur. h) Place within a lOO-year fiood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect fiood flows? No Impact. Refer to Response 8(g). i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure oft levee or dam? 8/9/00(<R:~CRG031Xdev_agreement_is.wpd>> 3-29 LSAASSOCIATES. INC. No Impact. The Revised University Project includes on-site storm water facilities that will be installed and maintained to adequately handle the ultimate drainage anticipated for the area. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses, or substantially modify the configuration of residential and commercial areas. The risk of exposing persons or structures to flooding hazards through the construction and occupation of on-site uses is no greater than that identified in the Supplemental EIR. j) Be subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mud flow? No Impact. The project site is not located adjacent to coastal waters, on large, contained bodies of water. Therefore, impacts resulting from either a tsunami or seiche will not occur. The project site is relatively flat, sloping generally to the south at an overall gradient of approximately 5 percent. The Development Agreement, Section 2(C)(5) requires City review and approval of selected slopes within the project site. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Adherence to City standards pertaining to slope design will not result in impacts greater than that addressed in the Supplemental EIR. Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to hydrology and water quality. Addendum Determinations Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that maj or changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or othenvise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental E1R. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 8/9/00<<R:\CRGO31Xdev_agreement_is.wpd>> 3-30 /J/ LSAASSOCIATES, INC. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final an&or Supplemental EIR. 9. Land Use and Planning. Would the Project... a) Physically divide an established community? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Because the project site is currently undeveloped, no disruption of an established community will occur. b) C~n~ictwithanyapp~icab~elandusep~an~p~~icy~~rregu~ati~n~fanagencywithjurisdicti~n over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No Impact. The Development Agreement between the City ofRancho Cucamonga and the owners of the Revised University Project permits development of the project site as entitled. Selected provisions of the Development Agreement require adherence to City standards, regulations and guidelines, modify the extent and scheduling of circulation improvements, or permit the City to apply new ordinances, rules, regulations, and policies to the project site. Adherence to City of Rancho Cucamonga standards, regulations and guidelines will result in a pattern of development which is consistent with adjacent properties. The consistency of standards resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement will provide a beneficial impact to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan ? No Impact. Subsequent to approval of the University/Crest PD in 1991, the County of San Bemardino established the North Etiwanda Open Space and Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP) (1994). This program seeks to establish open space areas and to provide connections between open space within a 7,243-acre area located north of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The Revised University Project site is located within the NEOSHPP program area. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Therefore, impacts greater than those identified in the Supplemental E1R will not occur. Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to land use or planning. Addendum Determinations 8/9/00((R:\CRG031 ~dev_agreement_is.wpd>> 3 -31 LSAASSOCIATES. INC. Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental E1R. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental E1R. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 10. Mineral Resources. Would the Project.. a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. The Final and Supplemental EIRs did not identify any on-site energy or mineral resources. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. No impact associated with this issue will occur. b) Result in the loss of availability of a local!y-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. Please refer to Response 10(a). Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/ur refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to mineral resources. 8/9/00((R:\CRGO31Xdev_agreement_is.wpd)) 3-32 LSAASSOCIATES, INC. Addendum Determinations Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Stody/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing AbiliO, to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 11. Noise. Would the Project.. a) Result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? No Impact. The Final EIR identified potential noise impacts associated with development of the Revised University Project and provided mitigation measures to reduce the significance of these impacts. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project area; therefore, no increase in commercial, residential, construction and/or traffic related noise is anticipated. No impact related with this issue will occur. b) Result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within 8/9/00<<R:\CRG031~dev_agreement_is.wpd>> 3-33 LSAASSOCIATES. INB. thepr~jectarea;theref~re~theam~unt~f~n~sitec~nstructi~nactivitywi~~remainunchanged~ No increase in the amount of groundborne noise or vibration is anticipated. No impact related to this issue will occur. c) Result in a substantial permanent in~rease in ambient n~ise levels in the pr~ject vicinity ab~ve levels existing without the project? No Impact. Please refer to Response 1 l(a). d) Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? No Impact. Please refer to Response 1 l(a). e) Iflocated within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or publlc use airport, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The Revised University Project site is located approximately 5.5 miles northeast of Ontario International Airport, 8.0 miles west of Rialto Municipal Airport, and 8.5 miles northeast of Cable Airport (Upland). Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. No impact associated with this issue will occur. J) If within the vicinity of a private airstrip, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. Please refer to Response 1 l(e). Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for noise related issues. Addendum Determinations Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiz:ing Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 8/9/00(<R:\CRG03 l\dev_agreement_is.wpd>> 3-34 LSAASSOCIATES, INC. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available fit the time the Final and Supplemental ErRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 12. Population and Housing. FFould the Project.. a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) ? No lmpact. DevelopmentundertheRevisedUniversityProjectwillresultinthedevelopmentof single-family residential units, and the installation of roadways, utilities, and community facilities. Impacts resulting from this development have been identified and, if necessary, mitigated for in the Final and Supplemental EIRs. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or intensity of permiRed uses within the project site; therefore, no population increase would take place. No impact associated with this issue will occur. b) Disp~acesubstantialnumbers~fexistingh~using~rpe~p~e~necessitatingthec~nstru~ti~n~f replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The project site is currently vacant. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site; therefore, persons or housing will not be displaced. No impact related to this issue will occur. c) Displacesubstantialnumbersofpeople, necessitatingtheconstruction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. Please refer to Response 12(b). Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to population and housing. Addendure Determinations Major EIR Revisions Not Required 8/9/O0( (R :\CRGO31Xdgv_agreement_is. wpd>;, 3-35 LSAA$SOCIATES, INC. Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental E1Rs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR 13. Public Services. FVouM the Project.. a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i) Fire protection? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site, therefore no increase in the demand for fire protection services will take place. No impact associated with this issue will occur. ii) Police protection? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site; therefore, no increase in the demand for police protection services will take place. No impact associated with this issue will occur. iii) Schools? 8/9/O0((R:\CRGO31Xdev_agreement_is.wpd>> 3-36 /37 LSAASSOGIATES, INC. No Impact. The Supplemental EIR stated, "Prior to the issuance of building permits for any residence, the developer shall pay school fees pursuant to Government Code 65995 ." Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site; therefore, no population increase will take place. Demand for school services and facilities will be similar to that identified in the Supplemental EIR. No impact associated with this issue will occur. iv) Parks? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site; therefore, no population increase will take place. Demand for park facilities will be similar to that identified in the Supplemental EIR. No impact associated with this issue will OCCur. v) Otherpublic facilities? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site; therefore, no increase in the demand for library, medical, or social services will take place. No additional maintenance burden of public facilities is anticipated. Therefore, no impact associated with this issue will occur. Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to the provision of public services. .4ddendum Determinations Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting ~'om implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final 8/9/00((R:\CRGO31Xdev_agreement_is.wpd)> 3-37 LSAASSOCIATES, INC, or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR 14. Recreation. Would the ProjecL.. a) ~ncreasetheuse~fexistingneighb~rh~~dandregi~na~parks~r~therrecreati~na~faci~ities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site; therefore, no population increase will take place. Demand for park facilities will be similar to that identified in the Supplemental EIR. No impact associated with this issue will OCCur. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The Development Agreement, Section 2(C)(8), requires the installation of seven additional "paseos" to provide access to the City ofRancho Cucamonga trail system. The location and construction of these paseos shall be in substantial conformante with "Exhibit L" and "Exhibit L-l" of the Development Agreement and/or approved by the City's Trail Committee. The construction and maintenance of these paseos will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site and, therefore, will not have an adverse effect of the environment. The Revised University Project included a 10-acre park site. Section 2(D)(2) of the Development Agreement specifies the extent and timing of park improvements, but does not entail actions which would have an adverse effect on the physical environment. No impact related to this issue will occur. Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to the provision of recreational facilities. ~lddendum Determinations Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. 8/9/00((R:\CRG03 t \dev_agreement_is.wpd)) 3 -3 8 LSAASSOCIATES, INC. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 15. Transportation/Traffic. F/ouM the Project... a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or intensity of permitted uses within the project site. Because the type and intensity of development remains unchanged from that identified in the Supplemental EIR, no increase in the number of vehicle trips, volume to capacity ratios, or congestion on local roadways is anticipated. No impact related to this issue will occur. b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? No Impact. As noted in Response 15(a), no increase in the number of vehicle trips, volume to capacity ratios, or congestion on local roadways is anticipated as a result of development of the project site (as entitled). Therefore, impacts to level of service standards will be no greater than that identified in the Supplemantal EIR. The Development Agreement, Section 2(C)(3 ), Section 2(C)(9), and Section 2(D)(1) specify the extent and timing of specific circulation improvements which were not included in the approved Revised University Project. These modifications to the previously entitled Revised University Project, may improve h'affic flow in and adjacent to the project site. Any such improvement would be a beneficial impact. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traf~c levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 8/9/00<(R:\CRGO31Xdev_agreernent_is.wpd>> 3-39 LSAASSOCIATE$,INC. No Impact. The Revised University Project does not include an air transportation component. Therefore, no impact related to this issue will occur. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.,farm equipment)? No Impact. The Development Agreement, Section 2(C)(3), Section 2(C)(9), and Section 2(D)(1) specifies the extent and timing of specific circulation improvements which were not included in the approved Revised University Project. Development ofthe Revised University Project as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site, and will not increase hazards from incompatible uses or design features. Adherence to Development Agreement and mitigation measures included in the Final and Supplemental EIRs will reduce traffic related impact resulting from development of the Revised University Project. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? No Impact. The Development Agreement, Section 2(C)(3), Section 2(C)(9), and Section 2(D)(1) specifies the extent and timing of specific circulation improvements which were not included in the approved Revised University Project. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Compliance with emergency access requirements of the San Bemardino County Fire Department (SBCFD), San Bernardino County Sheriffs's Department (SBSD), and/or the City ofRancho Cucamonga will ensure that emergency response to the site will not be hampered. Therefore, no impact beyond that identified in the Supplemental EIR will occur. J) Result in inadequate parking capacity ? No Impact. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. No impacts associated with this issue were identified in the Final or Supplemental EIRs. Parking for commercial uses and community facilities will be provided per City ofRencho Cucamonga standards. No impact associated with this issue will occur. g) C~n~ictwithad~ptedp~licies~p~ans~rpr~gramssupp~rtingalternativetransp~rtati~n(e.g.~ bus turnouts, bicycle racks) ? No Impact. The Final EIR includes Mitigation Measure No. 39, requiring that development within the project site shall include transit improvements such as bus shelters, bike storage facilities, benches, and bus pockets in streets. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Because Mitigation Measure No. 39 still applies to development within the project site, no impact related to this issue will occur. Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to the provision of recreational facilities. 8/9/00((R:\CRG031Xdev_agreement_is.wpd>) 3-40 /q/ LSAASSOCIATES. INC. ,4ddendum Determinations Major E1R Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final andor Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental E1R. No New Information Showing AbiliO, to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final andor Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the proj eel or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 16. Utilities and Service Systems. FFould the Project.. a) Exceedwastewatertreatmentrequirements~ftheapp~icab~eRegi~na~~FaterQua~ityC~ntr~~ Board? No Impact. Modification of the Revised University Project, as outlined in the Development Agreement will not alter the scale or intensity of permitted uses within the project site. Therefore, no increase in the amount ofwastewater generated by on-site uses will occur. No impact associated with this issue will occur. b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. Modification of the Revised University Project, as outlined in the Development Agreement will not alter the scale or intensity of permitted uses within the project site. Without a change of uses or an increase in the intensity of development, no increase in the demand for water 8/9/00<<R:\CRGO31\dev_agreement_is.wpd>> 3--41 LSAAS$OCIATES. INC. or wastewater treatment will take place. Therefore, no impact associated with this issue will occur. c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. Modification of the Revised University Project, as outlined in the Development Agreement will not alter the scale or intensity of permitted uses within the project site. The Revised University Project provided a storm drain system. Construction and/or expansion of storm water drainage facilities beyond that identified in the Supplemental EIR is not required. Therefore, no impact related to this issue will occur. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No Impact. The Revised University Project identified water system improvements which will provide adequate service to planned on-site uses. Modi~cationoftheRevisedUniversityProject, as outlined in the Development Agreement will not alter the scale or intensity of permitted uses within the project site. Without a change of uses or an increase in the intensity of development, no increase in the demand for water supply or delivery facilities will occur. Therefore, no impact associated with this issue will occur. e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? No Impact. Modification of the Revised University Project, as outlined in the Development Agreement will not alter the scale or intensity of permitted uses within the project site and would not result in increased sewer flows or increased pressure on existing or planned waste water treatment facilities. Construction and/or expansion ofwastewater treatment facilities beyond that identified in the Revised University Project. Therefore, no impact related to this issue will occur. Be served by a landfill with suf~cient bermitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? No Impact. Modification of the Revised University Project, as outlined in the Development Agreement will not alter the scale or intensity of permitted uses within the project site and would not increase the amount of solid waste generated by on-site uses. Therefore, no impact related to this issue will occur. g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact. Because modifications to the Revised University Projcct, as outlined in the Development Agreement, will not result in an increase in the amount of solid waste generated by on-site uses, no impact associated with this issue will occur. Refined Project Mitigation Measures Implementation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project will not result in any new significant impacts. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to the provision of utility services. 8/9/00((R:\CRG031 ~dev_agreement_is.wpd)) 3 -42 Addendum Determinations Major EIR Revisions Not Required Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that maj or changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR are required. Comparison of the previous project with the project as described in Section 2.3 of this document indicates that there are no new significant environmemal impacts resulting from implemantation of the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project. No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than in Final and/or Supplemental EIR This Initial Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new information that was not available at the time the Final and Supplemental EIRs were certified that may indicate that a new significant effect may occur that was not reported in the Final or Supplemental EIR. Based on the information and analysis above, there is no substantial new information that there will be new, significant impacts requiring major revisions of the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR The analysis above shows that there are no feasible alternatives to the project or additional mitigation measures that must be considered to substantially reduce one or more of the significant effects identified in the Final and/or Supplemental EIR. 17. Mandatory Findings of Significance a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlif e species, cause a fish or wildlif e population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No Impact. As previously stated in Section 4 (Biological Resources), biological surveys conducted prior to and subsequent to certification of the Supplemental EIR did not identify any state or federally listed threatened or endangered species on site. Impacts associated with riparian areas, migration corridors, or natural community conservation areas were determined not to be significant. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Therefore, impacts related to biological resources will be no greater than that identified in the Supplemental EIR. No historic, archeological, or paleotological resources have bean identified on site. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitted uses within the project site. Therefore, 8/9/00((R:\CRG031Xdev_agreemenLis.wpd)) 343 LSAASSOCIATES, INC. impacts to historic or cultural resources would be no greater than that addressed in the Supplemental EIR. b) D~esthepr~Je~thaveimpactsthatareindividually~imited~butcumulativelyc~nsiderabl~? (``Cumulative~y c~nsiderable~~ means that the incremental eff ects ~f a pr~ject are c~nsidera~le when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? No Impact. Cumulative impacts associated with development of the project site have been previously identified in the Supplemental EIR. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type or scale of permitteduseswithintheprojectsite. ImplementationofprovisionsoftheDevelopmentAgreement will not result in cumulative impacts which were not identified in the Supplemental EIR. Therefore, no impact associated with this issue will occur. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No Impact. Potential impacts associated with development of the Revised University Project have been identified and (where necessary) mitigated for in the Supplemental EIR. Development of the Revised University Project as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not alter the type and scale of permitted uses within the project site. Implementation of provisions of the Development Agreement will not cause direct or indirect impacts greater than that identified in the Supplemental EIR. Therefore, no impact associated with this issue will occur. 8/9/00<(R:\CRG031~cv_agreemenLis.wpd>> 3-44 LSAASSO(31ATES. INC. 4.0 LIST OF PREPARERS/REFERENCESfPERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED 4.1 LIST OF PREPARERS This document was prepared under the direct management of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as Lead Agency for the proposed project, and reflects the independent judgement and position regarding the environmental consequences of the proposed project. The Lead Agency was assisted by the following outside consultant(s): Lead Consultant LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) Environmental/Planning Consultants Lynn Calvert-Hayes, AICP, Associate/Project Manager Carl Winter, Environmental Analyst Jennifer Schuk, Graphics Technician Elsa Brewer, Word Processor 4.2 REFERENCES Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Revised University Crest Project (SCH No, 98121091), LSA Associates, Inc., April 15, 1999 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Revised University Project (SCH No. 98121091), LSA Associates, Inc., July 21, 1999 · Final Biological Surveys for the University Planned Development and Adjacent Parcels, San Bernardino County, California, Harmsworth Associates, July 28, 1999 · Fina~Envir~nmenta~~mpactRep~rtUniversity/CrestPr~jectPUDN~.~F~2~-49SCHN~.88~829~5~ Environmental Perspectives, August 1989 8/9/00({R:\CRG031 xdev_agreement_is.wpd>> 4- l CEQA FINDINGS City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Findings Related to the Addendum for the University Crest Planned Development Environmental Impact Report, Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Revised University Planned Development Project and Addendum in compliance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). REVISED UNIVERSITY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CEQA FINDINGS TABLE OF CONrENTS I. INFRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1 II. PROJECT SUMMARY ......................................................................................................2 A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .....................................................................................2 B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................4 lII. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION .............................................. 5 A. INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT ............................................................................7 B. FINDING ON 1991 EIR, SUPPLEMENTAL EIR AND ADDENDUM ..........................................................................................................7 C. GENERAL FINDING ON MITIGATION MEASURES .................................................. .7 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS .......................................................................8 A. IMPACTS DENTIPIED IN THE EIR AS LESS THAN SIGNFICANT REQUIRING NO MITIGATION ..............................................................8 B. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................................................10 C. IMPACTS ANALYZED IN THE EIR AND DETERMINED TO BE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE ..........................................................................14 V. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................24 VI. PROJECT BENEFITS ...................................................................................................................28 VH. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................29 VIII. ADOPTION OF A MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE CEQA MITIGATION MEASURES .............................................................................................33 ii Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Regarding the Environmental Effects from the Development Agreement for the University Planned Development (SCH # 88082915 and 98121091) I. INTRODUCTION The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ("this Council") in approving the Development Agreement for the University Planned Development (PD), makes the findings described below end adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations presented at the end of the Findings. The "project" under CEQA for purposes of the City's discretionary action is the approval of the Development Agreement, which will now govern the development of the University Planned Development (PD) site as entitled by the County of San Bemardino, subject to the terms end provisions of the Development Agreement. The University Planned Development (PD) is a modification to a project previously approved by the Board of Supervisors ("Board") of the County of San Bernardino in June, 1991. The prior project was identified as the University/Crest Planned Development (PD) (the "University/Crest PD"), and at the time of that project approval, the Board certified a Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse Number (SCH) 88082915 (the "1991 Final EIR"). In May 1991, the Board approved en addendum to the 1991 Final EIR. Subsequent to the 1991 approval, a portion of the University Crest Development Project was purchased, and in 1998 the new owners made application to the County for approval of revisions to the University portion including, severing the University portion from the Crest portion of the original University Project (the "Revised University Project"). The Board was presented with the Revised University Project and certified a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (the "SEER") on October 26, 1999 (SCH 98121091). The City of Rancho Cucamonga challenged the Board's approval of the Revised University Project and certification of the SEIR through a Petition for Writ of Mandate filed in the San Bernardino County Superior Court on November 29, 1999 (the "Action"). The Action challenged the adequacy of the SEER on a number of grounds, of which the primary concerns included inadequate traffic impacts analysis, inadequate open space analysis and improper application of the City' s zoning standards applicable within its sphere of influence. The City, the Board and the Project proponent have now entered into a conditional settlement agreement as regards the Action. Through the settlement agreement the Project proponent has agreed to enter into a Development Agreement to address the City's concerns about potential traffic impacts, and to modify certain traffic design and constructinn timing issues related to the development of the Revised University Project. The primary benefits to the City arising from the settlement agreement are (a) the Project proponent's agreement to enter into a development agreement as regards to the development of the Revised University Project (b) Project proponent's agreement to support the City's application to annex the Revised University Project into the City and (c) the addition of further clarifying language into the SEER pursuant to an Addendum, as the same is defined in Section 15164 of the Guidelines. The Project proponent has advised the City that it is acquiring additional off site mitigation land for perpetual use as open space which address the City's concerns about adequate mitigation for open space. The annexation of the land where the Project is located addresses the City's concerns about applicable zoning standards for the Project. Finally, of additional benefit is the proposal that the Project be annexed into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, thus providing further benefits m the City and through the settlement agreement addresses concerns about the City's zoning standards as applied to the Project. The City applied for annexation in June 2000, and it is anticipated that the annexation will be finalized in October or November 2000. These Findings are based upon the entire record before this Council, including the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report CSEIR") prepared for the Project and the addendum which augments the 1991 Final EIR and SEIR for the Project as regulated by the settlement agreement and the development agreement CAddendum"). The EIR and SEIR were prepared by the Cotmty of San Bemardino acting as the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act CCEQA"). The City ofRancho Cucamonga is identified in the SEIR as a Responsible Agency regarding the development of the Project pursuant to CEQA and the Notice of Preparation of the SEIR. II. PROJECT SUMMARY A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION As originally proposed and approved by the Board, the Project site is located in an unincorporated area of southwestern San Bernardino County. The Project site is located just west of Interstate 15 (I-15) and north of the future State Route 30 (SR-30) within ~he City of Rancho Cucamonga sphere of influence. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is located to the south and east (SEIR Figures 1.1 & 1.2). As a result of the pending annexation process, the Project site will be located within the City limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The University/Crest PD was approved in 1991 with 1,238 residential units, related commercial development, school, park and open space on 1,111.29 acres. To provide for comprehensive planning and infrastructure efficiency, two separate properties "known as University and Crest" were included under a single land use approval. The University/Crest PD was never developed. The current owner of the University portinn, U.C.P. Inc., proposed revisions to reflect the changes in cimumstances with regard to ownership, land area, and concept design. The Project provides a detailed plan for residential and commercial development, park, school and open space on 250.67 acres. The specific modifications analyzed in the SEIR were: Revise the existing University Development Plan of 578 residential units, commercial, school, and park on 186.83 acres by: Adding 64 acres of former SCE property to the project; Increasing the proposed number of dwelling units from 578 to 685; Modifying the location of proposed commercial uses and adding a new 2.3 acres of cormnercial development as shown in Figt~re 2.3; and - Increasing the size of the proposed school and park sites from a cumulative total of 11.96 to 18.00 acres. · Revise portions of the project design by adding new street alignments, new lot designs, and new lot sizes. All parcels are proposed to be a minimum 7,200 square feet. Transfer to the County of San Bernardino, in fee, of a one-half interest in 172 acres of off- site land for permanent open space purposes, along with funding to provide for the long- term maintenance of the off-site land. Create two stand-alone planned development projects, which will be called the University Planned Development and the Crest Planned Development. · Eliminate the 675-acre open space area from the project. Extend Banyan/Summit Avenue westerly over Day Creek Channel to connect with Rochester Avenue. · Reduce the design standard of Day Creek Boulevard from six lanes to four lands divided from SR-30 to Banyan Avenue, four lanes undivided to Wilson Avenue and two lanes north of Wilson Avenue. The SEIR evaluated the potential environmental effects that would result from the development of these modifications to the approved University/Crest PD, according to the requirements of the CEQA. The City was identified in the SEIR as a Responsible Agency under CEQA. The 1991 Final EIR, and subsequent SEIR together with and as clarified by the City's Addendum was intended to serve as an informational document to be used by the City in its responsible and lead agency roles in assessing the environmental effects of the proposed Project, and to provide mitigation measures to avoid or minimize identified significant impacts. The "project" under CEQA for purposes of the City's discretionary action is the approval of the Development Agreement, which will now govern the development of the Revised University Project as entitled by the County, subject to the terms and provisions of the Development Agreement. Provisions of the Development Agreement include the following: · Section 2(B): The application of City street improvement, lighting, storm drain landscape, and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards to uses within the Revised Univgrsity Project; · Section 2(C)(1)(a)(ii): The application of Etiwanda North Specific Plan design criteria to commercial uses located within Area "G;" · Section 2(C)(2): The modification of design of the Day Creek Boulevard streetscape to be consistent with the Day Creek Boulevard slreetscape south of the project site and/or substantially consistent with the City's Day Creek Boulevard Master Plan; · Section 2(C)(3): Provision by the Property Owner of funding and/or construction necessary to improve Banyan Avenue from the existing SCE easement, through to Rochester Avenue; · Section 2(C)(5): Review and approval by the City of slopes within all landscape maintenance districts and adherence to City standards for slopes in excess of 12.5 feet in height; · Section 2(C)(8): The installation of seven additional "paseos" to provide access to the City trail system; · Section 2(C)(9)(c): Modifications to type, extent, location, and/or timing of circulation improvements included in the Revised University Project; and · Section 2(D)(1): The timing and funding of circulation improvements to Banyan Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard and the timing and extent of development of the park site. B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES The objectives of the Development Agreement are as follows: · To conform the standards under which the Revised University Project will be developed to the standards of the City, as set forth in the Development Agreement, including the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and the Day Creek Boulevard Master Plan which provide for slightly different standards for street improvement, lighting, storm drain, landscape, and streetscape within the Revised Unversity Project as approved by the County. · To be consistent with the objectives of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan to include the following: · To create an identifiable "sense of place" within the City by using natural open space area and major areterial streets to define individual neighborhoods. · To promote the use of a landscape theme that respects climate, drought tolerant plants, soil conditions and the natural surroundings. · To promote the use of design features such as walls, fencing, lighting, and signage to enhance the overall community image. · To phase necessary backbone and local street improvements to maximize the efficiency of traffic as development progresses. · To discourage through traffic from entering the small neighborhood unit. · To mitigate traffic impacts upon City streets outside the development area. · To assure that the development of the Revised University Project will be a benefit to the City and its residents by providing quality development to meet the City's housing demands. The objectives of the Revised University Project are as follows: Integrate the former utility easement which extended through the boundaries of the original University/Crest PD, the easement was sold by SCE as surplus property to the project proponents, U.C.P. Inc., for incorporation, thereby increasing the project area by 64 acres. Allow for an independent entitlement so that the independently owned University property can be developed separately from the independently- owned Crest property. Modify the prior approval to take into account the changes in off-site urban development. · Increase the amount of acreage provided for the school site. · Realign the location of community facilities to achieve a better relationship between these uses. · Relocate commercial land uses adjacent to SR-30 in order to take advantage of the proximity to this transportation corridor. · Better reflect the current residential development market, and improve the compatibility of proposed development with surrounding communities. · Recognize that the 675-aere parcel originally proposed for open space mitigation is not controlled by the owners of the University and Crest properties, has been committed to permanent open space by its current owner as mitigation for a project other than the University/Crest PD, and is no longer part of the University or Crest development projects. Provide substitute off-site permanent open space to replace the 675-aere parcel. Develop the Project in conformance with the design standards within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan regulating commercial land uses. Provide for the timely installation of roadway improvements in conformante with City standards. III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The City of Rancho Cucamonga has conducted environmental review for the approval of the Development Agreement, which provides for the development of the Revised University Project as follows: · The City, in order to approve the Development Agreement to provide for development of the Revised University Project, conducted further environmental review in an Addendum to the SEIR. · On July 26, 2000, the City of R~ancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing on the development agreement and recommended the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council approve adoption of the Addendum to the SEIR and approve adoption of the ordinance approving the proposed Development Agreement. On August 16, 2000 the City ofRancho Cucamonga City Council held a public hearing on the development agreement and the adoption of the Addendum to the SEIR and the adoption of the ordinance approving the Development Agreement. The County of San Bemardino previously conducted environmental review for development of the University/Crest PD end the Revised University Project which included the 1991 Final EIR end the SEIR which was completed in 1999; including technical reports concerning traffic end circulation impacts; air quality; biological resource and open space impacts, as well a review of the project site's previous environmental documentation including the 1991 Final EIR. The following is a summary of the County's and City, as Responsible Agency, environmental review for this project relative to the SEIR: A Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study identifying the scope of environmental issues, were distributed to 89 state and federal agencies, and local agencies and organizations on December 21, 1999, end notice was provided through publication on December 25, 1999, in the San Bemardino Sun. A total of 17 comment letters were received. Copies of those comment letters are included in Appendix A of the Draft SEIR (under separate cover). Relevent comments received in response to the NOP/Initial Study were incorporated into the Draft SEIR. · The Draft SEIR was distributed for public review on April 19, 1999, for a 45-day review period with the comment period expiring on June 3, 1999. Seventeen comment letters were received at the close of the public comment period. The specific and general responses to comments are in the Final SEIR. · A Notice of Completion (NOC) was sent with the Draft SEIR to the State Clearinghouse on April 16, 1999, and notice was provided on April 19, 1999, in the following newspaper of general end/or regional circulation: The San Bemardino County Sun · The Final SEIR was distributed for a 10-day notification period beginning on July 26, 1999. · The Sen Bemardino County Planning Comssion held a public hearing to consider the Project and staff recommendations on August 19, 1999. Following public testimony, and staff recommendations, the Commission recommended to the Board that the SEIR is adequate and should be certified and that the Board adopt these Findings and Statement of Ovemding Considerations and appreved the Project. · On October 26, 1999, the Board held a public heating to consider the Project and staff recommendations. Following public testimony and staff recommendations, the Board certified the SEIR and adopted the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and approved the Project. A. INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT FINDING The City of Rancho Cucamonga subsequently retained LSA Associates to prepare the Addendum to the 1991 Final EIR and SEIR. The Addendum was prepared under the direction and supervision of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department, Planning Division. Finding: The Addendure reflects the City's thdcpcndent judgment. The City has exercised its independent judgment in accordance with Public Resources Code, Section 21082.1(c)(3) in retaining its own environmental consultant, directing the consultant in preparation of the Addendum to the 1991 Final EIR, SEIR, as well as reviewing, analyzing, and revising material prepared by the consultant. B. FINDING ON THE 1991 EIR, SUPPLEMENTAL EIR AND ADDENDUM Finding: The proposed changes to the Revised University Planned Development as set forth in the Development Agreement as well as the adoption of the Development Agreement require only minor technical changes or additions to the 1991 Final EIR, SEIR to adequately make the 1991 Final EIR and SEIR apply to the Project. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, an Addcndum to the SEIR is the required environmental documentation for the City's consideration of the Project, as modified by the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement. C. GENERAL FINDING ON MITIGATION MEASURES The City has reviewed the conditions of approval and mitigation measures applicable to the Project as a result of the County's approval of the University/Crest PD in 1991 and the Revised University Project in 1999. Attached as Exhibit "A" is a table comparing the environmental mitigation measures from the 1991 Final EIR to the mitigation measures now applicable to the Revised University Project. The City has determined in that preparing the conditions of approval for Revised University Project, the County incorporated the mitigation measures recommended in the 1991 Final E1R and SEIR. In the event that the conditions of approval do not use the exact wording of the mitigation measures recommended in the SEIR, in each such instance, the adopted conditions of approval are intended to be identical or substantially similar to the recommended mitigation measure. Any minor revisions were made for the purpose of improving clarity or to better defme the intended purpose. Findings: Unless specifically stated to the contrary in these findings, it is the City's intent to adopt all mitigation measures recommended by the 1991 Final EIR, SEIR and Addendum. If a measure has, through error, been omitted from the Conditions of Approval or from these Findings, and that measure is not specifically reflected in these Findings, that measure shall be deemed to be adopted pursuant to this paragraph. In addition, unless specifically stated to the contrary in these Findings, all Conditions of Approval repeating or rewording mitigation measures recommended in the 1991 Final EIR, SEIR and addendnm are intended to be substantially similar to the mitigation measures as worded in the Final SEIR and are found to be equally effective in avoiding or lessening the identified environmental impact. Finally, the mitigation measures applicable to the Revised University Project have incorporated, or deleted, as necessary, the mitigation measures from the 1991 Final EIR, as shown on Exhibit "A." Such mitigation from the 1991 Final EIR has been properly assigned to mitigate the impacts of the development of the Revised University Project, or has been deleted because the mitigation is no longer applicable as set forth in Exhibit "A." No new environmental impacts have been identified to arise from the adoption of the Development Agreement or are identified in the Addendurn. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS City and County staff reports, the 1991 Final EIR, SEIR, and Addendurn, written and oral testimony at all relevant public meetings or hearings, and these Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and other information in the administrative record serve as the basis for the City's environmental determination. The detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts and proposed mitigation measures for the Revised University Project are presented in Chapter 4 of the DEIR, Draft SEIR and within the Addendure. Responses to comments and any revisions or omissions to the Draft SEIR are provided in Chapters 3 and 4 of the Final SEIR. The SEIR evaluated three major environmental categories (traffic and circulation, air quality, and biological resources/open space resources) for potential significant adverse impacts, including cumulative impacts. Both project-specific and cumulative impacts were evaluated. Of these three environmental categories, the City concurs with the conclusions in the SEIR that the issues and subissues discussed below can be mitigated below a significant impact threshold and for those issues which cannot be mitigated below a level of significance, ovemding considerations exist which make impacts acceptable. In addition to the three major environmental categories addressed in the SEIR, twelve other major categories were found to be nonsignificant in the Initial Study prepared for the Revised University Project. The City concurs with the conclusions on these categories as outlined in the Initial Study (Appendix A of the Draft SEIR) and finds that no significant impacts have been identified as to those categories identified in the Initial Study and no further analysis is required. In addition the City prepared an Addendum to the SEIR to address potential impacts which may result from the development of the Revised University Project site, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. A. IMPACTS IDENTIFIED I~ TILE, SEIR AS LESS TITAN SIGNIFICANT REQUIRING NO MITIGATION The following issues were identified in the Initial Study (Appendix A of the Draft SEIR) as having the potential to cause significant impact and were carded forward to the SEIR for detailed evaluation. These issues were found in the SEIR as having no potential to cause significant impact and therefore require no project-specific mitigation. In the following presentation, each resource issue is identified and the potential for significant adverse environmental effects is discussed. 1. BIOLOGICAL AND OPEN SPACE RESOURCES a. Phmmer's Mariposa Lily Potential Significant Impact: The proposed Project would substantially diminish habitat for the Plummer's Mariposa Lily (Calochortusplummerae). Finding: Potential impacts to Plummer's Mariposa Lily are discussed in Section 4.3 of the SEIR. The analysis concluded that, impacts to Plummer's Mariposa Lily brought about by the implementation of the proposed Project would not be significant. No mitigation is required. Facts and analysis in Support of the Finding: The Plummer's Maripusa Lily, a species designated by the California Native Plant Society under CNPS List 1B was observed in several locations on the University portion of the site but not within the SCE easement. Currently, this species has no federal or state status but is on a watch list by CNPS which indicates that this species is rare in California and is eligible for state listing. The Biological Survey completed for the SEIR shows that approximately 50 +/- individual plants are located on the University project site, in gravely alluvium and rocky soils. The range of this species extends from Pasadena to Yucaipa, and includes the Etiwanda Wash, where the largest intact population exists. Substantial numbers of this plant are protected within the North Etiwanda Preserve and the loss of 50 +/- individuals is not considered to be significant. Because no plants were found with /s7 64-acre easement acquired from Southern Califomia Edison, which is being added to the previously approved project, no additional mitigation is necessary. b. "Blue-line" stream. Potential Significant Impact: The proposed project would result in the loss of an on-site "blue-line" stream. Finding: Potential impacts to the "blue-line" stream are discussed in Section 4.3 of the SEIR. The analysis concluded that the loss of the "blue-line" stream would not be significant due to the lack ofriparian vegetation associated with this intermittent watercourse. Facts and analysis in Support of the Finding: This "blue-line" stream does not fit the normal stream/wetlands pattern. No fiparian vegetation was associated with this intermittent watercourse. The vegetation associated with the stream is Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub instead of the typical willow/cottonwood fiparian association found for most blue-lined streams. The loss of this intermittent stream course would not result in a loss of streamcourse associated or wetland habitat. Therefore, impacts to the "blue-line" stream are not significant and no mitigation is required. c. Wildlife Movement Potential Significant Impact: The proposed project would interfere with local wildlife movement patterns. Finding: Potential impacts to any potential on-site wildlife corridor are discussed in Section 4.3 of the SEIR. The analysis concluded that the loss of any potential on-site wildlife corridor would not be a significant impact. Facts and analysis in Support of the Finding: The former utility easements which cross the proposed project site were previously identified as potential corridors for the movement of wildlife. The 1991 Final EIR found the quality of habitat in these easements to be degraded. Utility easements directly south of the proposed project site have been sold and are planned for development. The proposed project is located at the southern extreme of the NEOSHPP area and is located directly north and east of commercial and residential development and noah of the fight-of-way for the future SR-30. The pattern of commercial and residential development in the areas adjacent to the proposed project site lessens the value of the parcel as a wildlife corridor. Therefore, impacts of the proposed project on wildlife corridors is not significant and no mitigation is required. B. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES. The following issues from the environmental categories analyzed by the 1991 Final EIR and the SEIR; Traffic and Circulation, Air Quality, and Biological/Open Space Resources, were found to be potentially significant, but can be mitigated to a less than significant level, with the imposition of mitigation measures. The City finds that all potentially significant impacts of the project listed below can and will be mitigated, reduced or avoided by imposition of the mitigation measures, and these mitigation measures are set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Plan adopted by the City. Specific findings of the City for each category of such impacts are set forth in detail below. Public Resources Code Section 21081 states that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an Environmental Impact Report has been completed which identifies one or more significant effects unless the public agency makes one or more of the following fmdings: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. 2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the SEIR. The City hereby finds, pursuant to Section 21081 that the following potential environmental impacts can and will be mitigated to below a level of significance, based upon the implementation of the mitigation measures in the 1991 Final EIR, SEIR and Addendnm. Each mitigation measure discussed in this section of the findings is assigned a code letter conrelating it with the environmental category used in the Mitigation Monitoring Program included in the SEIR, and adopted by the City to provide for the enforcement of such mitigation measures. 1. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION a. Roadway Construction and Improvement Potential Significant Impact: The proposed Project would significantly impact area roadways. The 1991 Final EIR determined that with mitigation, no significant project- related or cumulative impacts would result from development of the University/Crest PD. Finding: The potential impacts to area roadways are discussed in Section 4.1 of the SEIR. The 1991 Final EIR determined that with mitigation, no significant project-related or cumulative impacts would result from the University/Crest PD. The SEIR analysis concluded that construction of intnmal roadways and improvements to roadways providing access to the Project site to standards required to maintain satisfactory operations and safe traffic conditions contained in the mitigation measures avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects analyzed in the SEIR such that no significant impacts remain. The following measure from the 1991 Final EIR and SEIR is still applicable and will mitigate these impacts to below a level of significance. 4.1.1B Landscape plantings and signs shall be limited in height in the vicinity of project roadways to assure good visibility. The following mitigation measures from the 1991 Final EIR and SEIR have been modified through the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement to change the timing of the installation of traffic signals: 4. 1.0 The project proponent shall construct the following roadway and intersection improvements: phuaw t,f lh~ F,,,j~d ua MiFtda;~d in i~,~ F,,~j~t~i'a ,~,,,.dlriun~ ,,ruFFruraL Day Creek Boulevard/Wilsoa Avenue - Install traffic signal by tb~, e,,H ,~f tbp Prqlprt Day Creek Boulevard/Summit Avenue - Install traffic signal t,~ bp ,mprmi,~nnl x~b~n warrant,,d tw hy tb~, ieeuanrp nf tb~ an~_b.ndr~d and fi~i~tb (I q~l buildin~ y~it · Day Creek Boul~ar~intage Ddve - I~taH traffic sisal by tba pnd qf tba ?rniapt Facts and analysis in Support of the Finding: Since the certification of the 1991 Final EIR, the 762-acre Oak Summit development project, located north of the Project site, has been converted to permanent open space, resulting in a decrease in future traffic volumes. Consequently, some of the traffic mitigation measures from the 1991 Final EIR are no longer required to mitigate project-related and cumulative traffic impacts, as analyzed in the SEIR. The required improvements to roadways and intersections within the Project site will provide adequate access and maintain satisfactory levels of service. Design standards related to roadways and intersections generally ensure the safe and adequate design, construction and maintenance of these facilities will reduce the potential impacts to less than significant levels. b. Public Transportation Potential Significant Impact: Increased demand for public Wansportation in the vicinity of the proposed project. Finding: The potential impacts related to public transportation are discussed in Section 4.1 of the SEIR. The analysis concluded that the project will increase demand for transit service along the Day Creek Boulevard, Wilson Avenue, and Banyan Street/Summit Avenue corridors. This is a potentially significant impact of the proposed project Implementation of the mitigation measures stated below will substantially lessen the significant impact identified in the SEW, such that no significant impacts remain. The following measure from the 1991 Final EW, and SEW, is still applicable and will mitigate these impacts below a level of significance. 4.1.7 To mitigate the project's increase in demand for transit service in the project area, bus transit stops should be provided at major intersections as follows: Day Creek Boulevard: - Bus turnout northbound far side of Vintage Drive - Bus turnout southbound far side of Vintage Drive - Bus turnout northbound far side of Banyan Street-Summit Avenue - Bus turnout southbound far side of Banyan Street-Summit Avenue - Bus stop northbound far side of Vintage Drive - Bus stop southbound far side of Vintage Drive Summit Avenue: - Bus stop eastboundfarside of Day Creek Boulevard Banyan Street: - Bus stop westbound far side of Day Creek Boulevard Wason Avenue: Bus stop eastbound far side of Day Creek Boulevard Bus stop westbound far side of Day Creek Boulevard Facts and analysis to Support of the Finding: As with the University/Crest PD, the proposed Project would increase the demand for transit service along the Day Creek Boulevard, Wilson Avenue, and Banyan Street/Summit Avenue corridors. The TIA for the Revised University Project identified measures associated with providing transit stops along roadways within the project. Implementation of these measures will reduce potential impacts related to public transportation to less than significant levels. 2. MR QUALITY a. On-site stationary emissions Potential Significant Impact: The project will increase emissions from on-site stationary sources. ,3/ 1 Finding: The potential impact to air quality is discussed in Section 4.2 of the SEIR. The long-term occupancy of the proposed development of homes and retail commercial uses would consume natural gas and electricity. On-site stationary sottrees (i.e., energy consumption) emissions would be below the emission thresholds established by the SCAQMD and, therefore, is not a significant long-term impact of the proposed project. Adherence to the following .energy conservation measures will reduce energy consumption and mitigate impacts related to stationary source emissions identified in the SEIR such that no significant effect rem/ms. The following measures from the 1991 Final EIR and SEIR are still applicable and will mitigate these impacts below a level of significance. 10. Require bus turnouts and shelters in commercial developments and public use areas as identified. 11. Include solar water heaters and pool heaters in model homes and community facilities with pools. 12. Use extensive landscaping to shade buildings Facts and analysis in Support of the Findings: Criteria pollutant emissions associated with stationary sottrees are generally small compared to those of the mobile sources. This was reflected in the 1991 air quality analysis. There would be an increase in indirect stationary source emissions (energy consumption) associated with the addition of 107 dwelling units. Total net increase in daily emissions for all criteria polhitants would be less than 5 pounds for NOx, and less than 3 pounds for the others. The project also proposes a lower density for the on-site commercial development. Together, the proposed modifications would not result in significant changes to the County's General Plan and SCAG's projection for the project area. Therefore, the project is considered to be consistent with the local Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Implementation of the mitigation measures stated above will reduce potential impacts from on-site stationary sources to less than significant levels. C. IMPACTS ANALYZED IN THE FEIR, SEIR AND ADDENDUM AND DETERMINED TO BE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE. With the implementation of all available and feasible mitigation measures recommended in the 1991 FinalEIR and the SEIR, the following adverse impacts of the proposed Project stated below are considered to be significant and tanavoidable, both individually and cumulatively, based upon information in the SEll( and Addendum, in the record, and based upon testimony provided during the public hearings on this project. These impacts are considered significant and unavoidable despite the mitigation measures which are imposed and which will reduce impacts to the extent feasible. 1. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION a. Key Intersections are forecast to exceed LOS standards at one or more peak hours Significant Unavoidable Impact: The following intersections are forecast to exceed the City of Rancho Cucamonga minimum standard of LOS D or meet warrants for installation of traffic signals under 2003 background plus project conditions during the one or both peak hours: Rochester Avenue/Banyan Street · Etiwanda AvenueNictoria Street. Finding: Issues associated with the Revised University Project's impact on traffic and circulation systems are discussed in Section 4.1 of the SEIR. Implementation of the mitigation measures stated below cannot be ensured since future development projects will be required to make "fair share" contributions towards needed improvements, but that will not guarantee that adequate funding will be available to construct the improvements at the time development occurs. Based on this conclusion, development of the proposed project will create a significant and unavoidable impact. This impact is overridden by the project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. 4.1.2 Prior to issuance of building permits for any dwelling unit within each devel- opment phase of the project, the applicant shall pay its fair share cost in accordance with Table 4.1.G (Table 6-4 of the TIA for the Revised University Project, included as Appendix B of the SEIR) for installing signals at the following intersection: · Rochester Avenue/Banyan Street · Etiwanda Avenue/Victoria Street Facts and analysis in Support of the Finding: The project peak hour trip assignments were added to the year 2003 traffic base. Intersection level of service analysis was conducted for the year 2003 with project peak hour condition at key study area intersections, based on existing intersection configurations with the SR-30 Freeway improvements. In addition, improvements to roadways and intersections within the project site which would be required to provide adequate access and maintain satisfactory levels of service are included. The Etiwanda Avenue/ Victoria Street intersection is forecast to operate at LOS E during the a.m. peak hour with year 2003 plus project traffic volumes. Despite implementation of the above stated mitigation measures, a significant and unavoidable impact b. Key Intersections are forecast to exceed LOS Standards Significant Unavoidable Impact: The following intersections are forecast to exceed the City of Rancho Cucamonga minimum standard of LOS D: Day Creek Boulevard/Highland Avenue · Etiwanda Avenue/Sumnut Avenue · Etiwanda Avenue/Highland Avenue Findings: Issues associated with the Revised University Project's impact on traffic and circulation systems are discussed in Section 4.1 of the SEIR. Implementation of the stated mitigation measures cannot be ensured since future development projects will be required to make "fair share" contributions towards needed improvements, but that will not guarantee that adequate funding will be available to construct the improvements at the time development occurs. Based on this conclusion, development of the Revised University Project will create a significant and unavoidable impact. This impact is overridden by the project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. 4.1.3 Prior to issuance of building permits for any dwelling unit within each devel- opment phase of the project as stipulated in the project's conditions of approval, the applicant shall pay pro-rated costs as shown in Table 4.1.G (Table 6-4 of the TIA for the Revised University Project, included as Appendix B of the SEIR) for the following intersection improvements: · Day Creek Boulevard/Highland Avenue - Addition of a second southbound left turn lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a second eastbound through lane, and a second westbound through lane. · Etiwanda Avenue/Summit Avenue - Signalization of the intersection. · Etiwanda Avenue/Highland Avenue - Addition of a westbound right turn lane. Facts and analysis in Support of the Finding: The project trip assignment was added to the future year 2015 traffic base. The 2015 plus project daily, a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes are illustrated in the SEIR. The project scenario level of service analysis is based on the future year 2015 circulation network improvements discussed previously. With the addition of the project a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic volume to the future year 2015 traffic base, four intersections will operate below local LOS threshold standards It should be noted that the intersection of Etiwanda AvenueNietoria Street will operate at LOS E with the current stop control. However, as noted in the discussion of year 2003 plus project impacts, this intersection will require signalization by 2003 to maintain satisfactory levels of service. With signalization, this location would continue to operate with satiifactory levels of service under 2015 plus project conditions. Despite implementation of the above stated mitigation measures, a significant and unavoidable impact remains. c. Required Intersection Improvements SignificantUnavoidable Impact: The following intersections will require additional lane improvements to maintain satisfactory operations: · Milliken Avenue/Highland Avenue · Day Creek Boulevard/Base Line Road Finding: Issues associated with the Revised University Project's impact on traffic and circulation systems are discussed in Section 4.1 of the SEIR. Implementation of the stated mitigation measures cannot be ensured since future development projects will be required to make "fair share" contributions towards needed improvements, but that will not guarantee that adequate funding will be available to construct the improvements at the time development occurs. Based on this conclusion, development of the proposed project will create a significant and unavoidable impact. This impact is overridden by the project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. 4.1.4 Prior to issuance of building permits for any dwelling unit within each development phase of the project as stipulated in the project's conditions of approval, the applicant shall pay pro-rated costs as shown in Table 4.1.G (Table 6-4 of the TIA for the Revised University Project, included as Appendix B of the SEIR) for the following intersection and roadway improvements: Milliken Avenue/Highland Avenue - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane. · Day Creek Boulevard/Base Line Road- Addition of a second eastbound left turn lane. Facts and analysis in Snpport of the Finding: While the level of service analysis indicates that these locations will operate with satisfactory levels of service, examination of the forecast volumes for the northbound left turn at Milliken Avenue/Highland Avenue and the eastbound left turn at Day Creek Boulevard/Base Line Road warrant additional left turn lanes to accommodate forecast demand. Despite implementation of the above stated mitigation measures, a significant and unavoidable impact remains. d. SignalizationofKeylntersection Significant Unavoidable Impact: The intersection of East Avenue/Summit Avenue will require installation of a traffic signals under 2015 background plus project conditions. Finding: Issues associated with the proposed project's impact on traffic and circulation systems arc discussed in Section 4.1 of the SEIR. Implementation of the mitigation measures stated below cannot be ensured since future development projects will be required to make "fair share" contributions towards needed improvements, but that will not guarantee that adequate funding will be available to construct the improvements at the time development occurs. Based on this conclusion, development of the proposed project will create a significant and unavoidable impact. This impact is overridden by the project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. 4.1.5 Prior to issuance of building permits for any dwelling unit within each development phase of the project as stipulated in the project's conditions of approval, the applicant shall pay its fair share cost in accordance with Table 4. 1. G (Table 6-4 of the TIA for the Revised University Project, included as Appendix B of this supplemental EIR) for installing a signal at the intersection of East Avenue/Summit Avenue. Facts and analysis in Support of the Finding: The project proponent is required to pay its fair share contribution for installing a signal at the intersection of East Avenue/Summit Avenue. Despite implementation of the above stated mitigation measures, a significant and unavoidable impact remains. e. Freeway Segments Levels of Service Significant Unavoidable Impact: The proposed project will contribute to deficiencies along the following freeway sections: SR-30 Eastbound - Euclid Avenue to 1-15 and Cherry Avenue to Beech Avenue SR-30 Westbound - Beech Avenue to Cherry Avenue and I-15 to Euclid Avenue · I-15 Northbound - 1-10 Freeway to SR-30 Freeway · 1-15 Southbound - SR-30 Freeway to 1-10 Freeway. Finding: Issues associated with the Revised University Project's impact on traffic and circulation systems arc discussed in Section 4.1 of the SEIR. There is no mechanism for individual projects to conlribute financially to freeway mainline improvements. No mitigation is proposed that is feasible, therefore the impact to frccway mainline improvements remains significant and unavoidable. Development of the proposed project will create a significant and unavoidable impact. This impact is overridden by the project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. Facts and analysis in Support of the Finding: The forecast year 2015 freeway mainline analysis summary tables are contained in the TIA for the Revised University Project (Appendix B, Tables 5-10 and 5-11 of the SEIR). Within the project study area, 11 freeway segments arc forecast to operate at LOS F during the a.m. and/or p.m. peak hour, without or with the project. The project would not bc responsible for the degradation of frccway segments to LOS F; however, the project would contribute additional traffic to the forecastcd impacted segments on SR-30 and 1-15. Funds have not been made available for freeway improvements along these sections of SR-30 and 1-15. Despite implementation of the above stated mitigation measures, a significant and unavoidable impact remains. 2. MR QUALITY a. Impacts from Construction and Grading SignificantUnavoidable Impact: Peak grading and construction emissions would exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds for the criteria pollutant of NOx and PM~0, which is 100 and 150 pounds per day respectively. Finding: Air quality issues for project grading and construction are discussed in detail in Section 4.2 of the SEIR. The 1991 Final EIR found the University/Crest PD to be consistent with the 1989 AQMD update and to have no project related impacts, which would not be mitigated to below a level of significance. However, the SEIR identifies that implementation of the mitigation measures stated below and identified in the Addendum to the 1991 Final EIR would not reduce the criteria pollutant emissions for NOx and PM~0 associated with construction of the proposed Project to a less than significant level under current standards. Despite implementation of the stated mitigation measures significant and unavoidable impacts remain. This impact is overridden by the Project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. The following mitigation measures from the 1991 Final EIR and SEIR, as revised, are still applicable and will mitigate these impacts to below a level of significance. 61. As a requirement of the County Development Code, Sections 810.0305 through 810-0360, the applicant shall obtain a permit from the County Agricultural Commissioner for the purpose of controlling wind borne soil erosion. 1. During clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation: a. Control fugitive dust by regular watering, paving construction roads, or other dust preventive measures as defined in District Rule 403. b. Maintain equipment engines in proper tune. 2. After clearing, Fading, earth moving or excavation: a. Spread soil binders. b. Wet the area down, sufficient enough to form a crust on the surface with repeated soakings, as necessary, to maintain the crust and prevent dust pick up by the wind. c. Sweep streets should silt be carried over the adjacent public thoroughfares. 3. During construction: a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems to keep all areas where vehicles move damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site. b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day. c. Use low sulfur fuel (0.05 percent by weighO for construction equipment. 4. Discontin. ue construction during second stage smog alerts. 4b. The dust control measures shall be required for both the grading period and for long-term control of dust once grading has been completed and prior to building construction. 4c. Grading shah be restricted during high velocity sustained wind conditions exceeding 25 mph in accordance with the requirements established by the Inland Empire Conservation District. 4d. Soil binders and stabilizers which are non-hazardous shah be used. Facts in Support of the Finding: Grading and construction activities would cause combustion emissions from utility engines, heavy-duty construction vehicles, haul trucks, and vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions during grading and construction activities envisioned on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. It is anticipated that peak grading days would generate larger amounts of air pollutants than during peak construction building erection days. The project will be required by law to comply with regional rules, which would assist in .reducing the short-term air pollutant emissions. Implementation of these dust suppression techniques as required by the SCAQMD can reduce the fugitive dust generation (and thus the PM~0 component) by 50 to 75 percent. Building erection or construction would have different types of equipment being used on the project site. Similarities do exist in terms of equipment exhaust emissions and fugitive dust emissions. However, it is anticipated that emissions during building erection phase would be below peak grading day emissions. Therefore, mitigation implemented for the peak grading day emissions would be adequate to reduce emissions during the building erection phase. Emissions associated with architectural coating can be reduced by using preeoated/natural colored building materials, water- based or low-VOC coating, and using coating lxansfer or spray equipment with high t~ansfer efficiency. Compliance with the SCAQMD Rules and Regulations for architectural coatings would reduce this potential impact to less than significant. Despite implementation of the above stated mitigation measures, a significant and unavoidable air quality impact remains. b. Increased Vehicle Emissions Significant Unavoidable Impact: Vehicular trips associated with the Revised University Project would produce emissions that would exceed the SCAQMD daily thresholds for the criteria pollutant of CO, ROC, and NOx. Finding: Issues associated with the Revised University Project's impact on air quality are discussed in Section 4.2 of the SEIR. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the Addendum to the 1991 Final EIR would not reduce the criteria pollutant emissions for CO, ROC, and NOx associated with vehicle emissions of the Revised University Project to a less than significant level. This air quality impact would remain significant and unavoidable after mitigation. This impact is overridden by the project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations The following measure from the 1991 Final EIR and SEIR is still applicable, but will not mitigate these impacts to below a level of significance. 39. Transit improvements, such as bus shelters, bike and storage facilities, benches and bus pockets in the streets, if recommended and approved by the City, the County Transportation Department and the local transit authority, shah be included in the project design and shown on the final Development Plan. Bus turnouts and shelters shall be included in the commercial and public use areas, where feasible. Facts in Support of the Finding: Although emissions of these criteria pollutants would be 11 percent less than those associated with the original development plan analyzed in 1991, mobile source emissions associated with the Revised University Project would exceed daily thresholds established by SCAQMD (550 ppd CO, 75 ppd ROC, and 100 ppd NOx), and is an impact which remains significant and unavoidable. c. Cumulative Impacts Significant Unavoidable Impact: Cumulative short-term air quality impacts from grading/construction and long-term impacts from increased vehicle emissions. Finding: Cumulative impacts to air quality are discussed in Section 4.2 of the SEIR. The 1991 Final EIR and SEIR determined that the site is located within a non-attainment, that is, ambient air quality exceeds EPA standards for the air basin. The development of the Revised University Project will result in a locally and regionally significant unavoidable impact to air quality. These impacts are overridden by the project benefits set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. Facts in Support of the Finding: As discussed in the 1991 air quality analysis and confirmed in the SEIR, the project would contribute less than 0.03 percent of criteria pollutants to the entire South Coast Air Basin projected for the year 2000. Although this appears to bc insignificant for the regional air quality, grading and construction emissions for NOx and Pi0, as well as operational emissions for CO, ROC, and NOx would exceed the daily thresholds established by the SCAQMD, and would contribute cumulatively to local and regional air quality degradation which is significant and unavoidable. 3. BIOLOGICAL AND OPEN SPACE RESOURCES a. Loss of Alluvial Sage Scrub Significant Unavoidable Impact: Implementation of the Revised University Project development would result in the loss of mature and intermediate alluvial fan sage scrub. The loss of the alluvial fan sage scrub represents a significant addition to the ongoing loss of this regionally limited resource. Finding: Impacts to Biological and Open Space resources are discussed in Section 4.3 of the SEll>,. The 1991 Final EIR and SEIR determined that cumulative impacts to biological resources, specifically, the loss of natural alluvial sage scrub habitat, would remain significant. Based on the whole record, project development, which will result in the loss of intermediate alluvial fan scrub is a significant and unavoidable impact. The loss of this resource within the proposed project site will still contribute to a significant adverse unavoidable cumulative impact within the region. The cumulative loss of open space will remain significant and unavoidable. The Addendum recognizes that the Project proponent has cornrmtted additional off-site land to be set aside in perpetuity for conservation purposes. This additional off-site land consists of 135-acres of land located in the foothills, noah and east of the project site. This off-site mitigation land and an $150,000 endowment is being delivered to Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs to be held and maintained for open-space and conservation purposes in perpetuity. These impacts remain significant and unavoidable but are overridden by the project benefits set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. The Addendum also recognizes that additional biological surveys were conducted by Harmsworth Associates after certification of the SEIR. These surveys concluded that the entire Revised University Project site did not support suitable habitat for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino), a recently federally listed endangered species. In addition, biological surveys of Area "H", as identified in the Development Agreement, did not find on site either the California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) (federally designated as "threatened") or the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Dipodotnys merriami parvus) (federally listed as "endangered"). No federally or state listed plant species were detected during these biological surveys. Because biological surveys conducted prior and subsequent to certification of the SEIR did not identify any state or federally listed threatened or endangered species on site, impact development of 22/7t the project site as entitled, and subject to applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, will not result in impacts related to this issue. 1. Any sycamores and oaks removed for the project shall be replaced either on site or in the mitigation site in a sufficient ratio to guarantee replacement. zt tree removal and replacement plan for native trees or plants shah be required prior to issuance of grading permits. In addition, the removal of any vegetation within 200feet of the bank of a stream or indicated as a protected riparian area on a community or specific plan shall be subject to a tree removal permit. 4. All graded and disturbed surfaces remaining outside developed areas following construction shall be revegetuted as soon as feasible. Landscape design and plant selection in areas directly adjacent to open space shall conform to the composition of surrounding vegetation. The use of native trees and shrub species shah closely match those already present in the alluvial fan scrub on-site. 7. The potentially adverse effects of night lighting on surrounding open space areas shah be mitigated by implementing one of the following alternatives: · low intensity street lamps at the development edge low elevation lighting poles shielding by internal silvering of the globe or external opaque reflectors. The degree to which these measures are utilized should be dependent upon the distance of the light source from the urban edge. 4. 3. 1A. The long-term preservation of a one-half interest of the 172-acre parcel is the principal mitigation included in the proposed project. This off-site property has been acquired jointly by U.C.P. Inc. and the new owners of the Crest properties. Eighty-six acres along with funding to maintain the open space area shah be offered as mitigation for project impacts related to the loss of open space. 4. 3. 1B. Deed restrictions to future development shah be placed on the 172-acre parcd in order to ensure that it retained as natural open space. 4.3.1C Until such time as biological habitat studies determine otherwise, the northerly 30 acres of the former SCE easement are presumed to be potential habitat for species protected by the California and federal endangered species act, and no development of that area may be permitted. Facts in Support of the Finding: The biological habitat impacts of development within the southerly portion of the University/Crest PD, encompassing the University properties is unchanged from the existing, certified 1991 Final EIR. The addition of the SCE easements to the Revised University Project represents a loss of an additional 64 acres of this plant community. The principal impact of the Project is the conversion of land from undeveloped open space to mixed residential, commercial, and community uses. Riversidian alluvial fan scrub habitat is designated by California /7/ Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) as a plant community requiring a high priority status for preservation. The conversion of alluvial fan scrub represents a significant addition to the ongoing loss of this regionally limited resource. In addition to the one-half interest in the 172-acre parcel, the project proponent has agreed to pay the sum of $100,000 as an endowment for this mitigation property, and has acquired another 135-acre parcel along with an endowment of $150,000 which will with be set aside in perpetuity for conservation and preservation purposes. Despite implementation of the above stated mitigation measures, project development will result in significant and unavoidable impacts to biological and open space resources. b. Cumulative Impacts Significant Unavoidable Impact: The cumulative loss of intermediate alluvial fan scrub and open space. Finding: The cumulative impact to biological and opens space resources is discussed in Section 4.3 of the SEIR. The 1991 Final EIR and SEIR determined that the cumulative impacts to biological resources, specifically, the loss of natural alluvial sage scrub habitat, would remain significant. In addition to the one-half interest in the 172-acre parcel as specified in the SEER as off-site mitigation for loss of natural open space, the project proponent has agreed to pay the sum of $100,000 as an endowment for this mitigation property. The Addendure recognizes that the Project proponent has committed additional off-site land to be set aside in perpetuity for conservation purposes. This additional off-site land consists of 135-acres of land located in the foothills, north and east of the project site. This off-site mitigation land and an $150,000 endowment is being delivered to Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs to be held and maintained for open-space and conservation purposes in perpetuity. The Revised University Project will result in a significant and unavoidable impact to these resources. These impacts are overridden by the project benefits set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. Facts in Support oftheFinding: The 1991 Final EER concluded that the conversion of Riversidian alluvial fan scrub community to urban uses would add to the cumulative loss of this regionally significant resource. The cumulative loss of such habitat was considered an unavoidable, significant impact. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the 1991 Final EIR was determined to reduce all remaining biotic impacts to a less than significant level. In the time since the certification of the 1991 Final EER for the University/Crest PD, the county has established the Noah Etiwanda Open Space Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP) area. The Revised University Project is within the NEOSHPP area. The NEOSHPP was adopted by the County to aid in the future preservation of open space and sensitive biological habitat in the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains. Potential mitigation for cumulative impacts includes participation in a regional mitigation plan (i.e., the San Bernardino Valley Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan). However, the participation in the plan as a mitigation measure is speculative at this time as no such plan is yet in place and the San Bernardino plan is only in its early formative stages. Although the Project applicant has set aside off-site mitigation lands with endowment funding, this cumulative impact remains significant and unavoidable. V. PROJECT ALTERNAllVES Three project alternatives are discussed in Chapter 6 of the SEIR and the potential significance for all of the alternatives are analyzed in Section 6 of the Draft SEIR. The City has considered these alternatives for the development of the Revised University Project and makes the following findings. Previously Approved Project Alternative This altemative includes the implementation of the previously approved University/Crest PD in accordance with the County's entitlements. The previously proposed project consists of approximately 1,100 acres in the West Foothills Planning Area in unincorporated San Bemardino County. The property is comprised of parcels under different ownership and is divided into two discrete elements. The larger of these encompasses 675 acres in Day Canyon, north of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City), and extends approximately 2 miles into the San Bernardino National Forest. This element had been proposed to be set aside for open space preservation. The southern element of the previously proposed project is located adjacent to the northern limits of the City and is completely within the City's sphere of influence. Planned development within the southern element consists of 1,238 single-family residential units on 377.79 acres. The addition of commercial areas (12.66 acres), a school site (4.66 acres), parkland (7.30 acres), and necessary acreage (31.25) required for landscaping and drainage brought the total acreage in this southern element to 433.66 acres. The 675-acre northern element which was owned by Etiwanda Highland Properties in 1991, was required as a condition of approval for the 1991 project to be dedicated through an easement to the County of San Bernardino for open space, recreational, scenic purposes. In the time since approval of the University/Crest PD, this property has been sold to individuals not associated with the University/Crest PD project. Eventually, the 675 acres was acquired by MWD and has since been committed to permanent open space as environmental mitigation for its Inland Feeder Project. Under this altemative, sig~ificant cumulative impacts to biological resources, especially the loss of natural alluvial sage scrub would remain after mitigation. The implementation of the previously appruved project would result in the loss of approximately 425 acres of natural alluvial plant and animal communities. The previously approved project would generate a total of 26,980 average daily trips (ADT) and 2,530 trips at the PM peak hour. This is approximately 14.0 percent of the traffic expected with development of the entire traffic study area. Project related impacts can be fully mitigated by the implementation of the improvements identified in the 1991 Final EIR. Cumulative development anticipated in the vicinity of the proposed project as previously approved, would result in unacceptable levels of service (LOS) at two future intersections. The implementation of regional mitigation measures will reduce this potential cumulative impact to a level of less than significant. Implementation of the University/Crest PD would result in increased stationary and mobile source emissions in the air basin. The project emissions would be expected to be 0.03 percent of the total air basin emissions forecast for the year 2000. 'Although the previously approved project is consistent with AQMD, cumulative impacts would be significant. Impacts associated with noise, cultural resources, and sewer facilities would be adequately mitigated with the implementation of the measures stated in the 1991 Final EIR. Finding: The Previously Approved Project Altemative was rejected as an alternative to the Revised University Project because the removal of the area set aside for open space purposes alters the status of the University/Crest PD approval. Compliance with the conditions of approval is now impossible; therefore, implementation of the previously approved University/Crest PD as an alternative to the proposed project is not possible. Project With SCE Easement Used To Increase Park And Open Space Alternative The Revised University Project as proposed contains 8.0 acres for an elementary school and I0.00 acres of parkland. Under this alternative the amount of acreage for parks would increase by 2.38 acres for a total of 12.23 acres by adding additional park area long Day Creek Boulevard. This alternative would also increase the school site from 8.0 acres to 10 acres and reduce the single-family units by 85. The overall residential density would increase from 3.09 to 3.11 dwelling units per acre. This alternative would also provide for 30.07 acres of on-site open space as the northern portion of the SCE easement would never be developed, and one-half interest in a 172-acre off-site parcel for open space. This alternative would generate approximately 17,458 daily tripswhile the Revised University Project would generate 18,289 daily trips. Thus, this altemative would generate 831 less daily trips than the proposed project. The Revised University Project would be required to mitigate project traffic impacts by the installation of roadway improvements such as street widening, traffic signals, and stop signs. Cumulative traffic impacts would be mitigated by fair share costs to provide future roadway improvements. This alternative would be required to provide the same mitigation because the reduction in trip generation is not substantially less than that generated by the Revised University Project. Therefore, impacts to traffic from this alternative are substantially the same. With implementation of the Revised University Project, emissions of the three criteria pollutants (NOx, ROC and CO) by mobile sources associated with the modified development on the University property would remain greater than the daily thresholds established by the SCAQMD. Emissions of these criteria pollutants would be 11 percent less than those associated with the original development plan analyzed in 1991. This alternative would reduce the number of daily trips by 0.88 percent and therefore, reduce the amount of pollutants from mobile sources by about 0.88 percent. The reduction in emissions would be minimal and the impact to air quality from development of this altemative would remain significant. Under this alternative, the northern portion of the SCE Easement would remain as open space. In the 1991 Final Ell>,, the quality of habitat in the SCE Easement was found to be degraded, and would not be quality habitat for wildlife, nor would it serve as a wildlife corridor because of urban development, which surrounds the Easement. Under this alternative, impacts to biological resources would remain significant although they would slightly diminished. Finding: The Project With SCE Easement Used To Increase Park And Open Space Alternative was rejected because the significant unavoidable impacts of the Revised University Project on the cumulative impacts to traffic, air quality and biological resources would not be avoided nor substantially lessened with development of this alternative. Project With SCE Easement Converted To Open Space Alternative This alternative would propose leaving the 64-acre SCE easement in permanent open space. In leaving the SCE easement in permanent open space the amotmt of acreage for residential, commercial, and parkland would be reduced. This alternative would reduce the Revised University Project's residential units by 144 units and residential area by 48.10 acres, for a total of 541 units (685 residential units are proposed in the Revised University Prnjeet on 433.43 acres). A total of 14.95 acres of commercial land is proposed with the Revised University Project, but this alternative would reduce the commercial land to 4.4 acres. Park acreage would be reduced from 10.00 acres with the proposed Project to 4.64 acres with this alternative. This alternative would also provide one-half interest in a 172-acre off-site parcel for open space. This alternative would retain the elementary school acreage at 8.0 acres and not increase the elementary school acreage to a minimum of 10 acres that has been requested by the State Department of Education and the Etiwanda School District. This alternative would have fewer impacts on schools, traffic generation, air quality, and open space than the Revised University Project. Impacts to biological resources would remain similar to those of the Revised University Project due to the degraded nature of the SCE easement and its low quality as habitat for wildlife. Impacts to parks would increase, but still remain less than significant, with a reduction in acreage allotted to active park space. Potential mitigation for cumulative impacts includes participation in a regional mitigation plan (i.e., the San Bernardino Valley Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP)). However, the participation in the plan as a mitigation measure is speculative at this time as no such plan is yet in place and the MSHCP is only in its early formative stages. The Revised University Project is providing one-half interest in a 172 acre off site parcel for open space, which is located within the North Etiwanda Open Space and Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP) area. This alternative would have similar impacts as the proposed project on biological resources because the majority of the 250.67-acre site would be developed with the exception of 26.8 acres within the SCE easement. This alternative would generate approximately 10,226 daily trips while the Revised University Project would generate 18,289 daily trips. Thus, this alternative would generate 8,063 less daily trips than the Revised University Project. The Revised University Project would be required to mitigate project traffic impacts by the installation of roadway improvements such as street widening, traffic signals, and stop signs. Cumulative traffic impacts would be mitigated by fair share costs to provide future roadway improvements. This alternative would be required to provide the same mitigation even through trip generation is less than the Revised University Project because traffic generated under this alternative would still have a significant impact on roadways in the project area. With implementation of the Revised University Project, emissions of the three criteria pollutants (NOx, ROC and CO) by mobile sources would remain greater than the daily thresholds established by the SCAQMD. However, emissions of these criteria pollutants would be 11 percent less than those associated with the original development plan analyzed in 1991. This alternative would reduce the 27/75 number of daily trips by 44 percent and, therefore, reduce the amount of pollutants from mobile sources by about 1.8 percent. Construction emissions would also be reduced because the 64-acre site would not be graded. These reductions in emissions would be minimal however, and the impacts to air quality would remain significant. The Revised University Project was determined to have significant unavoidable adverse impacts on biological resources. The loss of Riversidian sage scrub within the proposed development firea will still contribute to a significant adverse unavoidable cumulative impact within the region. The cumulative loss of open space will also not be reduced to below a level of significance with implementation of required mitigation measures. Potential mitigation for cumulative impacts includes participation in a regional mitigation plan (i.e., the San Bemardino Valley Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan). However, the participation in the plan as a mitigation measure is speculative at this time as no such plan is yet in place and the San Bemardino plan is only in its early formative stages. The Revised University Project is providing one-half interest in a 172-acre off- site parcel for open space. This alternative would have similar impacts as the proposed project on biological resources because the majority of the 250.67-acre site would be developed with the exception of 64 acres within the SCE easement. Finding: The Revised University Project With SCE Easement Converted To Open Space Alternative would have less impacts on schools, traffic, air quality and open space, than the Revised University Project. However, this altemative does not have the benefits of the proposed project, which will provide orderly residential and commercial development and provide additional acreage for the school site. Alternative Site to the Revised University Project An alternative site was not considered because the University/Crest Project is an approved and entitled project. The Revised University Project simply modifies the existing, entitled project; therefore, relocating the proposed project to another site is impossible. An alternative site would not accomplish the objectives of the proposed project that is to amend the original approved plan and was, therefore, rejected from further consideration. VI. PROJECT BEN~!~II'S The benefits from the approving the Development Agreement for the Revised University Project are related to the establishment of a residential and commercial planned development that will provide a new, high quality residential community within the City. The benefits of the Revised University Project will result in a well-designed urban type development that provides for some major backbone infrastructure that would not be made available to the community without this Project's development. The following benefits will occur as a result of project implementation: 1. Construction of Banyan/Summit Avenue westerly over Day Creek Channel to Rochester Avenue will provide an east/west corridor north of future SR 30. This will allow Hanson Aggregates, located west of Day Creek Channel, access south of Highland Avenue after the completion of SR- 30. This is also identified by the City as a major east-west corridor and an essential element in the City's traffic and circulation planning through the Development Agreement, the improvements to Banyan Street and Summit Avenue through to Rochester Avenue will conform to the City's standards. 2. Relocating planned commercial development near the future interchange of Day Creek Boulevard and future SR-30, which will provide amenities to travelers on SR-30 and to future residents noah of SR-30 and Highland Avenue. ' ' 3. Providing continuous, compatible development by integrating the former utility easement into the Revised University Project. 4. Providing a substitute off-site permanent conservation area to replace the prior off-site acreage, which is now unavailable for the University/Crest PD. 5. Implementation of the Revised University Project will provide additional housing, in addition to that approved in the University/Crest PD to meet housing demands in the City. The Project provides for a well-developed and adequate infrastructure, which complements existing and proposed development in the area, and is in substantial conformance with the City's approved Etiwanda Noah Specific Plan standards as well as the Day Creek Boulevard Master Plan. 6. Implementation of the Revised University Project will result in new sources of income to the area through new property taxes, and through the creation of new jobs, both short-term construction and long-term commercial and retail jobs. 7. The commercial component of the Project provides new job opportunities and provides shopping amenities closer to the housing components to reduce some of the vehicular trips of residents. 8. The joint use of the park and school site will benefit both the community and the school district. 9. The adoption of the Development Agreement makes certain substancial modification to the design and timing of construction of certain traffic improvements and substantially conforms development to the City's adopted plans. VII. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The City of Rancho Cucamonga adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the significant unavoidable impacts identified in the 1991 Final EIR, SEIR and Addendurn, specifically (1) traffic and circulation related to (a) off-site Development Plan roadway impacts, Co) levels of service along freeway segments on 1-10 and 1-15 in the peak direction, and (2) air quality related to (a) temporary increases in PM~0, NOx emissions from construction, (b) increased local and regional air pollutant emissions from future development, (c) contribution to increased CO concentrations at one intersection and (3) biological resources including project related cumulative impacts of loss of Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub and loss of open space of the project when combined with other projects in the vicinity. This section of findings specifically addresses the requirements of Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, which require the lead agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable significant impacts and to determine whether the impacts are acceptably overridden by the project benefits. The City finds that the previously stated major project benefits, see Section V and VI above, of the University Project, outweigh the unavoidable significant adverse environmental impacts noted above. Each of the separate benefits of the proposed development to be governed by the planned development cited in Section V above, is hereby determined to be, in itself and independent of the other project benefits, a basis for overriding all unavoidable environmental impacts identified in the 1991 Final EIR, SEIR, and Addendum and in these findings. The City's findings set forth in the preceding sections have identified all of the adverse environmental impacts and the feasible mitigation measurei which can reduce impacts to less than significant levels where feasible, or to the lowest feasible levels where significant impacts remain. The findings have also analyzed three alternatives to determine whether there are reasonable or feasible alternatives to the proposed action or whether they might reduce or eliminate the significant adverse impacts of the proposed Project. The 1991 Final EIR, SEIR and Addendnm present evidence that implementing the development of the Revised University Project will cause significant adverse impacts, which cannot be substantially mitigated to nonsignificant levels. These significant impacts have been outlined above and the City makes the following fmding: Finding: Having considered the unavoidable adverse impacts of the Revised University Project to construct the planned development, the City hereby determines that all feasible mitigation has been adopted to reduce or avoid the potentially significant impacts identified in the 1991 Final EIR, SEIR and Addendum, and that no additional feasible mitigation is available to further reduce significant impacts. Further, the City fmds that economic, social, and other considerations of the Revised University Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts described above. The reasons for accepting these remaining unmitigated impacts are described below. In making this finding, the City has balanced the benefits of the Revised University Project as developed in accordance to the Development Agreement against its unavoidable environmental impacts and has indicated its willingness to accept those risks. Furthermore, the City has considered the alternatives to the project, and makes the following finding: Finding: Feasible alternatives to the Revised University Project which are capable of reducing identified impacts have been considered and rejected because the alternatives offer a reduced level of benefit when compared to the Revised University Project. The City further finds that the Revised University Project's benefits are substantial and override each unavoidable impact of the project, as follows: 1) Findings Regarding Traffic and Circulation Impacts Offsite traffic circulation impacts resulting from Project-related traffic are significant, despite numerous modifications to the circulation system of the Revised University Project, and despite offsite traffic improvements to be constmuted by the project applicant and the project's contribution to fair share expenses of other off-site improvements. Implementation of the identified traffic mitigation measures cannot be ensured since future development projects will be required to make "fair share" conlxibution toward needed improvements, but that will not gaarantee that adequate funding will be available to construct the improvements at the time development occurs. The Revised University Project's impacts to freeway segments remain significant and unavoidable because there is no mechanism for individual projects to contribute financially to freeway mainline improvements. Operating levels at three intersections, as specifically analyzed in Chapter 4.4 of the Ell( and in the Traffic finpact Analysis, cannot be mitigated - Day Creek Boulevard at Highland Avenue, Etiwanda Avenue at Summit Avenue, Etiwanda Avenue at Highland Avenue. Operating levels at Milliken Avenue and Highland Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Avenue will require additional land improvements to maintain satisfactory operations. The applicant will provide funds on a fair-share basis for improvements to the roadway intersections; however, the City cannot ensure that adequate funding will be available to construct the improvements at the time development occurs. Since additional mitigation measures are technically and economically infeasible, this impact is overridden by the new housing and jobs provided by the Revised University Project. The Revised University Project will also contribute to deficiencies along the following freeway sections; SR-30 Eastbound - Euclid Avenue to 1-15 and Cherry Avenue to Bench Avenue; SR-30 Westbound - Beech Avenue to Cherry Avenue and I-15 to Euclid Avenue; 1-15 Noahbound - 1-10 Freeway to SR-30 Freeway; and 1-15 Southbound - SR-30 Freeway to 1-10 Freeway. Widening of the freeways to improve levels of service is not feasible mitigation, and there is no mechanism for a private project to contribute a pro rata fair share, which could likely be economically infeasible. Since additional mitigation measures are technically and economically infeasible, this impact is overridden by the new housing and jobs provided by the Revised University Project. 2) Findings Regarding Air Quafity Impacts Construction activities occurring in the Revised University Project area, including mass grading, will result in short-term increases in air emissions that exceed applicable thresholds of the SCAQMD, despite the imposition of mitigation measures. Short-term increases in air emissions from construction can be mitigated but are not entirely avoidable, as construction activities within this region will continue to provide necessary and vital housing. This impact is overridden by the new housing and jobs provided by the Revised University Project. The impacts from the Revised University Project on air quality will increase local and regional pollutants despite the imposition of several mitigation measures and implementation of Best Available Control Technology. Increases in local and regional pollutants are not entirely avoidable, as development activities within this region will continue to provide necessary and vital housing. This impact is also overridden by the new housing and jobs provided by the Project. The Revised University Project related traffic may contribute to increased CO concentrations at one intersection which already exceeds the State's threshold of significance. The EIR identified no feasible mitigation to control traffic flow at the impacted intersection, and it remains a significant and unavoidable impact. This impact is overridden by the new housing and jobs provided by the Revised University Project. 3) Findings Regarding Cumulative Impacts The Revised University Project will contribute to cumulative air quality impacts including short-term impacts to air quality during construction or other major projects in the area and on a long term basis as a source of vehicle emission from the Revised University Project and other projects in the region contributing to an increase in pollutants. Since the South Coast Air Basin is a nonattainment area for federal air quality standards, cumulative increases are considered significant and unavoidable. This impact is overridden by the new housing and jobs provided by the project. The Revised University Project will also contribute to the cumulative loss of mature and intermediate alluvial sage scrub on a regional basis. The conversion of alluvial fan sage scrub represents a significant addition to the ongoing loss of this regionally significant limited resource. The loss of open space will also contribute to the cumulative loss of open space in the Rancho Cucamonga area. These impacts are overridden by the Revised University Project benefits. While the prior proposed off-site conservation area was substantially larger, 675-aeres, no permanent funding was provided under the prior approval, and that land is now set aside as permanent conservation for a project built by the Metropolitan Water District. The undivided one-half interest in the 172-acre amenity site and the dedication of now proposed as a part of the Revised University Planned Development project provides for permanent conservation of land located within the North Etiwanda Open Sbai:e and Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP) area, consisting of a portion of alluvial fan draining into San Sevaine Canyon. This amenity site has the potential for endangered species or species of special concern, and if protected from encroachment, Riversidean sage scrub can be re-established to support a diverse habitat. The charmelization of Day Creek, near the project site, diminishes the biological value of the project site, which is no longer subject to flooding and natural regeneration. The long-term commitment to provide $100,000 of endowment funding for the amenity site represents a positive action towards preservation and conservation of regional open space. Additionally, the Project applicant has acquired another 135-acre parcel for permanent conservation including $150,000 of endowment funding. As the CEQA Responsible Agency for the 1991 Final EIR and SEIR and Lead Agency for the Addendum to the SEIR and Development Agreement, the City has reviewed the project description and the SEIR and fully understands the Project proposed by U.C.P. Inc. for its development in accordance with the Revised University Project. Further, the City finds that all potential adverse environmental impacts and all feasible mitigation measures to reduce these impacts have been identified in the SEIR and Addendum, the 1991 Final EIR end public testimony. These impacts and mitigation measures are discussed in Section VI above. The City also finds that a reasonable range of alternatives was considered in the SEIR and this document, Section VI above, and that no feasible alternatives which substantially lessen project impacts are available for adoption. The City has identified economic and social benefits and important public policy objectives, Section V above, which will result from implementing the Resied University Project through the Development Agreement. The City has balanced these substantial social and economic benefits against the unavoidable significant adverse effects of the proposed project. Given the substantial social and economic benefits that will accrue to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the region, from developing the Revised University Project undre the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement, the City finds that the benefits identified herein override the unavoidable environmental effects. California Public Resources Code 21002 provides: "In the event specific economic, social, and other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects can be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof." Section 21002.1 (c) provides: "In the event that economic, social, or other conditions make it infeasible to mitigate one or more significant effects of a project on the environment, the project may nonetheless be approved or carried out at the discretion of a public agency...." Finally, California Administrative Code, Title 14, 15093(a) states: "If the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered acceptable." VIII. ADOPTION OF A MONITORING/REpORTING PROGRAM FOR THE CEQA MITIGATION MEASURES Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires the City adopt a monitoring or reporting program regarding the changes in the project and mitigation measures imposed to lessen or avoid significant effects on the environment. The Mitigation Monitoring and Compliance Program, included as Chapter 5 in the Final SEIR, (MMCP) is adopted by the City as modified, because it fulfills the CEQA mitigation monitoring requirements: a) The MMCP is designed to ensure compliance with the changes in the project and mitigation measures imposed on the project during project implementation; and b) Measures to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment are fully enforceable through pemait conditions, agreements or other measures. LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 175 west Fifth Street, Second Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0490 · (909) 387-5866 · FAX (909) 387-5871 E-MAIL: lafco@ lafco.co.san-bernardino,ca.us PROPOSAL NO.: LAFCO 2864 HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 RESOLUTION NO. 2686 A RESOLUTION OF THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO MAKING DETERMINATION ON LAFCO 2864 AND APPROVING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANNEXATION NO. 00-01 (RANCHO ETIWANDA). The annexation area comprises approximately 500 acres and is generally located within portions of Sections 20, 29 and 30, Township 1 North, Range 6 West, San Bernardino Meridian. The annexation area generally lies north of Highland Avenue (existing City of Rancho Cucamonga boundary), east of a combination of Day Creek Channel and existing City of Rancho Cucamonga boundaries, south of the natural extension of 25'h Street, and west of existing City of Rancho Cucamonga boundaries. The annexation area lies in the northern sphere of influence of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. On motion of Commissioner MikeIs, duly seconded by Commissioner Hansberger, and carried, the Local Agency Formation Commission adopts the following resolution: WHEREAS, an application for the proposed annexation in the County of San Bernardino was heretofore filed with the Executive Officer of this Local Agency Formation Commission in accordance with the Cortese/Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985 (Government Code Sections 56000 et seq.), and said Executive Officer has examined said application and executed his certificate in accordance with law, determining and certifying that said filings are sufficient; and, WHEREAS, at the times and in the form and manner provided by law, said Executive Officer has given notice of public hearing by this Commission upon said application; and, WHEREAS, said Executive Officer has reviewed available information and prepared a report including his recommendations thereon, said filings and report and related information having been presented to and considered by this Commission; and, WHEREAS, the public hearing by this Commission was held upon the date and at the time and place specified in said notice of public hearing and in order or orders continuing such hearing; and, WHEREAS, at such hearing, this Commission heard and received all oral and written protests; the Commission considered all plans and proposed changes of organization, objections and evidence which were made, presented, or filed; it received evidence as to whether the territory is inhabited or uninhabited, improved or unimproved; and all persons present were given an opportunity to hear and be heard in respect to any matter relating to said application, in evidence presented at the hearing; RESOLUTION NO. 2686 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Local Agency Formation Commission of the County of San Bernardino does hereby determine, resolve, order, and find as follows: DETERMINATIONS: SECTION 1. The Executive Officer is hereby authorized and directed to mail certified copies of this resolution in the manner provided by Section 56853 of the Government Code. SECTION 2. The proposal is approved subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter specified: CONDITIONS: Condition No. 1. The conducting authority for this proceeding shall be the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Condition No. 2. The conducting authority shall provide notice of its hearing pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 57025. Condition No. 3. The boundaries are approved as set forth in Exhibits "A" and "A-I" attached. Condition No. 4. The following distinctive short-form designation shall be used throughout this proceeding: LAFCO 2864. Condition No. 5. All previously authorized charges, fees, assessments, and/or taxes currently in effect by the City of Rancho Cucamonga (annexing agency) shall be assumed by the annexing territory in the same manner as provided in the original authorization pursuant to Government Code Section 56844(0. Condition No. 6. The City ofRancho Cucamonga shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission from any legal expense, legal action, or judgment arising out of the Commission's approval of this proposal, including any reimbursement of legal fees and costs incurred by the Commission. Condition No. 7. The date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion shall be the effective date of this annexation. SECTION 3. The conducting authority is hereby directed to initiate appropriate proceedings in compliance with this resolution and State law (Government Code Sections 57000 through 57053). SECTION 4. The conducting authority shall not make any changes in the boundaries hereby approved nor shall it impose any new conditions or modify any conditions hereby imposed unless and until it receives the approval of the Local Agency Formation Commission for such changes, modifications, or conditions, pursuant to the procedures prescribed in Section 56857 of the Government Code. SECTION 5. Upon completion of its proceedings, the conducting authority is directed to adopt its own resolution setting forth its action relating to the proposal considered and forward the required number of certified copies of the resolution to the Local Agency Formation Commission (Government Code Sections 57075 through 57179). SECTION 6. Upon receipt of the resolution of the conducting authority approving said action, the Certificate of Completion shall be prepared and filed. RESOLUTION NO. 2686 SECTION 7. Approval by the Local Agency Formation Commission indicates approval of this proposal by the conducting authority would accomplish the proposed change of organization in a reasonable n~anner with a maximum chance of success and a minimum disruption of service to the functions of other local agencies in the area. SECTION 8. FINDINGS. The following findings are noted in conformance with Commission policy: 1. The subject 500+/- acre annexation area is legally uninhabited, as certified by the County Registrar of Voters office. The area is within the sphere of influence of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 2. The County Assessor has determined that the assessed value of land and improvements for privately- owned parcels within the annexation area is $5,062,857. Because of the significant amount of exempt properties within the annexation area, the Assessor was requested to assign values to parcels owned by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, the Edison Company, the Cucamonga County Water District, CALTRANS, the Metropolitan Water District, the Cucamonga Public Facilities Corporation, and the Etiwanda School District. Together, those properties have been valued at $5,033,700. Thus, the total assessed value of the annexation area for protest purposes at the conducting authority level is $10,096,557. 3. Notice of this hearing has been advertised as required by law through publication in The Sun and the Daily Bulletin, newspapers of general circulation in the area. 4. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has pre-zoned the annexation area for low density residential uses (L), Neighborhood Commercial (NC), General Commercial (GC), Utility Corridor (UC), and Flood Control/Riparian (FC). These designations conform with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 5. The Commission's Environmental Consultant independently prepared an Initial Study for the Commission's use as a CEQA responsible agency to determine that no significant changes or new significant impacts have occurred since the preparation and adoption of the following documents which address the environmental impacts from developing the 500+/- acre annexation area in accordance with General Plan designations. Prepared by the County of San Bernardino: Final Environmental Impact Report, University/Crest Project PUD No. W121-49, August, 1989 (State Clearinghouse #88082915); Addendure to Final Environmental Impact Report, University/Crest Project PUD No. W 121-49, May, 1991 (State Clearinghouse #88082915); Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, Revised University Project, April, 1999 (State Clearinghouse #98121091 ); and Final Supplemental Environmental lmpact Report, Revised University Project, July, 1999 (State Clearinghouse #98121091 ); Prepared by the Etiwanda School District: Negative Declaration, Acquisition of Future School Site, October, 1997; and Negative Declaration, Construction of Intermediate School, June, 2000; Prepared by the City ofRancho Cucamonga: Etiwanda North Specific Plan, April, 1992; Draft Environmental Impact Report, Etiwanda North Specific Plan, May, 1991 (State Clearinghouse #89012314); Program Environmental Impact Report Pan II, Etiwanda North Specific Plan, April, 1992 (State Clearinghouse # 89012314); and Initial Study/Addendum, Revised University Project, Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, June, 2000; 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2686 Copies of the applicable environmental review documents have been previously provided to the Commission. The Commission certifies it has reviewed and considered the Initial Study prepared by its Environmental Consultant, the County and City' s Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs), as listed above, and the effects outlined therein, the Etiwanda School District's Negative Declarations and environmental effects as outlined in the Initial Studies, which indicate that approval of the acquisition/development of the school site will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, and the City's Initial Study/Addendum, and finds that they are adequate for its use as a CEQA responsible agency. The Commission further finds that it does not intend to adopt alternatives or mitigation measures for this project. The Commission hereby acknowledges the mitigation measures and mitigation monitoring plans contained in the County and City's EIRs and finds that no additional feasible alternatives or mitigation measures have been identified. The Commission finds that all changes, alterations, and mitigation measures are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City and other agencies, not the Commission. The Commission finds that it is the responsibility of the City and the Etiwanda School District to oversee and implement these measures and the mitigation monitoring plans. The Commission hereby adopts the Candidate Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the environmental effects of the annexation, a copy of which is available for review in the office of the LAFCO Clerk. The Commission finds that all feasible changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project; that these changes are the responsibility of the City and other agencies identified in the Candidate Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations a.nd the EIRs; and that specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible adoption of the alternatives identified in the EIRs. The Commission, as a responsible agency, notes that this proposal is exempt from Department of Fish and Game fees because the filing fee was the responsibility of the City, as the lead agency. The Commission directs its Clerk to file a Notice of Determination within five (5) working days with the San Bernardino County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors 6. The local agencies currently serving the area are: County of San Bernardino, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Inland Empire West Resource Conservation District, Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA), IEUA Mid-Valley area and Improvement District C, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (City subsidiary), Cueamonga County Water District (CCWD), CCNVD Improvement Districts 3, 5, 6, and 1963-1, County Service Area 70 (Countywide), and County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone OS-1 (open space). County Service Area 70 and County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone OS-1 will be detached from the annexation area upon successful completion of the annexation pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 25210.90. None of the other agencies will be affected by this proposal. 7. The City ofRancho Cucamonga has submitted a plan for the provision of its municipal services which indicates that the City can maintain and/or improve the level and range of services that are currently available to the area to be annexed. The Plan for Services has been reviewed and compared with the standards established by the Commission. The Commission finds that such Plan conforms with those adopted standards. 8. The annexation area can benefit from the extension of services, as evidenced by the Plan for Services. RESOLUTION NO. 2686 9. This proposal and its anticipated effects conform with State law and adopted Commission policies. 10. All notices have been provided as required by law. Individual notification was provided to affected and interested agencies, County departments, and those individuals wishing mailed notice. In conformance with the Commission's adopted policy for landowner notification individual notice was mailed to each landowner in the annexation area. No protest has been received. 11. The City and County have negotiated the transfer ofad valorem taxes as required by State law. Copies of the resolutions adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors are on file in the LAFCO office outlining the exchange of revenues. 12. The map and legal description, as revised, meet State standards as determined by the County Surveyor's office. THIS ACTION APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Local Agency Formation Commission of the Connty of San Bernardino by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Eshleman, Itansberger, MikeIs, Pearson, Roemer, Smith, Williams NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Bagley (Eshleman voting in his stead) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) I, JAMES M. RODDY, Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission of the County of San Bernardino, California, do hereby certify this record to be a full, true, and correct copy of the action taken by said Commission by vote of the members present as the same appears in the Official Minutes of said Commission at its regular meeting of September 20, 2000. RESOLUTION NO. O ~) "' Z Z I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANGHO CUGAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ANNEXATION 00-01 (LAFCO 2864) AND ORDERING TERRITORY ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. A. Recitals. 1. Pursuant to the Cortese/Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985 (Government Code Section 56000), the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the "City") is conducting annexation proceedings to consider the proposed annexation of territory described in Exhibits "A" and "A-1" attached hereto and expressly incorporated herein and made a part of this resolution by this reference. 2. On September 20, 2000, the Local Agency Formation Commission of the County of San Bernardino reviewed the proposed annexation and adopted Resolution No. 2686 making certain determinations regarding the above-described annexation, approving the annexation, and authorizing the City to order the same. 3. On October 18, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed annexation application. 4. The territory described in Exhibits "A" and "A-l" (the "Territory") is located within and consistent with the established sphere of influence of the City and is contiguous with current City limits. 5. The annexation of the Territory represents a logical extension of the City's boundaries and urban services. 6. The Board of Supervisors of the County (the "Board") previously certified an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the University/Crest Development Project (the "Original University Project") in 1991 (SCH #88082915). The Original University Project was never constructed. Subsequent to the 1991 approval, a portion of the Original University Project was purchased, and in 1998 the new owners made application to the Board for approval of the Revised University Project (the "Revised University Project"), severing the University portion from the Crest portion of the Original University Project. The Board was presented with the Revised University Project and certified a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report CSEIR") on October 26, 1999 (SCH #98121091 ). In its Statement of Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, dated October 26, 1999, the Board found that the SEIR had been prepared to evaluate the potential environmental effects that would result from the development of the proposed modifications to the Revised University Project in accordance with the requirements of both the Califomia Environmental Quality Act, as amended, CCEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines (the "Guidelines"). No judicial determination to the contrary has been issued. 7. The Revised University Project will be located within a portion of the Territory being annexed and represents the maximum development density permitted under the zoning that the City proposes for the Territory. As a responsible agency under CEQA, the City reviewed the SEIR for the Revised University Project and determined that certain design, construction timing, circulation issues, and zoning concerns created by the development of the Revised University Project were not adequately addressed in the SEIR. The City prepared an addendum to the SEIR (the "Addendum"), pursuant to Sections 15096 and 15164 of the Guidelines, to more thoroughly analyze these concerns. On August 16, 2000, the City adopted Resolution No. 00-161 certifying that the City independently considered the environmental effects of the Project as shown in the EIR, the SEIR, CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. ANNEXATION 00-01 October 18, 2000 Page 2 and the addendure. In its Statement of Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, dated October 26, 1999, the City Council found that the EIR, the SEIR, and the addendure had been prepared to evaluate the potential environmental effects that would result from the development of the proposed modifications to the Revised University Project in accordance with the requirements of both the Califomia Environmental Quality Act, as amended, ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines (the "Guidelines"). The City's Statement of Overriding Considerations further found that the benefits of the Revised University Project outweighed the unavoidable adverse environmental effects of the project. No judicial determination to the contrary has been issued. 8. In October of 1997, the Etiwanda School District (the "School District") adopted a Negative Declaration in conjunction with the acquisition of a future school site within a portion of the Territory being annexed (the "Intermediate School Property"). 9 In June of 2000, the Etiwanda School District (the "School District") adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration in conjunction with its review and approval of plans to construct an Elementary School within a portion of the Territory being annexed (the "Elementary School Project"). 10. The City Council of the City previously certified an EIR for the Etiwanda North Specific Plan ("ENSP") in 1992 (SCH #89012314). The ENSP is a comprehensive plan to guide the development of over 6400 acres of land, including the 500 acres comprising the Territory. The ENSP EIR analyzed the potential environmental effects that would result from the development of the Territory in conformance with the ENSP and determined that with the mitigation measures proposed the impacts on the environment would be less than significant. 11. The City Council has determined annexation of the Territory is consistent with the ENSP. The City Council has further determined that the Revised University Project and the School Project are both consistent with the zoning proposed for the annexed Territory. 12. The City Council has determined that the annexation of the Territory to the City would be beneficial to the public purposes of the City, in that the properties will provide for the development in a manner consistent with the City's General Plan and with related development. 13. Regular County assessment roles are to be used for tax purposes. 14. The subject 504+/- acre-property is legally uninhabited. 15. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this resolution have occurred. 16. The affected territory will be taxed for existing general bonded indebtedness and contractual obligations of the City. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the recitals, part A, of this resolution are true and correct. 2. The terms and conditions of the annexation as approved by the Local Agency Fort'nation Commission are as follows: CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. ANNEXATION 00-01 October 18, 2000 Page 3 Condition No. I The conducting authority for this proceeding shall be the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Condition No. 2 The conducting authority shall provide notice of its hearing pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 57025. Condition No. 3 The boundaries are approved as set forth in Exhibits "A" and "A-1" attached. Condition No. 4 The following distinctive short-form designation shall be used throughout this proceeding: LAFCO 2864. Condition No. 5 All previously authorized charges, fees, assessments, and/or taxes currently in effect by the City of Rancho Cucamonga (annexing agency) shall be assumed by the annexing territory in the same manner as provided in the original authorization pursuant to Government Code Section 56844(t). Condition No. 6 The City of Rancho Cucamonga shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission from any legal expense, legal action, or judgment arising out of the Commission's approval of this proposal, including any reimbursement of legal fees and costs incurred by the Commission. Condition No. 7 The date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion shall be the effective date of this annexation. 3. This Council finds and determines that the value of written protests filed and not withdrawn is less than 50% of the total assessed value of the land within the affected territory. 4. The City Council has reviewed and considered the environmental documents described in Recitals 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 (collectively the "previous environmental documents"). The City Council hereby makes the following findings in regard to the environmental documents: a. The City, as the lead agency under CEQA for the annexation of the Territory, has reviewed the previous environmental documents prepared in conjunction with the previous projects to analyze the potential environmental effects of the annexation. b. The City's decision to rely on the previous environmental documents in connection with the annexation is explained and supported by substantial evidence in the Initial Study/addendum attached hereto as Attachment I and incorporated herein bythisreference. TheCityCouncilexpresslyfindsthatthepreviousenvironmental documents adequately analyzed the potential environmental effects relevant to the proposed annexation and the previously identified significant environmental impacts. The City Council further finds that the mitigation measures set forth in the previous environmental documents are adequate to address the effects the annexation will have on the environment and will ensure that the annexation will result in a less than significant impact on the environment. c. The City Council expressly finds that the annexation is consistent with the projects reviewed in the previous environmental documents and does not create different or additional environmental effects beyond the impacts previously identified. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. ANNEXATION 00-01 October 18, 2000 Page 4 d. The previous environmental documents have been completed and reviewed in full compliance with CEQA. e. The previous environmental documents collectively reflect the City Council's independent judgment and analysis. 5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in this Resolution, this Council hereby resolves that the territory described in Exhibits "A" and "A-1" is annexed, and directs the City Clerk to transmit a certified copy of this resolution with applicable fees required by Section 54902.5 of the Government Code to the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission of the County of San Bernardino. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 18th day of October 2000. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk THE CITY OF I~ANCIlO CUCAI',IONGA Stuff Report DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Douglas Fenn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-01 - JPI - A request to add multi-family residential as a permitted use in the Mixed Use Planning Area IX of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, located on the northwest comer of 6th Street and Milliken Avenue. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified in June 1994. An addendure to the EIR has been prepared to allow multiple-family residential uses as an additional permitted use in Planning Area IX. The addendure us being prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) - APN: 290-272-17. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The Planning Commission held Pre-Application Review workshops on September 29 and December 8, 1999, regarding conceptual development plans for an apartment complex. The amendment to the Subarea 18 Specific Plan is necessary to create development standards for residential product and to add multi-family residential (High-Residential Density up to 30 dwelling units per acre) as a permitted use in the Mixed Use Planning Area IX. JPI Westcoast Development, is interested in developing a 521 multi-family residential unit project. The project, Development Review 00-31, was approved by the Planning Commission on August 23, 2000, contingent upon approval of the proposed Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment to allow multi-family residential use. Therefore, on September 13, 2000, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendment. Copies of the Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes of the September 13, 2000, meeting are attached. FACTS FOR FINDING The proposed amendment is consistent with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the General Plan. Additionally, the proposed housing units will enable Empire Lakes Center to capitalize on the location of the Metrolink Station, encourage a jobs-housing balance, and help create an urban village feeling that will catalyze the development of other existing vacant industrial and commercial areas. Moreover, the Amendment will conform the IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan to the Rancho Cucemonga General Plan, which permits residential uses in the Mixed Use land use designation. CITY COUNCIL IASP 00-01 - JPI October 18, 2000 Page 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT An Environmental Impact Report (EIR)was prepared and certified as a Master EIR for Subarea 18 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan in 1994. The California Environmental Quality Act (CFQA) provides that once a Master EIR has been certified, no further EIR or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects within the scope of the Master FiR. An Addendure was prepared to address the issue of residential development. In short, the proposed residential development will have less environmental impact than other mixed uses, such as industrial, office, or retail. The Amendment to the Subarea 18 Specific Plan has been prepared in conjunction with an Addendum to the previously certified Rancho Cucamonga Subarea 18 Specific Plan Final EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 93102055). TheAddendum identified nosubstantial changes intheprojectthat require major revisions to the previous EIR. TheappropdatefindingsoftheAddendumareincluded in the attached Ordinance of Approval. CORRESPONDENCE This item was advertised as a public headng in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site. Staff has also included a package of 11 letters from vadous businesses, which support the amendment and the residential development project (attached with Planning Commission Staff Report). Additionally, staff received a letter from the Chaffey Joint Union High School District, stating that the project will generate approximately 104 high school students and that fees will be collected. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:DF\Is Attachments: Fxhibit "A" - Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 13, 2000 Exhibit "B" - Planning Commission Minutes, September 13, 2000 Planning Commission Resolution No. 00-93 Ordinance approving Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment THE CITY OF ~ANCIIO CUCAMONGA Staff Report DATE: September 13, 2000 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Douglas Fenn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTAND SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PL~ N AMENDMENT 00-01 - JPI - A request to add multi-family residential as a permitted use in the Mixed Use Planning Area IX of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, located on the northwest comer of 6th Street and Milliken Avenue. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified in June 1994. An addendum to the EIR is being prepared to allow multiple-family residential uses as an additional permitted use in Planning Area IX. The addendum is being prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) -APN: 290-272-17 BACKGROUND: Two Pre-Application Review workshops were held by the Planning Commission on September 29, and December 8, 1999. The Commission reviewed conceptual plans of the proposed project. The applicant was informed that the Empire Lakes Specific Plan does not address development standards for residential uses; therefore, an amendment is required. The amendment to the Subarea 18 Specific Plan is toadd multi-family residential (High-Residential Density up to 30 dwelling units acre) as a permitted use in the Mixed Use Planning Area IX. This issue is in response to a request by the applicant, JPI Westcoast Development, who is interested in developing a 521 multi-family residential unit project. The project, Development Review 00-31, was approved by the Planning Commission on August 23, 2000, contingent upon approval of the proposed Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment to allow multi-family residential land use. The High-Residential Density is defined as follows: H{qh-Residential Density: This district is intended as an area for high density multiple-family use, with site development regulations that assure development compatible with adjacent uses. Residential densities are up to 30 dwelling units per gross acre. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ISPA 00-01 - JPI September 13, 2000 Page 2 ANALYSIS: The Industrial Area Specific Plan establishes a comprehensive plan for the development of the industrial area. The Specific Plan is divided into Subareas based upon five major land use categories, which range in intensity from lightest to heaviest as follows: Industrial Park, General Industrial, Mixed Use, Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial, and Heavy Industrial. Each Subarea has distinct land use regulation and development standards. Subarea 18 is unique because it has its own Specific Plan consisting of 11 interrelated Planning Areas organized around the Empire Lakes Golf Course. The uses that are permitted in Planning Area IX, are research and development/light industrial/business park type development; office/commercial; and restaurant- related uses. The proposal to add multi-family residential would add another land use. The proposed multi-family land use will be in concert with the concept of mixed-use. It would also allow for the accessibility of housing units that will be adjacent and/or withinclose proximity to existing industrial jobs in the area.. Additionally, as other existing vacant industrial areas are developed, the proposed housing units will be conveniently located. There are no development standards in the Subarea 18 Specific Plan for residential development. Therefore, the applicant also proposes a number of new standards as shown in Exhibit "A." The building setback along 6th Street is reduced from 45 feet to 44 feet. The parking setback along 6th Street for multiple-family residential uses in Planning Area IX is reduced from 25 feet to 19 feet (see Exhibit "A," Table 5-7, page 15). This setback is consistent with the "urban streetscape" concept presented to the Planning Commission at the second Pre-Application Review workshop in December 1999. Additionally, the standards for Major Arterial Divided (impacts Milliken Avenue, and 6th Street) are requested to be slightly modified to allow linear sidewalk and urban scale landscaping without undulating berming, which is also consistent with the "urban streetscape" concept. The applicant proposes on-site recreational and site amenities which is similar to the Development Code "recreation area/facility" list. These minor changes would only be effective for Planning Area IX (Figure 5-2). ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified as a Master EIR for Subarea 18 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan in 1994. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides that once a Master EIR has been certified, no further EIR or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects within the scope of the Master EIR. An Addendum was prepared to address the issue of residential development. In short, the proposed residential development will have less environmental impact than other mixed uses, such as industrial, office, or retail. The amendment to the Subarea 18 Specific Plan has been prepared in conjunction with an Addendum to the previously certified Rancho Cucamonga Subarea 18 Specific Plan final EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 93102055). The Addendum identified that there are no substantial changes in the project that require major revisions to the previous EIR. The appropriate findings of the Addendure are included in the attached Resolution of Approval. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in theInland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were sent to adjacent property owners within 300 feet of the project site. Staff has also included a package of 11 letters from various businesses, which support the amendment and the residential development project (Exhibit "C"). Additionally, staff has also received a letter from the Chaffey Joint Union High School district stating that the project will generate approximately 104 high school students and that development fees will be collected (Exhibit "D"). PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ISPA 00-01 - JPI September 13, 2000 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment 00-01 to the City Council through the adoption of the attached Resolution. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:DFmlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Planning Area IX Specific Plan Amendment. Exhibit "B" - Project Location Map Exhibit "C" - Letters of Support from Business Exhibit "D" - Letter from Chaffey Joint Union High School District Resolution Recommending Approval RANCHO CUCAMONGA IASP SUB-AREA 18 PLANNING AREA IX SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT Prepared for: JPI Westcoast Development, L.P. 8910 University Center Lane, Suite 150 San Diego, California 92122 Prepared by: BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 September 1, 2000 RANCHO CUCAMONGA IASP SUB-AREA 18 PLANNING AREA IX SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT Prepared for: JPI Westcoast Development, L.P. 8910 University Center Lane, Suite 150 San Diego, California 92122 Prepared by: BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 September 1, 2000 /el Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No. 1. Introduction ............................................................. 1 1,1 Purpose and Objectives .............................................. 1 2. Project Descdption ....................................................... 2 2.1 Regional and Local Setting ........................................... 2 2.2 Amendments to IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan .......................... 2 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment IASP SUB-AREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN PLANNING AREA IX AMENDMENT 1. INTRODUCTION This proposed amendment to the adopted Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) would amend the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan for Planning Area IX would allow for development of this planning area with residential development, as well as the previously approved office, industrial, and commercial land uses. The amendment to the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with California State requirements and City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements for Specific Plans. California law requires that a Specific Plan specify the type, location, intensity, and timing of development and ensures the systematic implementation of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The amendment to the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan has been prepared in conjunction with an Addendum to the previously certified Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area Specific Plan final EIR. (SCH No. 93102055). The Addendum and Specific Plan provide for the needed development regulations and environmental documentation for Planning Area IX so that project-related subdivisions, site plans, grading permits, and/or discretionary approvals may proceed without new environmental documentation, absent significant changes in development conditions or proposals. 1.1 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of Planning Area IX is to provide for a flexible mix of uses, including office, light industrial, retail, and residential uses. Planning Area IX proposes uses that are permitted under the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan land use designation of Mixed Use. Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Planning Area IX is a 20.5-acre site with proposed uses such as research and development/light industrial/business park; office/commercial; restaurant-related; and residential uses. 2.1 REGIONAL AND LOCAL SETTING Planning Area IX is located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga in San Bemardino County. The planning area is bounded by Seventh Street to the north, Sixth Street to the south, Milliken Avenue to the east, and the Empire Lakes Golf Course to the west. 2.2 AMENDMENTS TO IASP SUB-AREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN The following amendments are applicable to the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan to allow multiple- family residential development as an additional permitted use within Planning Area IX. General Notes A. As set forth herein, all references to Planning Area IX shall be deemed to include multiple- family residences as a permitted use. B. The following land use category is hereby incorporated into the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan: Residential Use-This category allows for high-density residential development in Planning Area IX ofthe IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan. High-density residential development shall be subject to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code for high-density residential uses, unless as othenNise noted in the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan. C. The following land use table, Table A, is applicable to Planning Area IX. D. ~n instances in which the Devel~pment Guide~ines are inc~nsistent with the imp~ementati~n ~f an "urban' development theme for Planning Area IX, minor departures from the Design Guidelines (because of changes in the marketplace, demand for different amenities and new technology) are acceptable subject to the approval of the Planning Director. E. In the event of acon~ict between this Specific Plan, as amended, and the Development Code, this Specific Plan, as amended, shall govern. ~:~P~i~:~uP~uoo~ ~ P~-~90~eo.w~ 2 Project Desc~pt/on Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE A SUMMARY OF LAND USE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM This table is conceptual to illustrate and summarize the maximum development potential of the project. Types of Uses LU o e *,Be 'o ~ S u.. ~ · 'o :~ -- FAR c~ c~ '~ · E O c '1~ Maximum (Floor ~ ~ ~ m ~= ~ u. Developman~ Area Planning ~> 8 '~ ~ i .~_o.iPotentiallsf Ratio) ~ _ _ ordwelling or Planning Area Size ~ '~ ~ ~ IF_ x ~s · 3 Parcel/Facility Area (Acres) ¢~ -- n, n- 'r O ~ n- i~ ~ units) du/ac Existing Fadlities · Building600 V~ 27 O e O e O e · 308,000~ 0.25e · Building601 IV~ 17 · · · · e i 242,000; 0.35~ · Building602 II 28 · · · el 8 · · · 425,000 0.35e Subtotal 72 975,000 0.31 Goff Course (including clubhouse and rnaintenancefadlity) I 151 · · · · 8 60,000 0.01 Goff Practice Facility lIP 22 15,0004 0.0ls (lighted) · · · · O O · · Subtotal 173 75,000 0.01 Commercial/Industrial VI 23 · · · e · · · 425,000 0.35e Parcels VII 24 · · · e · · · 730,000 0.709 VIII 23 · · · · 320,000 0.35 IX 21 · · · · 290,000 0.35 X 24 · · · · ,· · 200,000 0.20s XI 18 · · · 275,000 0.35 Subtotal 133 2,240,000 0.39 Multiple Family up to 615 du 24-30 Residential IX 20.5 · dtdac Subtotal 173 615 du or 24-30 commercial/ du/ac industrial Total 378e 3,000,000 sf 0.56 P~c~ectsupru00~ Spedtic Pl&-,aS0~OO.wpd 3 Project Descnpt/on Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub*Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE A (continued) SUMMARY OF LAND USE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Types of Uses 'c: c: =o._o *- o ~ ,. -- FAR r,' n, ~ x u_ Development Area Planning ~ ~ .~ ~ :~ ~. Potential(sf Ratio) .. ! u e Q -- ~ or dwelling or Planning Area Size ~ ~ :~ ~ '~ ~ x ~ e ParceUFacility Area (Acres) O ' ~ n, -r ,O ~ r,-;~ ~ units) dulac and 30 du; or 3,290,000 1. Ultimately demolished and redeveloped as mixed-use commercial: 440,000 sf. 2. Could be intensified with parking deck and +10,000 sf addition of retail/restaurant/fast food. 3. Existing facility could be adaptively re-used or redeveloped as a family recreation/entertainment Center or mixed-use commercial. 4. Could be redeveloped ultimately to mixed-use commerciah 290,000 sf. 5. Alternative hotel and conferenCe center site. 6. Includes 5 acres for vacated portion Of Cleveland Ave. 7. Ultimately could be 3,707,000 sfwith overall FAR: 0.23. 8. FAR: 035 for 13 acre area excluding the Metrolink parCel (10 acres). 9. Where a hotel is developed. the maximum allowable FAR for the Planning Area can increase to FAR 0.70. Section 4: Development Framework The following revisions are hereby incorporated into page 4-9 of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan: Planning Area IX: Office/Industrial/Commercial/Residential Planning Area IX is located at the northwest comer of Sixth Street and Milliken Avenue. This Planning Area enjoys pdme arterial road frontage, golf course frontage, and proximity to the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station. Possible uses proposed include office, research and development, light industrial uses, retail, and/or multiple-family residential. Residential development on this planning area would complement the mix of uses within Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan area. Section 5: Development Guidelines and Standards 1. Revisions to Table 5-1 commencing on page 5-3 are hereby incorporated into the IASP Sub- Area 18 Specific Plan. R:~o~gc~sUI>IU00~ Specisc PLv,090100.wp<l 4 Project Descfipt/on Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE 5-1 SUMMARY OF LAND USE TYPE BY PLANNING AREA MANUFACTURING Light p p p p p p p Medium p p p p p WHOLESALE/STORAGE/DISTRIBUTION Public Storage (indoor) C Light p p p p p p p p Medium P P C C MATERIALS RECOVERY Collection Facilities RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT (R&D) Research & Development (R&D) OFFICE Office CIVIC Cultural Public Assembly p p p p p p p p Public Buildings (library, post office, etc.) P p p p p p p p Public Safety &Utility Sewices C C C C C C C C Religious Assembly C C C C C C C C PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC USES Ciobs/I.odges (Private and Public) C C C C C C C C C C C Convalescent Facilities/Hospital C C C C C C C C C Educational Institutions (Private and Public) C C C C C C C C C C Transportation Facilltios p RECREATION Goff Pmcticerl'raining Facility p p p Recreational Facilities (indoor/outdoor) P P P P P 'P P P C P C ENTERTAINMENT Arcades Entertainment Facilitjes (1) Family Entertainment Center (1) R:M~e~ISUpr, JO01 S~oedfic Plan-~90100.wpd 5 ROje(~ Desclfpt/on Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE 5-1 (continued) SUMMARY OF LAND USE TYPE BY PLANNING AREA EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS Eating and Drinking Establishments (1) P p p p p p p p p p p Restaurant-Fast Food {including Drive-thru) C C C C C C C C C C Sports Bar (1) p p p p p p TRANSIENT ACCOMMODATIONS/CONFERENCE CENTER Hotel/Motel p p p p p p C~nference Center p p p p p p p Corporate Training Center p p p p p p MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL PERSONAL/BUSINESS SERVICES Business Support Services p p p p p p p p p p Funeral & Cremato~ Services C C C C C C C C C C Personal Services p p p p p p p p p p Repair Services p p p p p p p p p p AUTOMOBILE/VEHICLE SERVICES AUtomotive Rental/Leasing p p p p p p AUtomotive Service Coutl C C C C AUtomotive Service Station C C C C C C C Specialty AutosMotorcycle Sales/Service C C C C C C C C RETAIL-BUSINESS SUPPLYISERVICEB RETAIL/CONVENIENCE RELATED RETAIL-FOOD & BEVERAGE RELATED RETAIL-GENERAL Retai~--Genersl (2} P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) ! P(2) Kiosk i~ Panking Lots p p p p p RETAIL-HOME IMPROVEMENT RELATSD Building/Lighting Equipment Supplies & Sales P(2) I P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) Fumiture/Home Furnishings/Antiques P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) H~ma App~iaaceJEtsctronics P(2~ P~2) P(2~ P(2) P(2~ P(2~ GENERAL COMMERCIAL P,:~,~sos~JPl,~oo~ sp~yr~ P~-OgO~OO.w~d 6 Project Descdption Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE 5-1 (continued) SUMMARY OF LAND USE TYPE BY PLANNING AREA Communications Services p p p p p p p p p p Parking (commercial) p p RESIDENTIAL KEY: P = Permitted Uses C = Conditionally Permitted Use Blank Box = N~t Permitted Use (1) Where live entertainment is present, such uses are subject to a city entertainment permit. (2) Permitted as part of a mixed use cornmerdal or retait canter. Section 5: Development Guidelines and Standards (continued) 2. The following text will be inserted into Table 5-2; revisions to the table commencing on page 5-6 are hereby incorporated into the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan as follows: RESIDENTIAL USES High-Residential Density This distdct is intended as an area for high-density multiple-family use, with site development regulations that assure development compatible with adjacent uses. Residential densities are up to 30 dwelling units per gross acre.' R:~qec~UPPJ001 Specmc Pim-Og0100.wpd 7 Project Description Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 SpeciFic Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE 5-2 LAND USE TYPE DEFINITIONS MANUFACTURING Custom Manufacturing Activities typically include, but are not limited to: and athletic goods. The activities do not produce manufacturing, processing, assembling, odors, noise, vibration, hazardous waste packaging, treatment, or fabdcation of Custom materials, or particulates which would adversely made products. These types of business affect other uses in the structure or on the same establishments do not use raw materials for their site. Where 24 hour onsite surveillance is finished products, but rather may utilize "semi- necessary, a caretakers residence may be finished 'type of manufactured materials for their permitted when approved by a Conditional Use Custom made-to-order products. The finished Permit. products from these business establishment are ready for use or consumption and may include Medium Manufacturing onsite wholesale and retail of the goods produced. Such uses may include, but are not Activities typically include, but are not limited to: limited to: jewelry; household furniture; art manufacturing, compounding of materials, objects; apparel products; small instruments processing, assembly, packaging, treatment, or (musical, electrical or photographic); stationary, fabrication of materials and products which and related products: signs and advertising require frequent large container truck traffic or rail displays; stained glass products; leather products; traffic, or the transport of heavy, bulky items. The and assembly of bicycle parts. The uses do not new products are semi-finished to be a produce odors, noise, vibration, or particulates component for further manufacturing, fabrication which would adversely affect uses in the same and assembly. These types of business structure or on a same site. Where 24 hour establishments are customarily directed to inter- onsite surveillance is necessary, a caretaker plant transfer, or to order from industrial uses, residence may be permitted when approved by a rather than for direct sale to the domestic Conditional Use Permit. consumer. Such uses may include, but are not limited to: canned food; textile products; furniture Light Manufacturing and fixtures, converted paper and paper beard products; plastic products made from purchased Activities typically include, but are not limited to: rubber, plastic or resin; fabricated metal products labor intensive manufacturing, assembly, made from sheet metals; electrical and electronic fabrication or repair processes which do not machinery, equipments and supplies; office, involve large container truck traffic or the computing and accounting machines. Activities transport of large scale bulky products, but may may produce noise, odors, vibrations, illumination include limited rail traffic. The new product may or particulates that affect the persons residing in be finished in the sense that it is ready for use or or conducting business in the vicinity. Where 24 consumption or it may be semi-finished to hour onsite surveillance is necessary, a become a component for further assembly and caretakers residence may be permitted when packaging. These types of business appreved by a Conditional Use Permit. establishments are customadly. directed to the wholesale market, inter-plant transfer rather than WHOLESALESTORAGE/DISTRIBUTION the direct sale to the consumer. Such uses may include, but are not limited to: electronic microchip Public Storage assembly; printing, publishing and allied industries; commercial bakery; candy and other Activities include mini-warehouse or recreation confectionery products; bottle, canned soft ddnks, vehicle storage facilities for the rental or lease of and carbonatedwater; apparel and other finished small scale enclosed storage units or parking products; paper board containers and boxes; spaces primarily to individuals ratherthan firms or drugs; small fabricated metal products such as organizations. Activities to store household items hand tools, general hardware, architectural, and other than storage operations are not allowed on ornamental metal work; toys, amusement; sports the premises. Where 24 houronsite surveillance e~e~up~0ol spec~c P~es01~o,v,~d 8 Pmje¢~ Desctfpt~on Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Anea 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE 5-2 (continued) LAND USE TYPE DEFINITIONS is necessary, a caretakers residence may be RESEARCH and DEVELOPMENT permitted when approved by a Conditional Use Permit. Research and Development Light Wholesale, Storage, and Distribution A use engaged in study, testing, design, analysis, and experimental development of products, Activities typically include, but are not limited to: processes, or services, including incidental wholesaling, storage, and warehousing services manutactudng of products or provision of services and storage and wholesale to retailers from the to others. premises of finished goods and food products. Activities under this classification shall be OFFICE conducted in enclosed buildings and occupy 50,000 square feet or less of building space. Office (Commemial) Retail sales from the premises may occur when appreved as a Conditional Use. Where 24 hour A use where the affairs of a pdvate firm, business, onsite surveillance is necessary, a caretakers professional, service, orindustryareccnducted in residence may be permitted when approved by a such activities such as administration, Conditional Use Permit. management, consulting, professional/personal services, clerical, and data processing/storage. Medium Wholesale, Storage, and Distribution Uses typically include, but re not limited to, administrative offices; corporate headquarters Activities typically include, but are not limit~:l to: and branch offices; financial, insurance and real wholesale, storage and warehousing services, estate offices; medical/dental health services/ moving and storage services, storage and laboratodes/clinica; professional and design wholesaling to retailers from the premises of offices; and research offices. finished goods and food products, and distribution facilities for large scale retail firms. Activities CIVIC under this classification shall be conducted in enclosed buildings and occupy greater than Administrative Civic Services 50,000 square feet of building space. Included are multi-tenant or speculative buildings with over Activities typically include, but are not limited to: 50,000 square feet of warehouse space. Where management, administrative, or cledcal services 24 hour onsite surveillance is necessary, a performed by public, quasi-public, and public caretakers residence may be permitted when utility administrative offices. approved by a Conditional Use Permit. Cultural MATERIALS RECOVERY Activities typically include, but are not limited to Collection Facilities those performed by the following institutions: Activities typically include the acceptance by · Public and pdvate non-profit museums and donation, redemption, or purchase of recyclable art galledes; materials from the public for sorting and storage. Public and pdvate non-profit libraries and Such a facility may involve aggregating, weighing, observatories. and storing large amounts of material onsite, including bailing, compacting, or similar Public Assembly packaging operetions for shipment. Outdoor storage may be permitted when approved by a Activities typically include, but are not limited to Conditional Use Permit. Collection facilities shall those performed by, or at, the following comply with standards of the IASP. institutions or installations: Parks, betanisal gardens, and open space areas of a passive use character; P~-oje~suPrdom SNd~C P~n-aeo~oo.w~ 9 /=roje~ Desctfpt/on Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE 5-2 (continued) LAND USE TYPE DEFINITIONS Public and semi-public playgrounds and organized solely or primarily to render services playing fields, and open space areas of an customadly carded on as a business. active use character; Public and semi-public meeting halls. Convalescent Facility/Hospital Public Buildings (Library, Post Office, etc.) A use providing bed care and in-patient services for persons requiring regular medical attention, A non-commercial use established primarily for and persons aged for inform unable to care for the benefit and enjoyment of the community in themselves, excluding surgical or emergency which it is located, including a library, pest office, medical services. museum. neighborhood center, and similar facilities. Educational Institutions (Public and Private) Public Safety &Utility Services A public or privately owned school. including vocational, business trade or schools owned and Activities typically include, but are not limited to, operated by religious organizations, offedng the maintenance and operation of the following instruction including branches of learning and installations: study required to be taught in the public schools by the Education Code of the State of California. Communications equipment installations and exchanges, except telephone exchange and Transportation Facilities switching facilities; Electrical substations; A use involving public transpertation activities Gas substations; such as a light or heavy rail commuter station, · Ambulance services; bus transfer station, or intermodal transfer station, Police stations and fire stations; including park-and-ride facilities. Post offices, but excluding major mail processing centers; and, RECREATION Publicly operated off-street parking lots and garages available to the general public either Golf Course without charge or on a fee basis. A tract of land used for playing the sport Of golf, Religious Assembly typically 18 holes improved with tees, greens, fairways, hazards, and rough. Accessory uses A seminary, retreat, monastery, conference include: a clubhouse with restaurant, bar/lounge, center, or similar use for the conduct of religious pro shop, club room, and locker rooms; perking, activities, including accessory housing incidental putting green and practice range, on-course rest thereto, butexcludingpdvateeducationalfacility. shelters. maintenance building with outdoor storage facility, and caretakers residence. PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC USES Golf Practice/ Freining Facility Child Care Facilities A commercial recreational facility providing A facility, other than a family day care home, in instructional and practice facilitiesforgolf, outdoor which less than twenty-four hours per day non- and/or indoor and/or utilized by the public in the medical care and supervision is provided for daytime and/or at night-time with outdoor lighting, children in a group setting. including driving range, putting green, chipping green, practice traps, pitch-and-put course. Clubs/Lodges (Private and Public) teaching stations, golf shop, club making/repair, concession stand, and storage/maintenance A facility for an association of people organized facility. and operated to pursue common goals, interests. and activities, such as social; recreational, religious, or fTatemal, but not including groups P~Pr~iectsuP~J0ol Spedtic P~n-OS0100.wpd 10 Project Desofpt/on Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE 5-2 (continued) LAND USE TYPE DEFINITIONS Recreational Facilities (indoor and Outdoor) Activities typically include, but are not limited to: food or beverages generally prepared for exercise, sports, and/or instruction which require immediate on-premises consumption. Uses an indoor or outdoor facility for conducting the typically include, but are not limited to: recreational activity and owned/operated either restaurants; bars; delicatessens; excluding fast publicly or commercially for the general public food ddve-thru type services. When the pdmary and/or the exclusive use of members. Uses use is a bar selling and dispensing alcoholic include, but are not limited to: health clubs, sports beverages by the ddnk, such use is subject to a clubs, exercise studios or classes, swimming Conditional Use Permit from the City. centers, skating dnks, bowling alleys, tennis courts, sports fields, weight loss, and wellness Restaurant-FastFoodSales(includingdrive-thru) centers. Activities shall include the retail sale from the ENTERTAINMENT premises of quickly prepared foods and beverages such as hot or cold sandwiches, Arcades chicken, tacos, pizza, donuts, etc. served with dispensehie (paper, plastic) plates and utensils Any establishment.containing four or more foronsiteoroffsiteconsumption. Tableserviseis amusement devices. This definition shall not generally limited to delivery of counter ordered apply to recreational premises such as bowling meals and busing. Service to persons in vehicles alleys or skating dnks, where an arcade is part of can be a function of fast food establishments. the primary use (see City Development Code Section 17.10.030F regulations). Sports Bar Entertainment Facilities A structure or tenant space providing food and beverage service, including the sale or dispensing Activities typically include, but are not limited to: of alcoholic beverage by the ddnk, themed to cultural, educational, and entertainment servjcas sports, including video screening of sporting within an enclosed building to assembled groups events, and sports games and activities such as of spectators or participants, including public, billiards, darts, ping-pong, simulated golf, video pdvate non-profit~ or for profit facilities. Uses arcade games. and live entertainment, and/or typically include, but are not limited to: movie dancing. Liveentertainmentusesaresubjecttoa theaters and cineplexes, night clubs/comedy Entertainment Permit in accordance with City clubs, dinner theaters, disco/dance halls, ordinances. performing arts theaters, and meeting halls, subject where applicable, to an Entertainment TRANSIENT ACCOMMODATIONS/ Permit in accordance with City ordinances. CONFERENCE CENTER Family Entertainment Center Hotel/Motel A grouping of two or more commercial Activities typically include, but are not limited to recreational attractions into an indoor and/or lodging services fo~ transient guests on a less- outdoor center uses typically include but are not than-monthly basis, other than in the case of uses limited to: miniature golf, baseball batting cages, classified as residential uses. Uses typically mini-grand prix/go-cart track, video arcade, and include, but are not limited to: hotels and motels. concession area/snack bar. Conference Center EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS A commercial facility providing business meeting, Eating & Drinking Establishments training and conference facilities, with or without food catering services, either independent or Activities typically include, but are not limited to: affiliated with a hotel facility. the retail sale from the premises of unpackaged P:Vh~c, jec~sUPrdO01 Spedtic P~m-OSOI0O.v,~c,d 11 Project Desctfptfon Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE 5-2 (continued) LAND USE TYPE DEFINITIONS Corporate Training Center Repair Services A corporate facility providing training facilities for Activities typically include, but are not limited to, employees with or without food catering services repair services involving articles such as and dormitory accommodations. upholstery. fumiture, electrical appliance, camera, shoe repair/shine, failor/seamstress, sports MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL equipment repair, and locksmiths. Mixed-Use Commemial Center AUTOMOTIVE/VEHICULAR SERVICES A functionally integrated development of Automotive Rental/Leasing coordinated design combining two or more types of compatible commemial and/or public uses such Activities typically include, but are not limited to: as retail, office, hotel, restaurant, recreational or the rental or leasing from the premises of motor entertainment and/or civic and cultural uses, vehicles, withprovisionofincidentalmaintenance either in separate buildings or combined in one services. Uses typically include, but are not building. limited to, car rental agencies and leasing services. Onsite storage or keeping of vehicle for PERSONAL/BUSINESS SERVICES rental or lease shall not occupy more than 25% of the required parking for the subject building sits, Business Support Services unless approved with a Conditional Use Permit. Activities typically include, but are not limited to: Automotive Service Court services which support the activity of other firms, such as: clerical, employment, protective, or An integrated cluster or related automotive minor processing, including blueprint, photocopy service activities, which typically include: gas printing services, business equipment stations, service stations with or without ancillary maintenance/repair, and photo processing. uses such as car washes and food marts; Activities not included in this category are the automotive service and repair including mufflers, pdnting of books and services of a personal shocks, wheel alignments, brakes, oil changes, nature. lubrications, tune-ups, smog checks, tire repair and replacement; installation of air conditioning, Funeral/Crematon/Services car phones, stereos, windshields, and upholstery; windshield tinting; sale of auto parts; and other Activities typically include, but are not limited to, related services. Services typically provided in the services involving the care, preparation, and category"AutomotiveandTruckRepair-Major"of disposition of human dead other than in the IASP are specifically prohibited. Auto Courts cemeteries. Uses typically include, but are to shall comply with the general design critada limited to: funeral homes. crematodes, and established in City Ordinance 16496 of the IASP, mausoleums. except overall maximum size requirements. Personal Services Automotive Service Station Activities typically include, but are not limited to: Activities typically include, but are not limited to: information, instruction, and convenience services the sale from the premises of goods and the of a personal nature. Uses typically include, but provision of service normally required in the day- are not limited to: computer training, driving to-day operation of motor vehicles, including the schools, childcare facilities, travel bureaus, and principal sale of petroleum products, the agencies, photography studios, incidental sale of tires, batteries, replacement stockbrokerage/insurance/real estate services, items, and lubdceting services, the performance and optometrist/eyewear. of minor repairs, such as tune-up, tire change, and brake work, and automobilewaxing/detailing. ,R:~-oj~supr, joo~ ~ Pk,.,-asoloCwpd 12 Project Desct~o~/on Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE 5-2 (continued) LAND USE TYPE DEFINITIONS Specialty Automobile/Motorcycle Sales/Service The sales/servicing of specialty automobiles and business supplies; gifts/cards/stationary; motomycles such as historic and collectors candy/confectionery; computers/software; vehicles. department stores; drug stores/pharmacies, eyewear/optometrist, fast food court/restaurants; RETAIL-BUSINESS SUPPLY/SERVICES jewelry; newspaper/magazines; shoes; sporting goods; stamplcoinlcollectibles; television/radio; Business Supply Retail &Services telephone/electronics; toys; variety goods; video sales/rentals; indoor wholesale/retail; and Activities typically include, but are not limited to: wholesale sales outlets. retail sales, rental or repair from the premises of office equipment, office supplies and similar office Kiosk in Parking Lots goods primarily to firms and other organizations utilizing the goods rather than to individuals. A small structure, pavilion, or gazebo not They exclude the sale of materials used in exceeding 300 square feetofenclosedfloorarea construction of buildings or other structures. used for convenience retail and services, and located within a parking lot to primarily serve RETAIL-CONVENIENCE RELATED customers while in their automobiles. Convenience Sales and Services RETAIL-HOME IMPROVEMENT RELATED Activities typically include, but are, not limited to Building/Lighting Equipment/Supplies and Sales the retail sales from the premises of frequently needed small personal convenience items and Activities typically include, but are not limited to: professional services which are used frequently. the retail sale or rental from the premises of Uses typically include, but are not limited to: goods and equipment, including paint, glass, toiletries, tobacco and magazines, beauty and hardware, fixtures, electrical supplies, cultivators, barber shops, apparel laundering. and dry short-haul trailers, lumber, and hardware, and cleaning agencies, and film processing. may have outdoor storage where allowed. Hardware stores are included is this use category. RETAIL-FOOD & BEVERAGE RELATED Furniture/Home Furnishings/Antique Stores Food and Beverage Sales A retail business which primarily provides Activities typically include, but are not limited to furniture, home furnishings, and/or antiques for the retail sale from the premises of food and home or business use. beverages for off-premises consumption. Uses typically include, but are not limited to: mini- Home ApplianceElectronics Stores markets, liquor/wine/beer stores, retail bakeries and specia ty/gourmet food market; and, catering A retail business which primarily provides kitchen businesses excluding chain-type grocery stores. and laundry appliances, television. stereo equipment, and computer electronic goods for RETAIL-GENERAL home use. Retail-General GENERAL COMMERCIAL Retail businesses which are oriented toward Communications Services serving the general needs of residents. employees, and visitors of the community, in Activities typically include, but are not limited to: facilities as part of a shopping center, mixed-use broadcasting, and other information relay services cemmemial center, or independent establishment, accomplished primarily through use of electronic -including, but not limited to: apparel/clothing and telephonic mechanisms. Uses typically accessories; art/music/photography, bookstore, R:~Pmiec~UPrUoOl Sped~ P~n-OSOl00.wpd 13 Pmjed Desctfpt/on 2/1 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub. Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment include, but are not limited to: television and radio studios and telegraph offices. Parking (Commercial) An automobile parking facility operated for fee or profit, including either a surface lot or a parking structure. RESIDENTIAL USES High-Residential Density This distdct is intended as an area for high- density multiple-family use, with site development regulations that assure development compatible with adjacent uses. Residential densities are up to 30 dwelling units per gross acre. Section 5: Development Guidelines and Standards (continued) 3. The following information is hereby incorporated into Section 5.3: Design Guidelines and Standards of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan. · Table 5-3 commencing on pages 5-20a and 5-20b, and Table 5-4 on page 5-21 are hereby revised as follows: TABLE 5-3 SUGGESTED PLANT PALETTE BY LANDSCAPE ZONE OASIS ZONE (Lush, green, non-native) Evergreen Tf~es Evergreen Trees (continued) Arbutus unendo (Strawberry Tree) Pinus pinea (Italian Stone Pine) Brachychiton populneus (Bottle Tree) Pittosporum rhombifolia (Queensland Callistemon species (Bottlebrush) Pittosporum) Citfinus species (Citrus varieties) Podocarpus gracilior (Fem Pine) Eucalyptus cladocalyx (Sugar Gum) Podocarpus macmphyllus (Yew Pine) Eucalyptus maculata (Spotted Gum) Quercus agfifolia (Coast Live Oak) Eucalyptus nicholli (Nichols Willow Leaf) Quemus ilex (Holly Oak) Eucalyptus Rudis (Desert Gum) Quercus suber (Cork Oak) Eucalyptus sideroxylon Rosea (Red Iron Bark) Quercus virginia (Southem Live Oak) Eucalyptus viminalis (Mianna Gum) Rhus lancea (African Sumac) FeSoa sellowiana (Pineapple Guava) Schinus terebinthifolius (Brazilian Pepper) Geijera parvi~ora (Australian Willow) Washingtonia ~lifera (California Fan Palm) Magnolia Grandi~ora (Majestic Beauty) Washingtonia robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) Melaxuca nesophila (Pink Melaleuca) Olea eumpea 'Fruitless' (Olive Tree) Deciduous Trees Pinus canariensis (Canary Island Pine) Pinus eldarica (Mondell Pine) Albizia julibdssin (Silk Tree) Pinus halepensis (Allepo Pine) Alnus cordata (Italian Alder) R:~jectsUP~Jo0~ Specffic Ptan-oso1eO,wp~ 14 Freject Description Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment OASIS ZONE (continued) Deciduous Trees (continued) Vines Alnus rhombifolia (White Alder) Cissus antartica (Kangaroo Treevine) Chionathus retusus (Chinese Fringe Tree) Cissus hypoglauca (No common name) Chorisia speciosa (Silk Tree) Doxantha unguis-cati (Cat's Claw Vine) Fraxinus velutina (Arizona Ash) Ficus pumila (Creeping Fig) Gledistia tdcanthus (Honey Locust) Gelsemium semperWrens (Carolina Jessamine) Koelreuteda bipinnata (Chines Flame Tree) Jasminium mesnyi (Primrose Jasmine) Koelreuteda paniculata (Golden Rain Tree) Jasminium polyanthum (No common name) Lagerstroemia indica 'indian Tree' (Crape Myrtle) Lonicere japonica (Japanese Honeysuckle) Liquidambar styreci~ua (Sweet Gum) Parthenocissus tdcuspidata (Boston Ivy) Magnolia soulangiana (Saucer Magnolia) Trachelospermumjasminoides (Star Jasmine) Nyssa silvetica (Tupelo Tree) Wisteria sinensis (Wisteda) Pistacia chinensis (Chinese Pistache) Platanus acerifolia (London Plane Tree) Groundcovers Platanus racemosa (California Sycamore) Tipuana tipu (Tipu Tree) Bacchafis pilulafis 'Twin Peaks" (Coyote brush) Campanula pischarskyana (Serbian Bellflower) Shrubs Cotoneaster buxifolius (Rock Cotoneaster) Drosanthemum ~oribundum (Rosea Ice Plant) Abelia 'Edward Goucher' (Abelia) Festuca species (Fescue) Agapanibus africanus (Lily of the Nile) Gazania Camellia species (Camellia) Hedera helix 'Needlepoint" (English Ivy) Citrus species (Rockrose) Hypeficum calcinum (Aaron's Beard) Cocculus laurifolius (Snailseed) Juniperus species (Prostrate varieties) Coroleia (Cotoneaster) Lantana montevidensis (Trailing Lantana) Cortadefia selloana (Pampas Grass) Lonicere japonica (Honeysuckle) Dietesbicolor(FortnightLily) Nandins domeMica "Harbor Dwarf' (Dwarf Grevillea species Heavenly Bamboo) Hemerocallis species (Day Lily) Rosmarinus officinalis 'Prostratus' (Prostrate Hypericum calycinum (St, Johns Wort) Rosemary) Ilex species (Holly) Verbena peruvians (No common name) Juniperus species (Juniper) Vinca species (Periwinkle) Lantana species (Lantana) Zoysia tenuifolia (Korean Grass) Leptospermum scopat~um (Australian Tea Tree) Ligustrumjaponicum(Japanese Pdvet) NATIVE GARDEN ZONE (Primarily native Mahonia aquifolium (Oregon Grape) material, rich color and texture) Myrtus communis (True Myrtle) Nandins domestics (Heavenly Bamboo) Evergreen Trees Osmantbus fragrans (Sweet Olive) Pennisetum setaceum cupmum (Purple Fountain Acacia famesiana (Sweet Acacia) Grass) Calocerdrus decurrens (Incense Cedar) Phormium tenax (Flax) Cercidium ~oddum (Blue Palo Verde) Photinia fraseri (Red-tip .Photinia) Cercidium microphyllum (Foothill Palo Verde) Pittosporum tobfia (Mock Orange, Vadegata, Cercidiumpraecox(Sonoran PaloVerde) Whellers Dwarf)~ Cupressus glabra (Arizona Cypress) Plumbago aur~culata (Cape Plumbago) Parkinsonia aculeata (Mexican Palo Verde) Punica granatum (Pomegranate) Pittosporum rhombifolia (Queensland Pyracantha species (Firethom) Pittosperum) Raphiolepis indica (India Hawthorn) Podocarpus gracilior (Fern Pine) Temstruemia gymnathere (Temstreemia) Prosopis alba (Argentine Mesquite) Trachelospermumjasminoides (Star Jasmine) Schinus molle (California Pepper Tree) Xylosma congestum (Shing Xylosma) Washingtonia ~lifera (California Fan Palm) Washingtonia robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) R:Vh~oje~s, Jp;U001 Sped~Pa~SOl~.v4x~ 15 Project Description Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE 5-3 (continued) SUGGESTED PLANT PALETTE BY LANDSCAPE ZONE NATIVE GARDEN ZONE (continued) Deciduous Trees Groundcovers (continued) Aesculus califomica (Califomia Buckeye) Cotoneaster buxifolius (Rook Cotoneaster) Cerc's occidentalis (Westem Redbud) Drosanthemum foribundum (Rosea Ice Plant) Chilopsis linearfs (Desert Willow) Duchesnea indica (indian Mock Strawberry) Dalea spinosa (Smoke Tree) Grevillea "Noelii" (No common name) Platanus racemosa (Califomia Sycamore) Hedera hells "Needlepoint' (English Ivy) Prunus cerasifera atropurpurea (Purple Leaf Hypericum calycinum (Aaron's Beard) Plum) Juniperus species(Juniper [Prostrate varieties]) Sambucus mexicana (Mexican Elderberry) Lantana montevidensis (Trailing Lantana) Lonicera japonica (Honeysuckle) Shrubs Nandina domestica "Harbor Dwarf' (Dwarf Heavenly Bamboo) Caesalpinea gilliesil (Yellow Bird of Paradise) Pyracantha species (Firethom) Calliandra eriaphylla (Fairy Duster) Rosma~nus officinalis 'Prostratus' (Prostrate Cassia artemisioides (Feathery Cassia) Rosemary) Ceanothus species (California Lilac) Verbena peruviana (No common name) Encelia fa~nosa (Blue Bush) Heteromeles arbutifolia (Toyon) Justicia californica (Chuberosa) Larrea tridentata (Creosote Bush) Leucophyllum frutescens (Texas Ranger) Prunus caroliniana (Carolina Laurel Cherry) Prunus ilicifolia (Hollyleaf Cherry) Rhus ovata (Sugar Bush) Ribes sanguinium (Pink Winter Currant) Ribes speciosum (Flowering Fuschia) Romneya coultefi (Matilija Poppy) Rosa californica (California Wild Rose) Simmondsia chinensis (Jojoba) Teconia stans (Yellow Bells) Vines Antigonon leptopus (San Miguel Coral Vine) Doxcantha unguis-cati (Cat's Claw Vine) Ficus pumlia (Creeping Fig) Gelsemium semperWrens (Carolina Jessamine) Lonicera japonica (Japanese Honeysuckle) Parthenocissus tricuspidata (Boston Ivy) Rosa Banksiae (Banks Rose) Tecomada capensis (Cape Honeysuckle) Wisteda sinensis (Wisteria) Groundcovers Arctostphylos "Indian Hill" (No common name) Arctostphylos "Sea Spray" (No common name) 8accharis pilulatfs 'Twin Peaks" (Coyote brush) -- Ceanothus griseus horizontails (Carreel Creeper) R:~c~UPPJ001 Specific P~'~Ol00,wpd 16 Preject Desc~ption Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Spedtic Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE 5-4 STREETSCAPE LANDSCAPING THEME 1. Mlltiken Street Trees: Avenue (Special City Braachychiton Populneus (70%); · Informal drifts · Existing (implace) Gateway BIvd.) (Bottle tree) · Average Spacing: 25 ft. on Center Liqoidambar Stracifiua (30%) · Plantings to be inCOrporated into (Palo Alto Sweet Gum) landscape setback. · Street tree easements may be Planning Area IX (additionally required outside the right-of-way )ermitted street trees): Planning Area IX (alternative · Washin~onia filifera (California ~ermitted provisions): Fan Palm) Foreground: · Washingtonia tabueta (Mexican Fan Palm) · California Fan Palm or Mexican Fan Palm Accent Trees · Formal plaCement · Average Sparing: 40 ft. on · Albizia Julibt~ssen (Silk Tree) center (double row) · Lagerstroemia Indiea (Crepe Myrtle) Background: · Cinnamomumum Campbore (Camphor Tree) Bottletree (70%) Palo Alto Sweet Gum (30%) · Informal drifts · Average Spacing: 25 ft. on Center · Plantinge to be incorporated into landscape setback. · Street tree easements may be required outside the right--of-way 2. Fourth Street' Street Trees: Foreground (Major Arterial) · Platanus ACerifolia London · Semi-formal · Per Wildan Assoc. Plane Tree) · Average Spacing: 30 ft. on street plan. Center · Median landscape Street Trees: Background · Incorporate existin9 mature responsibilities General Dynamics street between City of · Pinus Canatfensis (Canary landscape to the extent Rancho Island Pine) possible. Cucamonga and · Locate trees to minimize COnflict Ontado to be with overhead transmission determined, lines. · Coordinate with Edison pruning pelides. · Street tree easements may be required outside right-of-way. 3. Sixth SUeet' Street Tree: (Major Arterial) · Magnoia Grandifore (Majestic · Semi-formal/regular · Per City Master Beauty Magnolia) · Tree sparing: 30 ft. on center Plan for Sixth Street. Planning Area IX (additionally Planning Area IX (alternative ~ermitted street trees): >ermitted provisions): · Washingtonia filifera (Califomia Foreground: Fan Palm) R:~JP~J001 specific Pin-~o100,wpd 17 Proj~ Descr/ptfon Rancho Cucarnonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment TABLE 5-4 (continued) STREETSCAPE LANDSCAPING THEME · Washingfonia robusta (Mexican California Fan Palm or Mexican Fan Palm) Fan Palm · Formal placement · Average Spacing: 40 It. on center (double row) Background: · Majestic Beauty Magnolia · Semi-formal/regular · Tree spacing: 30 ft. on canter 4. Utica Avenue Street Tree: (Existing Street) · Pinus Cana~ensis (Canary · Semi-formal/regular N.A. Island Pine) - Tree spacing: 25 ~. on center · Incorporate existing mature General Dynamics street landscaping to the extent possible. 5. Cleveland Street Tree: Avenue (Local Street) · Pinus Canafiensis (Canary · Semi-formal N.A. Island Pine) · Tree spacing: 25 ft. on center a. A beautificetion Master Plan for parkways along Fourth and Sixth Streets shall be prepared for City approval. The beauti~cation Master Plan can be included in individual Master Plans for Planning Area development or processed as part of the overall design concepts forthe Specific Plan in a separate document. Section 5: Development Guidelines and Standards (continued) 4. The following information is hereby incorporated into Section 5.4: Development Standards of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan: · Table 5-6 on page 5-29 is hereby revised. TABLE 5-6 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SUMMARY Planninf~ Area Standards I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X Minimum Parcel Size (Acres) n/a I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 Minimum Percenta e of Landscape Area (% of Net Lot~rea) n/a 15 15 15 15 15 10 10 31 10 Performance Standard (Schedule) n/a A A A A A B B B B Maximum FIoor Area Ratio (FAR)/ n/a 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.70 0.35 0,561 0.35 Residential Density 24-30 du/ac Note: Where a hotel is developed, the maximum allowable FAR for the Planning Area can increase to FAR 0.7. The FAR for the hotel if the entire Plannin Area is not used for such use can exceed the 0.7 FAR as long as the entire P ann ng Area does not excee~g{~.7 FAR as shown n the conceptua Master P an. R:~miectsuPru0ol specific P~-~0100.wpd 18 Project Description Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area f8 Specir,~ Plan Planning Area IX Amendment · Planning Area IX High-Density Residential Site Development Criteria (page 5-34, before "Minimum Parcel Size"). · Residential uses in Planning Area IX shall comply with the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, provided that, to integrate "urban" high-density residential uses within the Master Plan. · The Development Standards set forth in the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, specific to Planning IX shall be modified as follows: A. Table 5-7, Streetscape Setback Requirements (page 5-35) - Minimum building setback along Sixth Street for multiple-family residential uses in Planning Area IX shall be 44 feet. - The parking setback along Sixth Street for multiple-family residential uses in Planning Area IX shall be a minimum of 19 feet. TABLE 5-7 STREETSCAPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS (Determined from Ultimate Face of Curb) I Major Artedal and Special 45 45 25 Boulevard i Secondary 35 35 20 Local 25 25 15 Sixth Street adjacent to 25 44 19 Planning Area IXd a The average depth shall be uninterrupted from the face of curb. except for sidewalks. pedestrian hardscape, plazas and courtyards, monument signs and golf course security view fences. b Street frontage walls and fences over 3 feet in height are subject to building setbacks, except golf · c~ursesecu~tyviewfencasandg~~fceurse~drivingrange/precticefaci~ityba~~barriernetting(p~~e mounted). c Average landscape setback requirements shall be averaged from the golf course (Planning Area I) to other Planning Areas, but not less than the required minimum parking setback. d Applies only to mutiipie-family residential uses in Planning Area IX. B. The following section is included in the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, page 5-38, prior to 'Parking and Loading Requirements" as follows: ' = PLANNING AREA IX: MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RECREATIONALAND SITE AMENITIES The following list of amenities, or other similar amenities, as may be approved by the Planning Director, would be included in multiple-family residential projects development in Planning Area IX: R;~*OjeCIiUPr,.IO01 Speci~ Plll-09Ol~.wpd 19 pn:~ Descr/pt/on Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area IX Amendment Recreation Area/Facilities 1. Resort-style swimming pool 2. Spa 3. Fire pit 4. Three-hole putting green 5. Lawn volleyball court 6. Horseshoe pit 7. Garden gazebo 8. Poolside barbeque pit and serving areas 9. Barbeque node with picnic tables 10. Barbeque node with picnic tables 11. Barbeque node with picnic tables 12, Personal garden area 13. Open space/recreational area 14, Open space/recreational area 15. Open space/recreational area 16. Walking trail along the Empire Lakes Golf Course 17. Par course 18. Movie theater with THX Surround Sound 19. State-of-the-art exercise facility 20. Game room 21. Teaching kitchen 22, Community room 23. Bocce ball court C. Figures 5-2 and 5-6, and page 5-37: The IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan is amended for Planning Area IX to allow for linear sidewalks and urban scale landscaping. . Fcv,raieasuPnJom Sped~P~o'~oO.,...pd 20 ProjecfDescr/pt/on .Cuzv;llnear or Bike ~,ne Curvilinear or Linear Sidews!i~ ~tlltk~ Avenue Linear Sidew-ik Parkway 13' 94 ~. Roadway (1) 1~0~.~O.~. MHllk~ Avenue S~ Street Fou~ S~eet Major ~eriM Divided (120 ~. R. O. W.) Note: (1) Addi~on~ width for right mrn lan~ at driv~ay~ and inter~ection~ ..- 5-2 Major Arterial Divided Street Classification 7th Street Project LocaUon 6th Street 4ffi Street Figure ,~ferson at Em ire La~ Project ~ocatiol EDISON ~*-~ Regional Manager An EDISON INT£RNATIONAL~'~ Company Planning Commission August 19, 2000 City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 Re: Empire Lakes Center, JPI Multi-Family Opportunities Dear Planning Commission: As you may be aware, Edison recently relocated its Customer Communication Center operations to the General Dynamics facility, which currently employs approximately 800 people. The opportunity to live in a high quality multi-family community within walking distance of our offices will be very beneficial for a · number of our staff. We are offering our support for the JPI Multi-family project located in the General Dynamics area. This is the type of lifestyle choice that has long been lacking in our area. lt's my understanding that JPI is a leader in the multi-family market and builds a quality project with many amenities, not found anywhere else in the Inland Empire. The fact that they have chosen Rancho Cucamonga as their location says a lot about the job a~l of you have done in making this the premier place to live. Sincerely, .1.1,.1 RICHARD DICK 8 ASSOCIATES August 10, 2000 Planning Commission of THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: Jefferson at Empire Lakes Center - Parcel 9 Dear Sirs: As the owner of Fairway Business Centre in Rancho Cucamonga we have made a substantial investment in the purchase and development of Parcel 10 at Empire Lakes Center. We are in the process of building two office buildings totaling 90,000 square feet and are currently under contract to purchase an additional 10 acres of land to the south at Sixth Street and Milliken Avenue for three office buildings totaling approximately 150,000 square feet. We have been aware for the last year of the high-density residential development proposed by JPI and have discussed the project with both our lenders and prospective tenants. The concept of a quality residential project within close proximity of our office buildings is ideal to help us market our facilities to the Southern California business community. Empire Lakes Center has the capability of developing into a unique mixed-use business environment that capitalizes on the location of the Metrolink Station, encourages a jobs to housing balance and is easily accessible to regional amenities including entertainment, transportation (Ontario Airport) and recreation (Empire Lakes Golf Course). We are pleased to be a part of Empire Lakes Center and the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and strongly encourage the City officials to support the quality high-density residential project proposed by such a superior company as JPI. Sincerely, 1711 West,cliff Dri,,e, Newport Beach, CaliEomia 92660 (949) 642-6515, FAX: (949) 631-8813 R2 Z Phone (909) 788-6100 Riverside Commercial Investors FAX (909)784-1524 THE LORING BUILDING 3685 MAIN STREET · SUITE 220 RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 August 10, 2000 Planning Commission City ofRancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 P, ap. cho Cucamonga, CA 9 ! 729-0807 Re: JPI Project, General Dynamics Site Dear Planning Commission; Having been involved in Commercial Real Estate with many projects in the Inland Empire and Rancho Cucamonga for over the last five years, it is with much anticipation that we are looking forward to seeing such a quality multi-family project locate in Rancho Cucamonga. You can be assured that JPI knows their target market and where they are building will truly be a compliment and asset to the area. The lack of quality multi-family anywhere in the Inland Empire is, and has been a viable need. The addition of this project will add balance to our market place and will continue to make Rancho Cucamonga a preferred area for businesses looking to relocate. Sincerely, RIVERSIDE COMMERCIAL INVESTORS, INC. Daftell A. Butler The [ as C mpany District Manager hlland Empire Region 8110/2000 Southern California Gas Company 216 N, Ettc/id At/entie Planning Commission o,,,,,.io. City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 ,cz 909 394-4276 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 f~ 90946~3924 Re: Empire Lakes Center-JPI Project Dear Planning Commission; Having a good working knowledge of the quality product JPI is known for building and operating; I would like very much to share a few thoughts with you about their proposed project, First of all, JPI, much like the City of Rancho Cucarnonga itself, is a class act. They build a top notch multi-family development that most any City would be proud of. This is the type of project that has long been lacking in the Inland Empire; and I'm not surprised that they have chosen Rancho Cucamonga as it will be an excellent marriage. I feel the JPI project would be a quality addition for the area and certainly a major compliment to the Empire Lakes Master Plan. Such a project will provide a life- style choice for people who are business professionals; and enjoy and expect the amenities this type of development will offer. Thank you for allowing me to offer my thoughts relative to this great project; and my complements to you for the supedor vision you have developed and maintained for Rancho Cucemonga. Sincerely, ; / 22q PACIFICDBELL® A Pacific Telesis Company August 18, 2000 Planning Commission City ofRancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 RE: J'PE Project, Empire Lakes Center Dear Planning Commission: It has recently come to my attention that there are some exciting things taking place at the General Dynamics site. I wanted to personally express my interest and appreciation to you all for your foresight in seeing the need for quality multi-family projects that will attract and retain upper/middle income residents to live in Rancho Cucamonga instead of Orange County. Rancho Cucamonga has so much to offer to its residems. For those individuals who are not homeowners, high-end multi-family complexes are ot~en the alternative they are looking for. Very few complexes meet these expectations in the Inland Empire. It is my understanding that JPI takes great pride in developing just such complexes and I can't think of a better place for them to locate than next to the golf course. That will definitely be an incentive for moving in! This project will attract the type of people that already choose to live in Rancho Cucamonga. Such individuals will help Rancho Cucamonga ma'mtain the highest per capita income ranking in the Inland Empire and they will also spend some of their income at the businesses in the city. For all of these reasons, I am pleased to know the planning commission is considering such an exciting project and am sure it will prove to be another strong asset to Rancho Cucamonga. Sincerely, Joani Finwall Director of External Affairs Pacific Bell EMPIRE LAKES August 22, 2000 City ofRancho Cucamonga Planning Commission P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: JPI at Empire Lakes Center Dear Commissioners: Crown Golf Management is responsible for the day-to-day management of Empire Lakes Golf Course. We have been involved with General Dynamics during the last seven years in assisting with the design, construction and management of the Arnold Palmer designed golf course. The course has matured and is being recognized as one of the best public daily fee golf courses in the Western County. General Dynamics works very closely with our management team and keeps us apprised of all development concepts adjacent to the golf course. During the last two years we have seen the development program envisioning a high-end residential component for the project. We support the concept of bringing residential uses to Empire Lakes Center and look forward to the benefits we can mutually gain by the addition of high-density uses along the golf course edge. Our management team has explored ideas involving pick-up service, golf club storage and preferred tee times. All of these programs are reasonable and will help increase the number of rounds at Empire Lakes. During the last three years, two new high-end daily fee golf courses have been built within our marketplace and the competition wilt continue to increase. The City's approval of high-end apartments will have a beneficial impact to our business of the golf course and we support the quality architecture designs, which have been shared with us. Our company is very involved in community organizations, including the Chamber of Commerce and local high schools and colleges. General Dynamics has allowed us to provide free golf to the local high school and college golf teams to help promote the golf business we manage. Please give me a call if you have any questions, we would like to discuss our view in greater detail. Sincerely, Michael Lautenbach General Manager Sixth Street · Rancho Cucarnonga, CA 91730 909,481.6663 * Fax 909.481.6763 2f-' JOHN MELCHER, AIA · ARCHITECT 6779 Treeline Place · P. O. Box 1085 · Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 - 909.948.8777 · FAX 909.948.8677 119905 23 August 2000 Mr. Larry McNiel, Chairman, and Members of the Planning Commission CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10500 Civic Center Drive P. O. Box 870 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: JPI's Jefferson at Empire Lakes Planning Area IX Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Dear Commissioners: Since mid-May of last year I have served as consulting design professional to General Dynamics Properties (GDP) as it receives and evaluates proposals for the development of its Empire Lakes property. Specifically, I am tasked with providing "review and critique of(developers') conceptual designs and plans.... for compatibility with GDP's overall goals and to guide (the developers) toward planning and design solutions which will win City approval." In this capacity I have had the oppommity to review a number of development proposals, including the one that is before you tonight. Prior to and during its earliest informal discussions with the City, JPI presented GDP with a series of concepts for the development of the project, and on each occasion I reviewed the concepts and provided input to GDP and JPI. JPI consistently responded positively to this input, and through several iterations eventually arrived at the concept which was presented to you in a workshop last September. Since then JPI and its design team have endeavored to embrace not only the comments received at that workshop but also the significant input that has been provided by City staff dinring the formal project application/review process, in a determined effort to provide a project that not only meets the City's standards but also raises the bar for project quality. In my view, JPI has succeeded handsomely. I recently had the opportunity to review the project drawings that are now before you, and I was delighted to see the many enhancements that are the restfit of City review. Among these, the most noteworthy are the focus that has been placed on the project's clubhouse by bringing it forward to Milliken Avenue; the greatly enlarged interior open space, with its many amenlties; and the unique urban edges that the project will present to its Milliken Avenue and Sixth Street frontages. 227 119905 Chair andMember ofthe Planning Commission 23August 2000 Page 2 As you know, I served on the Planning Commission for six years, and I participated in the review and approval of GDP's specific plan. I was then, and I am now, a vocal proponent for quality development in this City. This project offers that kind of quality. I urge your favorable consideration and approval. Respectfully, JOHN MELCHER, AIA / ARCHITECT cc: Chuck Beecher, GDP REALi: ESTATE CONSULTANT T,T_C;: August 20, 2000 Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 RE: Empire Lakes -JPIProject Dear Planning Commission; Forthepastl8monthslhavebeenlookingatsitesin~eSoutherncaliforniamarketthatwould support a 250,000 +/- sotft campus style oilice complex for a publicly i/~ded Iragh - Tech user. A!~ mowing to a sdect few sites my client put the Rancho Cucamonga / F~nplre lakes project at the of the list Their biggest concern was the lack of housln~ within wa lki ng distance of their campus, which would cream a balance between work and home The JPI apa~ vauent p~ uject would help to create a vainMe feding promoting the community as a cos environment that aptral~ to tlg! High - Tech tenant I am pleased to be involved with such a proactive owner as General Dynamics in promoting community of Rancho Cucamonga to the High -Tech user. Steve Dou~nn 5135 240 TH. AVE. N.E. REDMOND, WA. 98053 425503-2261 FAX 425702-0316 I00~1 saT:bladoad ~sa~q~aoN LLL~9£g~'I~ XVd 9~:L0 ,LVS 0~/90/10 FAIT FAMILY TRUST 190 Newport Center Drive, Suite I00 Newport Beach, CA 92660 (O) 949.644.1860 (F) 949.644.1142 August 21, 2000 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commissiou P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: JPI at Empire Lakes Center Gendemen: The Fait Family Trust has had a long and successful relationship rovesting in real estate ~vith Richard Dick and Associates. We are extremely excited regarding the opportunities at Empire Lakes Center and our Fairxvay Bushxess Centre. Fairway Business Centre is located immediately north of the proposed JPI multi- family project and we look forward to JpI being our neighbor in Empire Lakes Center. JPI's tmtional reputation ~md financial strength with their parmer GE Capital, reaffirms our selection of being a part of Empire Lakes Center. We believe the mixed-use concept of housing, office and our northern neighbor, the Metrolink, is good not only for our project but the entire commutfity. Wc would appreciate your support of the J PI project. Sincere p cc: Mr.. John Burtchaell Mr. Richard Dick EMPIRE FM PRESENTED BY ,o..,0,--o- ( TOYOTA Robed W, Klemme' CEO S~ateglc Solutions c~.l~..n AuguSt 21,2000 Roy H. Taylor' Telbet Insurance & Financial Services Vice C3~aitman Donald N. Ecker' City of Rancho Cucamonga Vather, Saleson & Dobler Planning Commission CorPorate Counsel P.O. BOX 807 Williamj. Anthony RanchO Cucamonga, CA 91729 Donald I. Baker Subject: JPI at Empire Lakes Center Jack Boren* Dear Commissioners, Clifford R. Cummings* The Inland Empire Open has recently selected the Arnold Palmer Championship royo~ orSon B.,.a,~.o designed Empire Lakes Golf Course for the site of the 2000 BUY.GeM Inland Empire .~a.i ~. n.~. Open. We have discussed the concept of bringing the professional tournament to Empire ~-c~r~Be, Lakes Center since late last year. The golf tournament is the West County's premier GeerOe Fisher PGA TOUR event and a wonderful opportunity to raise significant funds for charities in State Farm Insurance both San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. 6r~ General Dynamics has shared with us the vision of creating a mixed-use project that Dr. Roger., Hadley inCOrporates a good blend of business and residential uses. It is our view that progress Loma LiBra Unlvetsi~ Health Care On building out the Empire Lakes Center will be a mix of uses, including residential, will nogerKranz* only add to the success of our PGA TOUR event and bring regional recognition to the rneB.sz,~e. Pr~. City Of Rancho Cucamonga and the Inland Empire Open. General Dynamics Froperils This year'S event will be telecast by Fox Sports West and provides an opportunity to Chris Meyer showcase the project and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. ~a~i~ e..e~o. We support General Dynamic's efforts in gaining the necessary City approvals to Wells Fargo Bank implement the development program at Empire Lakes Center. Their efforts to support the Inland Empire Open and local children charities should be recognized by City Bank elArne~ca officials. no~t S~go PleaSe give me a call at (909) 948-5565, if you have any questions. Vaughn Br'/an Sinc y, Dir ors August 21, 2000 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission Post Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 Dear Commissioners: Pacific Century Homes is currently in negotiations with General Dynamics to purchase approximately 18 acres at the northeast comer of Cleveland and Sixth Street in Empire Lakes Center. We intend to develop our own corporate office facility and additional office buildings in a community-oriented office park. We chose the Empire Lakes site due to the opportunity to locate on a premier golf course and current activity occurring in the area. We are cognizant of the proposed project by JPI. The prospect of having a quality housing development in such close proximity to us would compliment our project. JPI's reputation of locating in superior markets will only make it more attractive to our target market looking to relocate to the Inland Empire. With JPI being a part of Empire Lakes Center it will certainly help our development and the Empire Lakes Golf Course. We are supportive of the proposed JPI residential project and encourage the City's approval. Yours truly, PACIFIC CENTURY HOMES, INC. Neil D. Gascon President NnG:ro z10925 Courtly Coator Drive, Suite 1]0, Temeculo, CA 92591 · 909.506-]606 ° tAX 909.506-1612 Chaffey Joint Union High School District 211 WEST FIFTH STREET, ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA 91762-1698 · (909) 988-8511 · FAX (909) 984-1164 BOARD OF TRUSTEES SUPERINTENDENT ASSOCIATE SUPERINTENDENT Charles J. Uhalley William J. Brod August 9, 2000 Doug Fenn City of Rancho Cucamonga .~ o P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 SUBJECT: ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-31 JPI - The development of 521 apartments on 20.46 acres of land in the Mixed Use Planning Area IX (Subarea 18) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan located on the northwest corner of Sixth Street and Milliken Avenue. An Environmental Impact Report was previously certified in June 1994. An addendum to the EIR is being prepared to allow multiple-family residential uses as an additional permitted use in Planning Area IX. The addendum is being prepared in compliance with the California ' Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). APN: 209-272-17 Dear Mr. Fenn: Thank you for the opportunity to provide input regarding the availability of school facilities to serve the above mentioned project. The project is located within the Etiwanda High School attendance area. Enrollment at Etiwanda High School has exceeded capacity and any additional new development will result in additional overcrowding at the school. We estimate that this project will generate approximately 104 high school students and Etiwanda High School will be impacted by these additional students. Chaffey District will collect statutory development fees for new construction throughout the District. Sincerely, ~ Susan B. Sundell, Ed.D. Director, Business Services SBS:jm Alta Loma High School · ChaItey High School · Etiwanda Hi Canyon View High School · Chaffey Adu AYES: MACIAS, MCNIEL, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: MANNERINO, TOLSTOY - carded PUBLIC HEARINGS C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PEI 00-12 - TOMRA PACIFIC, INC. - A request to expand an existinc of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 5)of the Indu Specific Plan, located at 9910 6th Street -APN: 209-211-42 and 43. Related 1 Warren Morelion, Assistant Planner, presented Chairman McNiel opened the public headng. Chuck Buquet, Chades Joseph 10681 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 395, Rancho Cucamonga, thanked staff for ~ processing the application and requested approval. Hearing no further testimony, McNiel closed the public headng. He commented that the application was for an sting recycling center and it would clean up the operation. He felt it is g the community. Motion: Moved seconded by Stewart, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolution ~ Conditional Use Permit 00-12. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MCNIEL, STEWART MANNERINO, TOLSTOY - carded D. ADDENDUMTOENVIR(:~IVENTALffvPACTRER::)R1'ANDSUBAREA18SpECIFICpLANAMENDMENT 00-01 - JPI - A request to add multi-family residential as a permitted use in the Mixed Use Planning Area IX of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, located on the northwest comer of 6th Street and Milliken Avenue. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified in June 1994. An addendum to the EIR is being prepared to allow multiple-family residential uses as an additional permitted use in Planning Area IX. The addendum is being prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) - APN: 290-272-17. Douglas Fenn, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and reported that JPI had met with staff dudng the last week and met several of the conditions imposed at the last Commission meetjng. He said there were still a few minor issues to be addressed. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that staff felt the previous meeting with JPI had been very successful and staff had confidence everything would be resolved. Chairman McNiel opened the public headng. Chuck Buquet, Charles Joseph Associates, 10681 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 395, Rancho Cucamonga, stated the action this evening was administrative cleanup of the project approval. He Planning Commission Minutes -2- September 13, 2000 l~' ~iII said the action would bring the Empire Lakes Specific Plan into conformance with the General Plan. He expressed confidence that all issues would be fully addressed. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Stewart observed the item was merely a housekeeping matter. Motion: Moved byStewart, seconded byMaciastoadopttheresolutionrecommendingapprovalof the Addendure to the Environmental Impact Report and Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment 00-01. Motion carded by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MCNIEL, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: MANNERINO, TOLSTOY - carded B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ~ The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for Tentative Tract consisting of 24 single family lots with a separate lot for future expansion of GTE tal acres of land in the Low Residential Distdct (2-4 dwelling units per acre) the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Vintage Drive - APN: 225-251-47 Files: Tentative Tract 15866 and Variance 00-05. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 158 FIELDSTONF - A residential subdivision for 24 single family lots, plus a separate lot 1 facilities, on 8 acres of land in the Low Residential Distdct dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast comer of Milliken Avenue and Drive - APN: 225-251-47. Related Files: Development Review 00-52 and Vad~ F. VARIANCE 00-05 - FIELDSTONE - A request to in ;Iht from 6 feet to 10 feet to mitigate Route 30 noise for futun 5866 on 8 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2 to 4 c ), located at the southeast comer of Milliken Avenue and Vintage Dr 225-251-47. Related Files: Tentative Tract 15866 and Development Review ( Brent Le Count, Associate Planner the staff report and reported that a few minutes before 5:00 p.m., staff had received a 5. Fish and Wildlife Service requesting protocol surveys for the California c and trappings for the San Bemardino kangaroo rat. He stated that staff had reviewed and continues to recommend approval of the project because the letter contains ~ccupation of the site bythe gnatcatcheror kangaroo rat, only opinions. Chairman by the Commission would put the City in a vulnerable position. Keyin Ennis, Ass Attorney, stated that if the letter had contained specifics, it would be appropriate to ~ matter and ask the applicant to respond. He said that in reviewing the letter, he Fish and Wildlife indicated general concern and gave no specific facts of species are present on site. He did not feel the letter provides specific information City at dsk. Planning Commission Minutes -3- September 13, 2000 RESOLUTION NO. 00-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALl FORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-01, A REQUEST TO ADD MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AS A PERMITrED USE IN THE MIXED USE PLANNING AREA IX, AND ESTABLISHMENT OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 6TH STREET AND MILLIKEN AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 290-272-17. A. Recitals. 1. JPI Westcoast Development, L.P., has filed an application for Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of September 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng on the application. 3. All legal prerequisites pdor to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution, NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- referenced public headng on September 13, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property within the City; and b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment; and c, The proposed amendment is consistent with the flexible land use concept of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public headrig and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paregraphs I and 2 above. this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan or the General Plan and will provide for the logical development of the Planning Area IX and the General Plan and with related development; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00-93 SUBAREA 18 AMENDMENT 00-01 - JPI September 13, 2000 Page 2 b. The amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and c. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. The subject application is consistent with the objectives of the Subarea 18 Spedfic Plan, and the purposes of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan; and e. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. An Environmentai impact Report (EiR) was prepared and certified as a Master EIR forthe Empire Lakes Subarea 18 Industrial Area Specific Plan. The Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 21157.1 provides that the preparation and certification of a Master EIR allows forthe limited review of subsequent projects that were described in the Master EIR as being within the scope of the reporting accordance with certain requirements. However, because of the changes that are submitted by this project, an Addendum was prepared for said project. An Addendum to the Subarea 18 Specific Plan final EIR is appropriate documentation because some changes or additions are necessary to describe the proposed residential project but none of the conditions described in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the attached Addendum based on the following findings: a. There have not been substantial changes in the project that require major revisions to the previous EIR because of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in severity of previously identified significant effects. b. There have not been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. c. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was cedified as complete, that shows any of the following: 1 ) the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR, 2) significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR, 3) mitigation measures or altematives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or altemative, or 4) mitigation measures or altematives, which are considerably different from those analyzed in the final EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or altemative. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application, and recommends approval of Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment No. 00-01, as shown in the staff report. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00-93 SUBAREA 18 AMENDMENT 00-01 - JPI September 13, 2000 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2000. PLANNING CO MISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: C/' ~'[-arry~/J~4cNiel, Chairr~an A'I'I'EST: I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of September 2000, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MACIAS, MCNIEL, STEWART NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: HANNERIN0, TOLSTOY AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY.COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-01, TO ADD MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE MIXED USE PLANNING AREA IX OF THE SUBAREA 18 AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. JPI Westcoast Development, L.P., has filed an application for Industdal Area Specific Plan Amendment 00-01 as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the subject Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment is referred to as the "application." 2. On the 13th of September 2000, the Planning Commission 'of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and, following the conclusion of said public hearing, adopted Resolution No. 00-93; thereby, recommending to this City Council that said application be appmved. 3. On October 18, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and, following the conclusion of said hearing, and · adopted Resolution No. 00-93. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part "A," of this Ordinance are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council dudng the above- referenced public headng on October 18, 2000, including wdtten and oral staff reports, togetherwith public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: ' a. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan; and b. This amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element and the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and c. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties; d. The amendment is consistent with key land use objectives identified in the General Plan including, i) encourage opportunities to mix different, but cempatible land uses and activities, ii) promote land use patterns that encourage non-motodzed modes of transportation; and iii) organize land uses to promote the maximal opportunity for transit usage; and CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. IASP 00-01 - JPI October 18, 2000 Page 2 e. The inclusion of multi-family residential as a permitted use in Mixed Use Planning Area IX will provide an integrated environment that will respond to evolving market conditions and will help to create a "City that functions efficiently, is exciting to live in, and makes the best use of its vadous resources" pursuant to the objectives of the General Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council dudng the above- referenced pubic hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and b. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. An Environmental Impact Report (E IR) was prepared and certified as a Master EIR for the Empire Lakes Subarea 18 Industrial Area Specific Plan. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 21157.1 provides that the preparation and certification of a Master EIR allows for the limited review of subsequent projects that were described in the Master EIR as being within the scope of the reporting accordance with certain requirements. However, because of the changes that are submitted by this project, an Addendum was prepared for said project. An Addendure to the Subarea 18 Specific Plan final EIR is appropriate documentation because some changes or additions are necessary to describe the proposed residential project but none of the conditions described in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the attached Addendure based on the following findings: a. There have not been substantial changes in the project that require major revisions to the previous EIR because of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in severity of previously identified significant effects. b. There have not been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. c. Thero is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete, that shows any of the following: 1 ) the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR, 2) significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR, 3) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative, or 4) mitigation measures or alternatives, which are considerably different from those analyzed in the final EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or altemative. CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. IASP 00-01 - JPI October 18, 2000 Page 3 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application to each and every condition set forth below: Planninq Division. The following conditions are to be reviewed for compliance by the City Planner. 1) Within 45 days of City Council approval or pdor to issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, a revised Plan text and graphics, including all renumbered pages within affected sections, shall be submitted to the City Planner for review and approval. Upon acceptance by the City Planner, a total of 25, 3-hole punch, copies of the revised Plan shall be submitted for distribution to the City Council, the Planning Commission, Library, and staff. In addition, one unbound original, and one executable copy in Microsoft Word file format on a 3.5 inch IBM formatted diskette, shall be submitted. 2) Table A shall be re-labeled as Table 4-1 to replace said table on pages 4-5 of Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 18 Specific Plan. 3) Table 5-1, Residential, shall be revised to insert a footnote after the words "Multiple Family Dwellings" to read as follows: "(3) Residential permitted without industrial in same Planning Area." 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. THE CITY OF ]~ANCiIO CUCAFIONGA Staff Report DATE: October 18, 2000 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Duane A. Baker, Assistant to the City Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION FORMING AND ESTABLISHING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF A LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION DECLARING NECESSITY TO INCUR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS AND SUBMI'FI'ING PROPOSITION TO QUALIFIED ELECTORS RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council open the public hearing and take testimony on forming and establishing Community Facilities District (CFD) 2000-02 (Rancho Cucamonga Corporate Park) and authorizing the levy of a special tax in the CFD to finance the acquisition of certain public facilities. During this hearing it is also recommended that the City Council take testimony on the necessity to incur bonded indebtedness and submitting a proposition to the qualified electors of CFD 2000-02. This action is brought to you in accordance with the request of the property owner and pursuant to City policy. BACKGROUND The proposed CFD is being requested by Catellus Development Corporation to fund public improvements related to their development located on the east and west sides of Milliken Avenue, south of Foothill Boulevard and north of ArrOw Route (Rancho Cucamonga Corporate Park)). This is the same development where GATX Logistics and Lowe's Home Improvement are located. Attached is a boundary map showing the exact boundaries of CFD 2000-02. These facilities will serve the residents in the northeast region of the community by providing needed improvements along Arrow Route, Milliken Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. To help fund these improvements, the developer has requested that a CFD ,24 Z APPROVAL Of RESOLUTIONS ESTABLISHING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) AND AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX AND DECLARING NEESSITY TO INCUR BONDED IDEBTEDNESS AND SUBMI'I'FING A PROPOSITION TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS October 18, 2000 Page 2 be formed. This request is in keeping with the City's policy on CFD formations and all associated formation costs are being borne by the developer. In order to pay for these improvements, a special tax will be levied. This special tax will be on the properties in the CFD only. The special tax is based on the acreage of the property. The maximum annual special tax rate will be $3,896 per taxable acre. The rate for the special tax is consistent with the City policy to insure that the total taxes on any property do not exceed 2%. This special tax rate has been reviewed with the property owner and they are in concurrence with the rate and method of apportionment for the special tax. Finally, in order to finance the facilities in question, it is necessary for the CFD to incur bonded indebtedness. The debt service for these bonds will be paid from the proceeds of the special tax levied in this CFD. No other property owners or residents will be responsible for this debt. It is proposed that the total amount of bonded indebtedness shall not exceed $7,000,000. Before the bonded indebtedness and levy of the special tax can happen, the property owners of the CFD need to vote on the matter. The attached resolution contains the language of the ballot proposition and sets the date for the election as October 25, 2000. It should be noted that there is only one property owner, Catellus Development Corporation, and they are the only qualified elector. The property owner is the party that originally requested the formation of this CFD. If the City Council decides to approve these resolutions then the matter will be put before the property owner for a vote. If the vote is successful, the staff will levy the special tax and sell the necessary bonds to see that these needed public facilities, are financed. These actions are consistent with established City policy on CFD formations and comply with the necessary state regulations regarding these matters. Duane A. Baker Assistant to the City Manager -2- PROPOSED BOUNDARIES COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO.2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA UPLAND i FONTANA l E -- PROJECT LOCATION INTERSTATE 10 INDEX MAP II PROPOSED BOUNDARIES """"' "" COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO.2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA UPLAND i FONTANA ill .. -- PROJECT LOCATION INTERSTATE 10 INDEX MAP I: PROPOSED BOUNDARIES COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO.2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOOTHILL BLVD. (STATE HIGHWAY) Z ARROW ROUTE PROPOSED COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT ' SO, ALE ~ FET .o. 2ooo-o2w~c~ocuc,~oc~coRpo.,~ ~=.... , PARK) BOUNDARy iwl I LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE FRACTIrlNAL NORTH ~/EST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, T(]~/NSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 6 ~/EST, SAN ]~ERNARI)IND MERII)IAN, IN THE CITY DF RANCHO CUCAMDNGA, COUNTY OF SAN ]~ERNAR/)INO, STATE OF CALIFDRNZA, ACCDRI)ING TD OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, FORMING AND ESTABLISHING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK), AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA (the "City Council"), has previously declared its intention and ordered the preparation of a Community Facilities District Report relating to the initiation of proceedings to create a Community Facilities District pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Mello- Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Act"). This Community Facilities District shall hereinafter be referred to as COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) (the "District"); and, WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing relating to the establishment of the District, the extent of the District, the financing of the acquisition of certain public facilities and all other related matters has been given, and a Community Facilities District Report, as ordered by this City Council, has been presented to this City Council and has been made a part of the record of the hearing on the Resolution of Intention to establish such District; and, WHEREAS, all communications relating to the establishment of the District, the proposed public facilities and the proposed rate and method of apportionment of special tax have been presented, and it has further been determined that a majority protest as defined by law has not been received against these proceedings; and, WHEREAS, inasmuch as there have been less than twelve (12) registered voters residing within the territory of the District for at least the preceding ninety (90) days, the authorization to levy special taxes within the District shall be submitted to the landowners of the District, such landowners being the qualified electors as authorized by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. RECITALS. The above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. DETERMINATIONS. It is hereby determined by this City Council that: A. All prior proceedings pertaining to the formation of the District were valid and taken in conformity with the requirements of the law, and specifically the provisions of the Act, and that this finding and determination is made pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 53325.1. B. No written protests to the formation of the District or the levy of the special taxes have been received and, therefore, the special taxes proposed to be levied within the District have not been precluded by majority protest pursuant to Section 53324 of the Government Code of the State of California. C. The District as proposed conforms with the City's goals and policies regarding the establishment of community facilities districts. D. Less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the territory of the District for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the close of the public hearing, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified electors of the District shall be the landowners of the District as such term is defined in Government Code Section 53317(f) and each landowner who is the ownerof record as of the close of the public hearing, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land that she or he owns within the District. E. The time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes to the qualified electors of the District and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified electors of the District. F. The City Clerk, acting as the election official, has consented to conducting any required election on a date which is less than 125 days following the adoption of any resolution forming and establishing the District. G. The Board of Directors of the Cucamonga County Water District ("CCWD") and this City Council have each approved a joint community facilities agreement pursuant to the provisions of the Act pertaining to the acquisition of certain water and sewer improvements to be owned, operated and maintained by CCWD. SECTION 3. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT REPORT. The Community Facilities District Report for the District (the "Report"), as now submitted by Willdan/MuniFinancial, Special Tax Consultant, shall stand as the report as required pursuant to Government Code Section 53321.5 for all future proceedings and all terms and contents are approved as set forth therein. SECTION 4. NAME OF DISTRICT. The City Council does hereby establish and declare the formation of the District known and designated as "COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK)." SECTION 5. BOUNDARIES OF DISTRICT. The boundaries and parcels of land for which the public facilities are to be provided and on which special taxes will be levied in order to pay the costs and expenses to acquire the authorized public facilities are generally described as follows: All property within the boundaries of COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK), as shown on a boundary map as previously approved by this legislative body, such map designated by the name of this District, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. The boundary map of the proposed District has been filed pursuant to Sections 3111 and 3113 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of San Bernardino, at Page __ of Book __ of the Book of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts for such County. SECTION 6. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES. A general description of public facilities which are to be financed under these proceedings, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The facilities are facilities which the City Council is authorized by law to contribute revenue to or to construct, own or operate. It is hereby further determined that the proposed facilities are necessary to meet increased demands and needs placed upon the City and CCWD as a result of proposed development within the District, and the costs and expenses charged to this District represent the fair share costs of the facilities and services attributable to this District. For a full and complete description of such facilities, reference is made to the Community Facilities District Report, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. In addition to financing the authorized facilities, the financing of those incidental expenses described in the Community Facilities District Report are also approved and authorized. SECTION 7. SPECIAL TAX. Except where funds are otherwise available a special tax, secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the proposed District, is hereby authorized, subject to voter approval, to be levied within the boundaries of such District. For particulars as to the rate and method of apportionment of the proposed special tax, reference is made to the attached and incorporated Exhibit "B" (the "Special Tax Formula"), which sets forth in sufficient detail the method of apportionment to allow each landowner or resident within the proposed District to estimate ; the maximum amount that such person will have to pay. Such special tax shall be utilized to pay directly for the facilities, to pay debt service on authorized bonds to assist in financing the acquisition of such facilities, to replenish any reserve fund established for such bonds, and to pay the costs of administering the bonds and the District. The special taxes herein authorized, to the extent possible, shall be collected in the same manner as ad valorem property taxes and shall be subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority in any case of delinquency as applicable for ad valorem taxes; provided, however, the District may utilize a direct billing procedure for any special taxes that cannot be collected on the County tax roll or may, by resolution, elect to collect the special taxes at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet its financial obligations. Under no circumstances will the special tax to be levied against any parcel used for private residential purposes be increased as a consequence of delinquency or default by the owner of any other parcel or parcels within the District by more than 10 percent. This legislative body further authorizes that special taxes may be prepaid and satisfied by payment of the prepayment amount calculated pursuant to the Special Tax Formula. Upon recordation of a Notice of Special Tax Lien pursuant to Section 3114.5 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, a continuing lien to secure each levy of the special tax shall attach to all non-exempt real property in the District and this lien shall continue in force and effect until the special tax obligation is prepaid and permanently satisfied and the lien canceled in accordance with law or until collection of the tax by the legislative body ceases. SECTION 8. PREPARATION OF ANNUAL TAX ROLL. The name, address and telephone number of the office, department or bureau which will be responsible for preparing annually a current roll of special tax levy obligations by Assessor's parcel number and which shall be responsible for estimating future special tax levies pursuant to Section 53340.1 of the Government Code of the State of California, are as follows: GIS/Special Districts Supervisor City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 (909) 477-2700, Ext 2567 SECTION 9. SUBSTITUTION FACILITIES. The description ofthe public facilities, as set in Exhibit A, is general in its nature. The final nature and location of such facilities will be determined upon the preparation of final plans and specifications therefor. Such 4 final plans may show substitutes in lieu of, or modification to, the facilities described in Exhibit A and any such substitution shall not be a change or modification in the proceedings as long as the facilities serve a function substantially similar to the facilities described in Exhibit A. SECTION 10. ELECTION. This City Council herewith submits the levy of the special tax to the qualified electors of the District, such electors being the landowners in the District, with each landowner having one (1) voter for each acre or portion thereof of land which he or she owns within the District. This legislative body hereby further directs that the ballot proposition relating to the levy of the special tax be combined and consolidated with the proposition relating to the incurring of a bonded indebtedness. This Resolution shall not constitute the notice ofthe election, and the Resolution declaring the necessity to incur the bonded indebtedness shall constitute the notice of the election relating to the combined proposition on the authorization to incur a bonded indebtedness and authorization for the special tax levy and the proposition to establish an appropriations limit for the District. PASSED, APPROVED, And ADOPTED this day of ., 2000. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: William J. Alexander, Mayor ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk Exhibit "A" Description of Public Facilities The types of public facilities proposed to be financed by the District shall include: Street improvements on public street improvements required as a condition of approval of development of the property within the proposed District; such street improvements to include but not be limited to: demolition and grading, curb, gutter and sidewalks, traffic signals; entry feature and Signs; fire hydrants; storm drains; water and sewer improvements; paving; striping; landscaping and irrigation improvements; public utilities and appurtenances. A-1 251 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 (Rancho Cucamonga Corporate Park) RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX A Special Tax applicable to each assessor's parcel or portion thereof in the CFD shall be levied and collected according to the tax liability determined by the Council, through the application of the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax set forth below. All of the property in the CFD, unless exempted by law or by the provisions of this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax, shall be taxed to the extent and in the manner herein provided. I. DEFINITIONS "Act" means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California. "Acre or Acreage" means the land area of a Parcel as shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, the land area shown on the applicable final map, parcel map, condominium plan, or other map or plan recorded with the County. "Administrative Fees or Expenses" means the actual or estimated costs incurred by the City to determine, levy and collect the Special Taxes, including salaries of City employees and the fees of consultants, legal counsel, corporate paying agents, fiscal agents, and trustees; the costs of collecting installments of the Special Taxes upon the general tax rolls; cost of arbitrage calculation and arbitrage rebates, preparation of required reports; and any other costs required to administer the CFD as determined by the City. "Administrative Services Director" means the Administrative Services Director of the City or his or her designee. "Assessor" means the Assessor of the County. "Bond Share" means the share of Bonds assigned to a Taxable Parcel as A-] 2 2. specified in Section VI, "Bonds" mean any bonds issued by the CFD or other debt as defined in Section 53317 (d) of the Act incurred by CFD 2000-02. "CFD" means the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Facilities District No. 2000-02 (Rancho Cucamonga Corporate Park). "City" means the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. "Council" means the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga acting for the CFD under the Act. "County" means the County of San Bernardino, California. "Debt Service" means for each calendar year, the total scheduled amount of principal and interest payable on any Outstanding Bonds during the calendar year commencing on January 1 of such Fiscal Year. "Fiscal Year" means the period starting on July I and ending the following June 30. "Indenture" means the bond indenture, fiscal agent agreement, indenture of trust, trust agreement, resolution of issuance of other instrument pursuant to which the Bonds are issued, as modified, amended and/or supplemented from time to time, and any instrument replacing or supplementing the same. "Maximum Annual Special Tax" means the greatest amount of Special Tax, determined in accordance with Section Ill, that can be levied in any Fiscal Year on any parcel. "Maximum Special Tax Revenue" means the sum of the Maximum Annual Special Tax for all of the Taxable Parcels in the CFD. "Outstanding Bonds" means the total principal amount of Bonds that have been issued and not retired or defeased. "Parcel" means any County of San Bernardino assessor's parcel that is within the boundaries of CFD, based on the equalized tax rolls of the County of San Bernardino as of January 1 in the prior Fiscal Year. "Parcel's Allocated Share" means the Maximum Annual Special Tax for a Parcel A-2 divided by the Maximum Annual Special Tax Revenue. "Payoff Parcel" means any Taxable Parcel for which a prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation is being calculated pursuant to Section VI. "Reserve Fund" means the total amount held in any bond reserve fund established for the Outstanding Bonds of the CFD. "Reserve Fund Share" is equal to the lesser of the Reserve Requirement or existing monies in the Reserve Fund, if any, for the Outstanding Bonds multiplied by the Parcel's Allocated Share. "Reserve Requirement" shall have the meaning given such term in the Indenture. "Special Tax" means any tax levied within CFD pursuant to the Act and this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax. "Special Tax Obligation" means the total obligation of a Taxable Parcel to pay the Special Tax for the remaining life of the CFD. "Special Tax Requirement" means for any Fiscal Year, the total of (i) Debt Service for such Fiscal Year; (ii) related Administrative Expenses for such Fiscal Year; (iii) any amounts needed to replenish the Reserve Fund to the Reserve Requirement and (iv) the amount, if any, equal to reasonably anticipated Special Tax delinquencies for the current Fiscal Year [subject to the limitations of Government Code Section 53321(d)], less a credit for funds available to reduce the annual Special Tax levy as determined pursuant to the Indenture. "Taxable Acreage" or "Taxable Acre" is the area within each Taxable Parcel that is suitable for commercial or other improvements when considering existing easements for streets. The minimum Taxable Acreage in this CFD is 137.38 acres. If the total Acreage of all Taxable Parcels falls below the minimum Taxable Acreage of 137.38 acres, the Taxable Acreage for each Taxable Parcel shall be increased proportionally based on the Acreage of such Parcel until the minimum Taxable Acreage is reached "Taxable Parcel" means any Parcel that is not a Tax-Exempt Parcel. "Tax-Exempt Parcel" means, as of January 1 st of each year, (i) any Parcel owned by a governmental entity, or irrevocably offered for dedication to a governmental entity, (ii) any Parcel which constitutes public right-of-way or which is encumbered by an u nmanned utility easement, making impractical its utilization for other than the purpose set forth in the easement, or (iii) any Parcel assigned a zero value by the A-3 Assessor. Notwithstanding the foregoing, (i) a Taxable Parcel acquired by a public entity after the adoption of the Resolution of Formation by means of negotiated transaction, or by gift or devise, or by eminent domain proceedings, shall remain a Taxable Parcel, and (ii) if a public agency owning a Tax-Exempt Parcel, including a Tax-Exempt Parcel held in trust for any beneficiary, grants a leasehold or other possesscry interest in the parcel to a non-exempt person or entity, the Special Tax shall be levied on the leasehold or possesscry interest and shall be payable by the owner of the leasehold or possesscry interest. II. CLASSIFICATION OF PARCELS At the beginning of each Fiscal Year, using the definitions above, the Council shall cause each Parcel to be classified as a Tax-Exempt Parcel or a Taxable Parcel.. III. MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATE The Maximum Annual Special Tax Rate is $3,896 per Taxable Acre. On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2002, the Maximum Annual Special Tax shall be increased by two percent (2%) of the amount in effect forthe previous Fiscal Year. IV. APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX Commencing with the first Fiscal Year for which the Special Tax is levied and for each following Fiscal Year, the Council shall determine the Special Tax Requirement and levy the Special Tax until the amount of Special Taxes levied equals the Special Tax Requirement. The Special Taxes shall be levied each Fiscal Year as follows: (1) The Special Tax shall be levied on each Taxable Parcel in an amount equal to 100% of the applicable Maximum Annual Special Tax; or (2) If less monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement, the Special Tax shall be levied proportionally on each Taxable Parcel at less than 100% of the Maximum Annual Special Tax; provided that, the Council may levy an amount in excess of the Special Tax Requirement if all authorized CFD Bonds have not already been issued. V. MANNER OF COLLECTION Collection of the Special Tax shall be by the County of San Bernardino in the same A-4 manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes are collected and the Special Tax shall be subject to the same penalties and the same lien priority in the case of delinquency as ad valorem taxes; provided, however, that the City may provide in the Indenture or in the Resolution of Issuance for (i) other means of collecting the Special Tax, including direct billings thereof to the property owners and (ii) judicial foreclosure of delinquent Special Taxes. VI, SATISFACTION OF SPECIALTAX OBLIGATION Proper~y owners may prepay and permanently satisfy the Special Tax Obligation ("Special Tax Prepayment") by a cash settlement with the City as permitted under Government Code Section 53344. Prepayment is permitted only under the following conditions: · The City determines that the prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation does not jeopardize its ability to make timely payments of Debt Service on Outstanding. No Special Tax prepayment shall be allowed unless the Maximum Annual Special Tax that may be levied on all Taxable Parcels other than the Payoff Parcel is at least 110% of the maximum annual Debt Service on the Outstanding Bonds. · Any property owner prepaying the Special Tax Obligation must pay any and all delinquent Special Taxes and penalties for the Payoff Parcel prior to prepayment. The amount of the Special Tax Prepayment shall be established by the following steps: Step 1: Determine the Maximum Annual Special Tax for the Payoff Parcel based on the assignment of the Maximum Annual Special Tax described in Section III above. Step 2:Divide the Maximum Annual Special Tax for the Payoff Parcel from Step 1 by the Maximum Special Tax Revenue to arrive at the Parcel's Allocated Share. Step 3: Determine the Bond Share for the Payoff Parcel by multiplying the Parcel's Allocated Share from Step 2 by the total amount of Outstanding Bonds issued by the CFD. Step 4:Determine the Reserve Fund Share associated with the Bond Share determined in Step 3. The Reserve Fund Share is equal to the lesser of the Reserve Requirement or existing monies in the Reserve Fund, A-5 if any, for the Outstanding Bonds multiplied by the Parcel's Allocated Share. Step 5:Calculate the amount needed to pay interest on the Bond Share from the first Bond interest and/or principal payment date established pursuant to the Indenture following the current Fiscal Year until the earliest redemption date for the Bonds on which Bonds may be redeemed from the proceeds of a Special Tax Prepayment. Subtract from this amount, the amount of interest that is reasonably expected to be earned from the reinvestment of the Special Tax Prepayment less money kept by the City to cover costs from the date of the prepayment until the first redemption date for the Bonds. Step 6: Determine the Total Prepayment Amount by subtracting the Reserve Fund Share calculated in Step 4 from the Bond Share calculated in Step 3, adding the interest amount calculated in Step A.5 and by adding Debt Service not yet paid for the current calendar year to the date of bond redemption and all fees, call premiums, and expenses incurred by the City in connection with the prepayment calculation or with the application of the proceeds of the Special Tax Prepayment. VII. TERM OF "SPECIAL TAX" The Special Tax shall be collected only so long as required to make payments on the Bonds, but in no event shall it be levied after Fiscal Year 2035-2036. A-6 RESOLUTION NO. 2000-Z~3 RESOLUTION DECLARING NECESSITY TO INCUR A BONDED INDEBTEDNESS, SUBMITTING TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 {RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) A PROPOSITION TO INCUR A BONDED INDEBTEDNESS SECURED BY A SPECIAL TAX LEVY TO PAY FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL FACILITIES IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) AND A PROPOSITION TO ESTABLISH AN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR SUCH DISTRICT, AND GIVING NOTICE THEREON WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA (the "City Council"), has previously declared its intention and held and conducted a public hearing relating to the issuance of bonds to be secured by special taxes to pay for the acquisition of certain public facilities in a community facilities district, as authorized pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Act"). This Community Facilities District shall hereinafter be referred to as COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) (the "District"); and, WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to proceed to make the determination of necessity to incur the bonded indebtedness, to declare the purpose for such debt, and to authorize the submittal of a combined proposition to the qualified electors of such District, being the landowners of the proposed District, all as authorized and required by law; WHEREAS, all of the qualified electors have waived the time limits specified in the Act pertaining to the conduct of the election and the requirements for impartial legal arguments have also been waived by the unanimous consent of the qualified electors; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk,' as the Election Official, has concurred in the shortening of time for conducting the election. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. RECITALS. The above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION2. NECESSITY FOR BOND ISSUE. The City Council hereby expressly declares and states that it is necessary to incur a bonded indebtedness as authorize under the terms and provisions of the Act, in order to finance the public facilities described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporate herein by this reference. SECTION 3. PURPOSE OF BONDED INDEBTEDNESS. The purpose for the proposed bonded indebtedness is generally described as follows: To finance the construction, expansion, rehabilitation or purchase of certain public facilities consisting of the types of facilities described in Exhibit A hereto; and appurtenances and appurtenant work and incidental costs as authorized pursuant to Government Code Section 53345.3. For a further description of such facilities, reference is made to the Community Facilities District Report (the "Report") of Willdan/MuniFinancial, the special tax consultant, previously approved by this City Council, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. SECTION 4. TERRITORY TO PAY FOR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS. This City Council determines that the whole of the District will pay for the above-referenced bonded indebtedness. A general description of the District is as follows: All property within the boundaries of COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARKE), as shown on a map as previously approved by the City Council, such map designated by the name of this District, a copy of which is on file in the Office efthe City Clerk. SECTION 5. BOND AMOUNT. The amount of the proposed bonded indebtedness, including the cost of the facilities, together with all incidental expenses, shall not exceed $7,000,000. SECTION 6. BOND TERM. This City Council hereby further determines that the maximum term of bonds and/or any series shall not exceed forty (40) years, and such bonds may be issued in differing series, at differing times. The maximum rate of interest to be paid on such bonds may not exceed the greater of either twelve percent (12%) per annum or the maximum rate permitted by law at the time of sale of any of such bonds. The bonds, except where other funds are made available, shall be paid exclusively from the annual levy of the special tax, and are not secured by any other taxing power or funds of the District or the City. SECTION 7. ELECTION. The proposition related to the incurring of the bonded indebtedness shall be consolidated with the proposition relating to the levy of the special tax, shall be combined into one ballot proposition, and shall be submitted to the qualified voters, together with a ballot proposition to establish an appropriations limit for the District, at a special election to be held on the 25th day of October, 2000, and such election shall be a special mailed ballot election to be conducted by the City Clerk (the "Election Official"). If the combined proposition for the levy of the special tax and the incurring of the bonded indebtedness receive the approval of more than two-thirds (2/3) of the votes cast on the proposition, bonds may be authorized, issued and sold for the purposes set forth herein and the special tax may be levied as provided in the Resolution of Formation. SECTION 8. BALLOT. The ballot proposal to be submitted to the qualified voters at the election shall generally be as follows: PROPOSITION A Shall the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK), County of San Bernardino, 1) incur a bonded indebtedness in an amount not to exceed $7,000,000 to pay for authorized public facilities pursuant to the special tax formula set forth in Resolution No. ,2) levy a special tax to secure such bonded indebtedness, pay directly for such public facilities, replenish any reserve fund, and pay costs of administering such bonds and such district? PROPOSITION B Shall the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO, 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) establish an Article XIIIB appropriations limit equal to $7,000,0007 SECTION 9. VOTE. The appropriate mark placed in the voting square after the word "YES" shall be counted in favor of the adoption of the proposition, and the appropriate mark placed in the voting square after the word "NO" in the manner as authorized, shall be counted against the adoption of such proposition. SECTION 10. ELECTION PROCEDURE. The Election Official is hereby authorized to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of such election. The Election Official shall perform and render all services and proceedings incidental to and connected with the conduct of the election, which services shall include, but not be limited to, the following activities as are appropriate to the election: A. Prepare and furnish to the election officers necessary election supplies for the conduct of the election. B. Cause to be printed the requisite number of official ballots, tally sheets and other necessary forms. C. Furnish and address official ballots for the qualified electors of the District. D. Cause the official ballots to be delivered to the qualified electors or their authorized representatives, as required by law. E. Receive the returns of the election and supplies. F. Sort and assemble the election material and supplies in preparation for the canvassing of the returns. G. Canvass the returns of the election. H. Furnish a tabulation of the number of votes given in the election. I. Make all arrangements and take the necessary steps to pay all costs of the election incurred as result of services performed by the District and pay costs and expenses of all election officials. J. Conduct and handle all other matters relating to the proceedings and conduct of the election in the manner and form as required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, And ADOPTED this day of 2000. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: William J. Alexander, Mayor ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF TYPES OF FACILITIES Street improvements on public street improvements required as a condition of approval of development of the property within the proposed District; such street improvements to include but not be limited to: demolition and grading, curb, gutter and sidewalks, traffic signals; entry feature and signs; fire hydrants; storm drains; water and sewer improvements; paving; striping; landscaping and irrigation improvements; public utilities and appurtenances. RANCH 0 CUCAMONGA COM~wUNXTY -~E~VXCES Staff Report TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director BY: Paula Pachon, Management Analyst III DATE: October 18, 2000 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS RECEIVED FROM THE SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION, CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR CHILDHOOD INJURY PREVENTION (CALIFORNIA KIDS' PLATE PROGRAM), FOR A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,000 TO CONDUCT COMMUNITY EDUCATION PROGRAMS TO PREVENT/REDUCE ACCIDENTS AT OUR SKATE PARK FACILITY (FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001 ). RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council appropriate funds received from the San Diego State University Foundation, California Center for Childhood Injury Prevention (California Kids' Plate Program), for a grant in the amount of $6,000 to conduct community education programs to prevent/reduce accidents at our skate park facility. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: In 1992 the State legislature created Kids' Plates, a specialty license plate that generates funds for child injury, abuse prevention and child care health and safety programs. Kids' Plates are distinguished from other specialty license plates by the use of any one of four symbols: a heart, a hand, a star or a plus sign as a part of the vehicle's plates. Motor vehicle owners who purchase Kids' Plates generate funds for child abuse and injury prevention through the payment of a vanity plate fee ($50 for personalized plates and $20 for sequential plates). Proceeds from Kids' Plates sales are distributed as follows: 25% to child injury prevention; 25% to child abuse prevention; 50% to child-care health and safety programs. As of July 1998, 27,000 California vehicle owners have chosen Kids' Plates for their vehicles. Their purchases have generated more than $1,000,000 for child injury, child abuse prevention and child-care health and safety programs. The goal is to have 100,000 Kids' Plates on the road by the end of the 2000. As part of the distribution of these funds the Center for Injury Prevention (Kids' Plate Program) release an RFP to fund mini, regional and statewide grants. In June 2000, the Community Services Department submitted an application for $6,000 to the Center for Injury Prevention (Kids' Plate Program) for a mini-grant that would assist staff in conducting community education programs at our skate park facility. Specifically through the California Kids' Plate Program mini-grant that we have received we will promote the use of safety gear by youngsters, ages 5-15 while skateboarding. Through bi- monthly demonstration and safety clinics, our program will seek the support of professional skater(s) to assist in getting the message out about the importance of wearing safety gear. In addition, through this grant we will foster the development of a local skate park facility- networking meeting for recreation professionals in the field and will develop educational materials promoting the use of safety gear while skateboarding. Lastly, through this grant we will promote the Kids' Plate Program. Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council appropriate the $6,000 received through this mini-grant and to direct staff to work towards meeting the deliverables of this important child safety/injury prevention program. Respe ully s ~ Kevin cArdie ~ices Director I:lCOMMSERV~C~uncil&BoardstCityCouncil~StaffRepo~ts~KidsplatesGrant. doc -2- RANCHO CUCAMON GA CO~rYUNITY ~EI~.VIOE~ TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Rick Gomez, Community Development Director Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director BY: Karen McGuire-Emery, Senior Park Planner Paula Pachon, Management Analyst III DATE: October 18, 2000 SUBJECT: PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATE BACKGROUND In accordance with the City Council's request to become more informed of park and recreation facility issues, programs, projects and events, this report is provided to highlight pertinent issues, projects and programs occurring in both the Community Services Department and the Park Design/Development and Maintenance Sections of Engineering. A. PARKS AND FACILITIES UPDATE Golden Oak Park: · Due to difficulties establishing the turf, the developer has notified the city that the park would not be completed by the end of September, as anticipated. The developer anticipates completion of the park sometime in October. Mountain View Park: · The City accepted Park improvements for Mountain View Park on September 20th and a dedication celebration was held on September 30t~. La Mission Park: · Lewis Homes began rough grading the park site the week of October 2"d. CITY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION FA~:ILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATE OCTOBER 18, 2000 Spruce and Old Town Parks: · Graffiti on the basketball hard-court surfaces has become a major problem. The special "slow-play" hard-court surface and colors are being removed along with the graffiti removal operations. In an attempt to find a solution, the park staff has agreed to allow the colored hard-court surface to be removed and replaced with white lines only as a trial method for graffiti removal/control at these two parks, so that large areas covered with graffiti may then be pressure blasted for ease of graffiti removal. Park crews will then be able to touch-up the white lines as needed. Epicenter: · The fence around the soccer field is being increased in height, to prevent any damage to vehicles parked in the southerly parking lot. · Additional netting for the little league fencing is being installed, to prevent balls from going onto Arrow Route. B. COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATE Seniors: · The Autumn Leaves Fashion Show will be held at the Senior Center on Saturday, October 21St. This spectacular event co-sponsored by the V.I.P. Club helps raise funds for Center equipment and supplies. The program will be highlighted by new fall and winter fashions modeled by the Center's seniors, a light salad lunch and entertainment. It is anticipated that the program will sell out. · The Senior Center Halloween Spooktacular will be held on October 26th, at 10:00 a.m. Seniors are invited to come in costume. There will be prizes and games for the nature ghosts and goblins. On this special day of illusions, what better entertainment than a day of magic featuring performers from the Magic Guild. In addition youth dancers from the Debra Davis Talent Show will also perform. This scary event is co-sponsored by the V.I.P. Club. · A very special Veterans Day Tribute will be offered at the Senior Center on Thursday, November 9t", at 10:00 a.m. This event, co-sponsored by the Elks Club, will honor those brave men and women who have served in our country's armed forces. There will be special entertainment from the local high schools, including an ROTC Color Guard, Jazz Band, and a special tribute will also be included. Don't miss this moving tribute. · The Senior Advisory Committee will meet on Monday, October 23% 2000 at 9:00 a.m. at the Senior Center. Over the past several months the committee has been addressing the item of a new senior Center. This has included input toward a vision statement and the development of an advocacy role. Both of these issues will be updated at the October meeting. The Committee will also discuss items pertaining to recruitment of new members and membership. -2- CiTY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATE OCTOBER 18, 2000 · The West Valley Regional Council on Aging will hold their next meeting on October 10t~, 2000, at 9:30 a.m. at the Rancho Cucamonga Senior Center. The Regional Council on Aging is made up of members from various cities of the West Valley who advise the Department of Aging and Adult Services on senior related issues, programs and funding. Members of our Senior Advisory Committee are also represented on this Council. · Attendance at the Senior Center continues to escalate. During the past quarter attendance rose by 12% over the same quarter in lggg to approximately 32,000. · Money Matters Seminars - The second of three financial lectures will be offered on Tuesday, October 17t~, 2000 at 11:00 a.m. The series is presented by Irv Voorhies of Woodell and Reed Financial Services and will be geared toward the needs of seniors. The topic for this month's presentation was Medi-Cal/Medi-Care - Are You Covered? Trips and Tours: · Palm Sprinqs Follies, November 8. Step back to the 30's and 40's for a fabulous musical review in the tradition of the Ziegfeld Follies. Participants will have time prior to the show to enjoy lunch on their own. (Seats still available) · Lights and Sounds of Christmas, December 13. We will visit Old Town Pasadena to browse and have dinner (on your own). As dark approaches, we will move up the hill to view the Hastings Ranch area with all its many blocks of Christmas lights and ornaments. Next we'll visit the Balin's Mansion, where just about every leaf has a light on it. Then we'll finish up with a drive down Christmas Tree Lane. Don't miss this special holiday trip. (Seats still available) · Rose Parade, January 1, 2001. Enjoy the world famous Rose Parade from grandstand seats along Colorado Blvd. Price includes bus, grandstand seating and a box lunch. Cost is $75 per person. (Seats still available) · Getty Center, February 15, 2001. Visit this world famous museum and gardens featuring spectacular architecture and view of the historic Sepulveda Pass. At the museum you'll see paintings by many of the most familiar masters - Rembrandt, Goya, Monet, and Cezanne, to name a few. A very special day to remember. (Seats still available) · A new brochure will be available in November identifying the multi-day tours and cruises for next year. Approximately 100 trips will be included. Human Services: · Flu Clinic, November 7, 2000, 9:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. The San Bernardino Public Health Department has made available to the Senior Center 500 vaccine units for seniors and chronically ill. The Department will administer our flu clinic at the Senior Center from 9:00 am - 11:00 a.m. Because we were unsure of when we would be recoiving the vaccine serum this year, we postponed the health fair that normally accompanies the clinic, for a later date. · The Arthritis Foundation is sponsoring a free 7-week lecture series on Fibromyalgia, at the Senior Center from October 3rd to November 21 st, 2000 from 10:00 a.m. - 12 noon. -3- CITY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATE OCTOBER 18, 2000 · Dr. Duber of San Antonio Hospital will present a free two-part lecture on The Warning Signs of a Heart Attack, at the Senior Center on October 23~d & 30th, at 12:30 pm. · Dr. Anita Kund[, M.D. will provide a free Women's Wellness lecture at the Senior Center on Tuesday, October 24th at 1:00 pro. Her topic will be Thyroid Dysfunction. · Dr. Harvey Cohen will present a free lecture on Forgetfulness - Is it Alzheimer's Disease? on October 18th , at 7:00 pro. Dr. Cohen will also present a free lecture on Tuesday, October 17th , at 12 noon on Unwanted Hair Growth in Females. · Luncheon Program - the Oldtimers Foundation serves hot lunches Monday through Friday at the Senior Center. Participants must be 60 years of age or older and a suggested donation of $2.00 per individual is requested. A limited homebound delivery program is also available. During the past three months over eleven thousand (11,000+) meals were prepared at the Senior Center. This is a 15% increase over the same period in 1999. · The County Department of Aging and Adult Services will be at the Senior Center the 4th Thursday of every month from 1:00 pm to 3:30 pm to answer questions on various senior related issues. Their next session will be on October 26th, Volunteers: The table below summarizes department usage of volunteers for the month of August 2000 and provides summary Year to Date information. MONTH: AUGUST 2000 YEAR TO DATE # of # of Volunteers # of Hours $ Value* Volunteers # of Hours $ Value* Admin 6 39 $ 546 47 168 $ 2,352 Sports 96 504 $7,056 1,067 7,556 $105,784 Sr & Human 55 231 $3,234 388 1,606 $ 22,454 Services Special 7 14 $ 196 182 851 $ 11,914 Events Youth 85 1,080 $15,120 270 2,346 $ 32,844 Programs Total 249 1,868 $26,152 1,974 12,527 $175,378 * Dollar value based on $14.00 per hour. Teens: · The Teen Center sponsored its annual Halloween Bash on October 27m. Over 200 are expected to attend. -4- CITY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATE OCTOBER 18, 2000 · The Teen Recreation Activity Club (TRAC) began its fall program of monthly meetings in October and published the TRAC Tattler newsletter. The bi-monthly babysitting service "Night on the Town" is going strong with approximately 35 children each night. Six teens volunteer each night and do a variety of activities with the children. · The teen trip program took their favorite annual jaunt to Knot~s' Sc, ary Farm on October 7m. Approximately 80 teens participated. · The Community Services Department, Police Department and the community partnership committee, RC CASA (Citizens Against Substance Abuse) will be co-sponsoring a special Red Ribbon Week presentation. The Legacy of Hope program will take place on October 23~d at Alta Loma High School and will educme sophomore students about the dangers of drug abuse. · The Teen Workshop Series continues with Ecluc~tion Funcling 101 on Saturday November 4th. This course will cover grants, student loans, scholarships and other sources of college funding. · The Teen Volunteer Program is receiving 8n ever-increasing number of calls from high school students who need to volunteer community service hours. The teen volunteers help the Department with special events such as the College Fair and Founders Day. Youth Activities: · Playschool sessions began on September 1'1~h at near capadty, with over 500 children enrolled. The program operates classes at Lions Center East, the Mulberry Learning Center and leases classrooms 8t Hillside Community Church. · The annual Pumpkin Carving Workshop will be held on October 27th at Red Hill Park. Approximately 40 youth are expected to attend this fun event. Classes: · Registration for contract classes started on September gth. Total enrollment for summer classes was two thousand thirty-one (2,031) participants. Special Events: · A Skate Park Demonstration and Safety Clinic is scheduled for Saturday, October 21 st at the Skate Park Facility. This quarterly program will feature equipment give-a-ways, that were made possible due to our Kids Plate Grant, and a program provided by professional skaters that will include a safety clinic and skills demonstration. · The Colleqe Fair is planned for October 19t' at the RC Family Sports Center. This annual event draws approximately 60 colleges and universities and 2,000 teens and parents and is a joint collaboration between the City and our three local high schools. -5- CITY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNI1T SERVICES UPDATE OCTOBER }8, 2000 Youth Sports: · The table below summarizes youth sports activities for the reporting period: · The Sports Advisory Committee met on October 11th. Field request materials were due for the spring/summer for 2001. The Committee will meet again on November 8th to review staffs field allocation proposal. Organized Youth Sports: · Bi-annually, the Community Services Department, through the Sports Advisory Committee allocates sport fields for non-profit organized youth sport leagues throughout the City. The table that follows indicates participation figures for the month of July 2000 per day. Facility use noted only notes City facilities. A number of groups also used school sites. AYSO 98 1,007 92% 1,510 Bear Gulch Park Beryl East Park Beryl West Park Etiwanda Creek Park ACE Youth 41 434 91% 651 Red Hill Park Softball* Spruce Park Windrows Park ACE T-Ball 20 235 80% 351 Beryl Park Alta Loma 32 399 100% 599 Heritage Park Liffie League* CYSA 32 443 75% 665 Church Street Park Bear Gulch Park Citrus Little 31 364 96% 546 Red Hill Park League Cucamonga 3 34 79% 51 Red Hill Park Dodgers Windrows Park Deer Canyon 23 294 100% 441 Coyote Canyon Park Little League Hermosa Park Rancho Little 33 377 97% 566 Milliken Park League Old Town Park Epicenter & Sports Complex RC Pony 5 59 100% 89 Old Town Park Heritage Park RC Spidts 3 57 72% 86 Red Hill Park Windrows Park RC Softball* 28 327 80% 491 Red Hill Park Vineyard 40 501 98% 752 Ellena Park Little League Windrows Park · . Kenyon Park * Includes >ost-season tournaments, additional area teams and spectators. -6- CITY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATE OCTOBER 18, 2000 RC Family Sports Center: · Activities at the Sports Center for the reporting period are summarized in the table below: Basketball Full 80 Adult/Males 8 Teams Court-Leagues Three-on-Three 40 Adult/Males 8 Teams Basketball Leagues Racquetball 8 Adult/Males Singles Singles League Co-ed Volleyball 40 Adult/Males &Females 4 Teams Youth Volleyball 60 6-12/Girls 6 Teams Organized Play 64 6-12/Boys & Girls N/A Basketball Camps · The table below provides droP-in/open Dlay participation at the B.C. Family Sports Center for the reporting period: Adult Basketball 482 Youth Basketball 445 Adult Racquetball 374 Youth Racquetball 28 Adult Volleyball 78 Youth Volleyball 210 Jazzercise 804 Adult Sports: Adult Softball 2,272 Adult/Male &Female 142 teams Adult Soccer 612 Adult/Male &Female 42 teams Adult Flag Football 110 Adult/Male 11 teams Adult Tennis 38 Adult/Male &Female N/A Rancho Cucamonga Performing Arts Academy: · Workshops - Vocal Expression and Performance and the Television Commercial workshops will continue on a five-week basis throughout December of 2000. We also have a new addition to our performing arts classes, Multi-Media Art, taught by Ms. Viola Lucer-Luper. Her first session of classes has been a success. -7- ZT/ CITY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATE OCTOBER 18, 2000 Each new session brings new members to the constantly growing numbers of classes and workshops being offered. The performing ad classes are being offered at the Lions Community Center West and East until a permanent site is found. Park and Facilities: · Our park monitors continue to do a tremendous job. While on site they have addressed several concerns and answered numerous questions from our residents. They have also served as the liaison between the public and the Community Services Department and Maintenance Division. Community members have shown much appreciation for this added service. · Even though summer is over we are still showing a high number of shelter rentals. The breakdown for park reservations for the month of August are as follows: Red Hill 4,270 41 Resident 45 228.5 $2,348.00 4 Non-Resident Coyote Canyon 350 6 Resident 6 102.0 $ 155.00 0 Non-Resident Heritage 860 22 Resident 22 34.5 $ 735.00 0 Non-Resident Hermosa 345 8 Resident 9 29.0 $ 205.50 1 Non-Resident Civic Courtyard 400 3 Resident 3 31.0 $ 375.00 0 Non-Resident Amphitheater 253 3 Resident 3 30.0 $ 332.00 0 Non-Resident Total 6,478 83 Resident 88 455.0 $4,150.50 5 Non-Resident Heritage Equestrian Center: · Equestrian Center usage for October/November 2000 is outlined below: Alta Loma Riding Club Board Meeting / 7:30 - 9pm Regional October 7~ Disabled Show/7 - 9pm Alta Loma Riding Club October 14t~ Playday Show / 8am - 4pm 4 - H Club October 16t" General Meeting / 7 - 9pm 4 - H Club October 28t~ Halloween Horse Show / 8am - 5pro Alta Loma Riding Club November 1 ,t Board Meeting / 7:30 - 9pm Alta Loma Riding Club November 4t~ Scavenger Hunt Ride/11 am- 1 pm RSET November 12t~ Schooling Dressage / 8am - 5pm 4 - H Club November 20u~ General Meeting / 7 - 9pro -8- CiTY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATE OCTOBER 18, 2000 Special Events: · Park Opening - Mountain View Park opened on Saturday, September 30, 2000. Nearly two hundred residents were on hand to enjoy the activities that included a ribbon cutting ceremony, a game area for kids and free hot dogs. The opening of our other new park, Golden Oak, has been postponed due to difficulties encountered by the landscaper in establishing turf. We anticipate that Golden Oak Park will be ready for the public sometime in the late fall. Both of these parks will be a wonderful addition to our community. · The Founders Day Parade and Celebration will be held on Saturday, November 11th. The focus is on family entertainment and fun. Our theme this year is American Heroes. The popular Kids Fun Zone will be expanded this year to include activities for older children. · The City of Rancho Cucamonga is a co-sponsor in another first - the Buy.com Inland Empire Open. This event will be held on October 9-15, 2000, at the Empire Lakes Golf Course. City staff will be manning an information booth in the Expo Village that will provide an opportunity for participants and spectators alike to learn more about the City's Community Foundation and the Library Foundation. Park and Recreation Commission: · The following items were discussed/acted upon at the Commission's September 21. 2000, meeting: -Update and establishment of future agenda items for the Senior Advisory Committee. -Update and establishment of future agenda items for the Sports Advisory Committee. -Update on City's General Plan and Recreation Needs and Systems Recommendations Study. -Conceptual review of the Rancho Etiwanda Park Project. -Review and recommendation of approval of proposed fee changes. -Election of Officers - Vice-Chair. -Discussion concerning existing policies governing storage and snack bars uses for youth groups at City parks. -Information regarding youth roller hockey facilities. -Information on athletic field lighting technology advances. -Participation of the Park and Recreation Commission in the Founders Day Parade. -General Plan Update. -Community Foundation Update. -Trails, Sports and Senior Advisory Committees updates. Rancho Cucamonga Community Foundation: · The following items were discussed/acted upon at the Foundation's Seotember 12. 2000, meeting: -Sub-committee update reports and discussion regarding the Founder's Night Gala - An Evening of Elegance to be held on November 4, 2000. -Review and discussion of Founder's Night Gala with Gala Ambassadors. -9- Z73 CITY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATE OCTOBER 18, 2000 · The Foundetion hosted a sponsors' reception on September 20, 2000, from 5:00-7:00 p.m. at the Civic Center Courtyard for those businesses end individuals who have donated to their Founders Night Gala. In addition to a short program a~endees were able to witness the unveiling of Gela's commemorative poster that was prepared by a Ioc81 high school teacher and to enjoy hor'sdourves donated by 6-Star Catering. Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter: · The following activities took place during the reporting period: -Calvary Chapel Rancho Cucamonga - Skate Demonstration and Outreach Ministry- September 23, 2000 - Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter Expanded Parking Lot. -Rancho Cucemonga Professional Firefighters Association - Celebrity Softball Game - September 24, 2000 - Rancho Cucemonga Epicenter Stadium. -Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce - Grape Harvest Festival- October 6-8, 2000 - Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter Expanded Parking Lot. -DGU/M-3 Entertainment - Boyz II Men Concert- October 8, 2000 - Rancho Cucemonga Epicenter Stadium. -All Events Unlimited - Olympic Boxing - October 14, 2000 - Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter Stadium · Staff is working with representatives of the following organizations for future bookings at the Epicenter: -CASTO, Chapter - School Bus Roadeo - March 23-24, 2001 - Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter Expanded Parking Lot. -Etiwanda High School - Graduation - June 2001 - Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter Stadium. -Rancho Cucamonga High School - Graduation - June 2001 - Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter Stadium. -Inland Empire Colts - Cucamonga Colts Semi-Professional Football - Fall 2001 - Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter Stadium. Respectfully submitted, omez 4cArdie ommunity Development DirectorC Comr lunity Services Director I.'lCOMMSERVJCouncil&Boards ICl~yC~uncillStaffReportsJUpdate 10. 18. OO, d~c -10-