HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021/11/17 - Regular Meeting Agenda PacketMayor
L. Dennis Michael
Mayor Pro Tem
Lynne B. Kennedy
Members of the City
Council:
Ryan A. Hutchison
Kristine D. Scott
Sam Spagnolo
AMENDED AGENDA
(Amended on: 11/17/21 9:20 AM: Item D3 Closed Session
updated: Assessors parcel number 22916119 added)
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
November 17, 2021
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCIL
HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLIC
FINANCE AUTHORITY
CLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.
REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.
The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00
p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings of
meetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. Live
Broadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).
CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M.
TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM
ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo
A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTS
D. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION
D1.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 54956.9(A) SOUTHWEST VOTER REGISTRATION EDUCATION PROJECT AND
LOUISA OLLAGUE V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; SAN BERNARDINO SUPERIOR COURT
CASE NO. CIVRS 1603632. (CITY)
D2.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8685 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 22915128, FORMALLY
22915115; NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT,
OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND
COLOMBERO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO
NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE
PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. (CITY)
D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8717 AND 8733 ETIWANDA AVENUE AND 12928 AND
12934 WHITTRAM AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 22916102, 22916103, 22916104, 22916105 AND 22916119;
NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT, OVERLAND,
PACIFIC AND CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND
COLOMBERO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO
NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE
PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. (CITY)
D4.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 22916222; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,
REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,
OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE.
NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. (CITY)
D5.THREAT TO PUBLIC SERVICES OF FACILITIES PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54957; CONSULTATION WITH DARRYL POLK, DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY
AND MICHELLE MUNSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY.
(CITY/FIRE)
D6.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957
(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)
E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the Council
Chambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo
A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
B. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONS
B1.Presentation of a Certificate of Sympathy in Memory of Jacquelin “Jackie” Amsler, Former Library
Board of Trustees Member.
B2.Presentation of a Certificate of Recognition to Rancho Pop Warner Football & Cheer Junior Varsity
Panthers Cheerleading Division who recently won a bid to compete at Nationals Cheer and Dance
Championships in Orlando Florida.
B3.Recognition of the 2021 Digital Cities Award Received by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Recap
of the 2021 Cyber Security Month Campaign.
B4.Presentation of Refurbished Bicycle Distribution Program.
C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor
Agency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to address
the Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing
Authority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the
Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,
and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire Protection
District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Council
may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.
Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the
Mayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be
addressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to the
members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.
Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any
activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.
The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the
business portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic
contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for these
business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of the
agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period
may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.
CONSENT CALENDARS:
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted
upon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and
Public Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion with
the City Council consent calendar.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
D1.Consideration of Meeting Minutes for the Regular Meetings of October 20, 2021 and November
3, 2021 and Special Meetings of October 18, 2021.
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$1,746,274.36 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $2,737,457.48 Dated October 25,
2021 Through November 07, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the
Month of October in the Total Amount of $1,458,936.82. (CITY/FIRE)
D3.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $13,795.20 Dated October 25, 2021
Through November 07, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of October 31, 2021 for
the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
(CITY/FIRE)
D5.Consideration to Adopt Development Impact Fee Study Prepared by NBS Government
Finance Group Dated December 16, 2020. (FIRE)
D6.Consideration to Authorize the Purchase of Banking Services from MUFG Union Bank, N.A. of
Los Angeles, CA, the Most Responsive Bidder in Accordance with the Request for Quote
(“RFQ”) #21/2201 in the Amount of $267,210 for a FiveYear Term. (CITY)
D7.Consideration of the Use of a County of San Bernardino Contract with Systems Source for the
Civic Center COVID and ADA Improvement Project. (CITY)
D8.Consideration of the Purchase of Traffic Signal Cabinets, Controllers and Related Equipment
from Econolite, in an Amount not to Exceed $165,000. (CITY)
D9.Consideration of the Purchase of ThirtyFive (35) Streetlight Poles and Seventeen (17)
Aluminum Pole Arms from Ameron Pole Products, LLC in the amount of $76,150. (CITY)
D10.Consideration of the Purchase of Fertilizer and Pesticides Supplies on an as Needed Basis
from Nutrien Ag Solutions and WilburEllis Co. in an Amount Not to Exceed $125,000. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Contract with Yunex, LLC. for the Traffic Signal Battery Backup System
Replacement in the Amount of $248,424 plus a Contingency in the Amount of $29,076. (CITY)
D12.Consideration to Approve Parcel Map 20101, Improvement Agreement, Improvement
Securities, and Resolutions Ordering the Annexation into Landscape Maintenance District
No.1, and Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Nos.1 and 2, Located on the East Side of
Vineyard Avenue, South of Azurite Avenue, Related to Case No. SUBTPM20101.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021126), (RESOLUTION NO. 2021127), AND (RESOLUTION NO.
2021128) (CITY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
E1.Consideration of Second Reading and Adoption of the Following:
Ordinance No. 988
An Ordinance of the City Of Rancho Cucamonga, Amending Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code to Permit Utility Companies to Store Materials and Equipment Associated with Utility
Facilities and Infrastructure and to Correct Errors and Omissions in the Allowed Land Use Table and
Industrial Development Standards Table and to Adopt an Uncodified Amendment to Ordinance No.
982 to Exempt Certain Buildings Currently Under Construction from the Amended Use Table, Making
Findings in Support Thereof, and Making a Determination that the Ordinance is Exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
F1.Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 989, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading Adding Chapter 8.15 (Mandatory Organics Waste Disposal Reduction) To Title 8 Health and
Safety of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, a Determination of Exemption Under CEQA.
(ORDINANCE NO. 989) (CITY)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 990, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading to Amend the Etiwanda Specific Plan Land Use Designation of a 6.96Acre Site Located at
12774 Banyan Street from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential, Related to the
Subdivision of the Property into 9 Residential Lots for Future SingleFamily Development. Staff has
Prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for Consideration.
(Specific Plan Amendment DRC201600730). APN: 022511107. (ORDINANCE NO. 990) (CITY)
G2.Continued Public Hearing for Consideration of General Plan Amendment DRC201800533 and Zoning
Map Amendment DRC201800534 – Arbor Express Car Wash – A Request for General Plan and
Zoning Map Amendments to Change the Land Use and Zoning Designation for One ProjectSpecific
Parcel of Land (APN: 020829103) from Low Medium (LM) Residential District to General
Commercial (GC) District and for Two NonProject Specific Adjacent Parcels of Land (020829101
and 020829102) From Low Medium (LM) Residential District to Medium (M) Residential District
Related to a Proposed Car Wash Located Approximately 200 Feet East of Archibald Avenue on the
North Side of Arrow Route. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021045) (CITY) (Continued from June 2, 2021
and August 4, 2021 City Council Meeting)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
H1.Consideration to Receive and File Quarterly Financial Update for the First Quarter of Fiscal Year
2021/22. (CITY/FIRE)
H2.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Toole Design Group, LLC for the
Completion of the Healthy RC Active Transportation Infrastructure Assessment and Improvement
Plan in the Amount of $349,882, Plus a 10% Contingency, and Authorization of Appropriations from
the State Grant (Fund 274) and Citywide Capital Infrastructure (Fund 198) Funds. (CITY)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I2.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
L. ADJOURNMENT
Adjournment in Memory of Jacquelin “Jackie” Amsler, Former Library Board of Trustees Member.
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 1
MayorL. Dennis MichaelMayor Pro TemLynne B. KennedyMembers of the CityCouncil:Ryan A. HutchisonKristine D. ScottSam Spagnolo AMENDED AGENDA(Amended on: 11/17/21 9:20 AM: Item D3 Closed Sessionupdated: Assessors parcel number 22916119 added)CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDANovember 17, 202110500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCILHOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLICFINANCE AUTHORITYCLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in theCouncil Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings ofmeetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. LiveBroadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M. TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTSD. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIOND1.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 54956.9(A) SOUTHWEST VOTER REGISTRATION EDUCATION PROJECT AND
LOUISA OLLAGUE V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; SAN BERNARDINO SUPERIOR COURT
CASE NO. CIVRS 1603632. (CITY)
D2.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8685 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 22915128, FORMALLY
22915115; NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT,
OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND
COLOMBERO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO
NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE
PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. (CITY)
D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8717 AND 8733 ETIWANDA AVENUE AND 12928 AND
12934 WHITTRAM AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 22916102, 22916103, 22916104, 22916105 AND 22916119;
NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT, OVERLAND,
PACIFIC AND CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND
COLOMBERO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO
NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE
PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. (CITY)
D4.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 22916222; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,
REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,
OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE.
NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. (CITY)
D5.THREAT TO PUBLIC SERVICES OF FACILITIES PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54957; CONSULTATION WITH DARRYL POLK, DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY
AND MICHELLE MUNSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY.
(CITY/FIRE)
D6.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957
(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)
E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the Council
Chambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo
A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
B. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONS
B1.Presentation of a Certificate of Sympathy in Memory of Jacquelin “Jackie” Amsler, Former Library
Board of Trustees Member.
B2.Presentation of a Certificate of Recognition to Rancho Pop Warner Football & Cheer Junior Varsity
Panthers Cheerleading Division who recently won a bid to compete at Nationals Cheer and Dance
Championships in Orlando Florida.
B3.Recognition of the 2021 Digital Cities Award Received by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Recap
of the 2021 Cyber Security Month Campaign.
B4.Presentation of Refurbished Bicycle Distribution Program.
C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor
Agency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to address
the Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing
Authority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the
Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,
and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire Protection
District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Council
may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.
Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the
Mayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be
addressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to the
members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.
Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any
activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.
The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the
business portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic
contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for these
business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of the
agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period
may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.
CONSENT CALENDARS:
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted
upon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and
Public Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion with
the City Council consent calendar.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
D1.Consideration of Meeting Minutes for the Regular Meetings of October 20, 2021 and November
3, 2021 and Special Meetings of October 18, 2021.
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$1,746,274.36 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $2,737,457.48 Dated October 25,
2021 Through November 07, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the
Month of October in the Total Amount of $1,458,936.82. (CITY/FIRE)
D3.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $13,795.20 Dated October 25, 2021
Through November 07, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of October 31, 2021 for
the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
(CITY/FIRE)
D5.Consideration to Adopt Development Impact Fee Study Prepared by NBS Government
Finance Group Dated December 16, 2020. (FIRE)
D6.Consideration to Authorize the Purchase of Banking Services from MUFG Union Bank, N.A. of
Los Angeles, CA, the Most Responsive Bidder in Accordance with the Request for Quote
(“RFQ”) #21/2201 in the Amount of $267,210 for a FiveYear Term. (CITY)
D7.Consideration of the Use of a County of San Bernardino Contract with Systems Source for the
Civic Center COVID and ADA Improvement Project. (CITY)
D8.Consideration of the Purchase of Traffic Signal Cabinets, Controllers and Related Equipment
from Econolite, in an Amount not to Exceed $165,000. (CITY)
D9.Consideration of the Purchase of ThirtyFive (35) Streetlight Poles and Seventeen (17)
Aluminum Pole Arms from Ameron Pole Products, LLC in the amount of $76,150. (CITY)
D10.Consideration of the Purchase of Fertilizer and Pesticides Supplies on an as Needed Basis
from Nutrien Ag Solutions and WilburEllis Co. in an Amount Not to Exceed $125,000. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Contract with Yunex, LLC. for the Traffic Signal Battery Backup System
Replacement in the Amount of $248,424 plus a Contingency in the Amount of $29,076. (CITY)
D12.Consideration to Approve Parcel Map 20101, Improvement Agreement, Improvement
Securities, and Resolutions Ordering the Annexation into Landscape Maintenance District
No.1, and Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Nos.1 and 2, Located on the East Side of
Vineyard Avenue, South of Azurite Avenue, Related to Case No. SUBTPM20101.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021126), (RESOLUTION NO. 2021127), AND (RESOLUTION NO.
2021128) (CITY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
E1.Consideration of Second Reading and Adoption of the Following:
Ordinance No. 988
An Ordinance of the City Of Rancho Cucamonga, Amending Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code to Permit Utility Companies to Store Materials and Equipment Associated with Utility
Facilities and Infrastructure and to Correct Errors and Omissions in the Allowed Land Use Table and
Industrial Development Standards Table and to Adopt an Uncodified Amendment to Ordinance No.
982 to Exempt Certain Buildings Currently Under Construction from the Amended Use Table, Making
Findings in Support Thereof, and Making a Determination that the Ordinance is Exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
F1.Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 989, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading Adding Chapter 8.15 (Mandatory Organics Waste Disposal Reduction) To Title 8 Health and
Safety of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, a Determination of Exemption Under CEQA.
(ORDINANCE NO. 989) (CITY)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 990, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading to Amend the Etiwanda Specific Plan Land Use Designation of a 6.96Acre Site Located at
12774 Banyan Street from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential, Related to the
Subdivision of the Property into 9 Residential Lots for Future SingleFamily Development. Staff has
Prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for Consideration.
(Specific Plan Amendment DRC201600730). APN: 022511107. (ORDINANCE NO. 990) (CITY)
G2.Continued Public Hearing for Consideration of General Plan Amendment DRC201800533 and Zoning
Map Amendment DRC201800534 – Arbor Express Car Wash – A Request for General Plan and
Zoning Map Amendments to Change the Land Use and Zoning Designation for One ProjectSpecific
Parcel of Land (APN: 020829103) from Low Medium (LM) Residential District to General
Commercial (GC) District and for Two NonProject Specific Adjacent Parcels of Land (020829101
and 020829102) From Low Medium (LM) Residential District to Medium (M) Residential District
Related to a Proposed Car Wash Located Approximately 200 Feet East of Archibald Avenue on the
North Side of Arrow Route. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021045) (CITY) (Continued from June 2, 2021
and August 4, 2021 City Council Meeting)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
H1.Consideration to Receive and File Quarterly Financial Update for the First Quarter of Fiscal Year
2021/22. (CITY/FIRE)
H2.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Toole Design Group, LLC for the
Completion of the Healthy RC Active Transportation Infrastructure Assessment and Improvement
Plan in the Amount of $349,882, Plus a 10% Contingency, and Authorization of Appropriations from
the State Grant (Fund 274) and Citywide Capital Infrastructure (Fund 198) Funds. (CITY)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I2.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
L. ADJOURNMENT
Adjournment in Memory of Jacquelin “Jackie” Amsler, Former Library Board of Trustees Member.
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 2
MayorL. Dennis MichaelMayor Pro TemLynne B. KennedyMembers of the CityCouncil:Ryan A. HutchisonKristine D. ScottSam Spagnolo AMENDED AGENDA(Amended on: 11/17/21 9:20 AM: Item D3 Closed Sessionupdated: Assessors parcel number 22916119 added)CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDANovember 17, 202110500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCILHOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLICFINANCE AUTHORITYCLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in theCouncil Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings ofmeetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. LiveBroadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M. TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTSD. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIOND1.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENTCODE SECTION 54956.9(A) SOUTHWEST VOTER REGISTRATION EDUCATION PROJECT ANDLOUISA OLLAGUE V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; SAN BERNARDINO SUPERIOR COURTCASE NO. CIVRS 1603632. (CITY)D2.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8685 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 22915128, FORMALLY22915115; NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT,OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANDCOLOMBERO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TONEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THEPROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. (CITY)D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8717 AND 8733 ETIWANDA AVENUE AND 12928 AND12934 WHITTRAM AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAXASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 22916102, 22916103, 22916104, 22916105 AND 22916119;NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT, OVERLAND,PACIFIC AND CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANDCOLOMBERO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TONEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THEPROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. (CITY)D4.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 22916222; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTHABOVE. (CITY)D5.THREAT TO PUBLIC SERVICES OF FACILITIES PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54957; CONSULTATION WITH DARRYL POLK, DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGYAND MICHELLE MUNSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY.(CITY/FIRE)D6.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the Council
Chambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo
A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
B. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONS
B1.Presentation of a Certificate of Sympathy in Memory of Jacquelin “Jackie” Amsler, Former Library
Board of Trustees Member.
B2.Presentation of a Certificate of Recognition to Rancho Pop Warner Football & Cheer Junior Varsity
Panthers Cheerleading Division who recently won a bid to compete at Nationals Cheer and Dance
Championships in Orlando Florida.
B3.Recognition of the 2021 Digital Cities Award Received by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Recap
of the 2021 Cyber Security Month Campaign.
B4.Presentation of Refurbished Bicycle Distribution Program.
C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor
Agency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to address
the Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing
Authority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the
Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,
and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire Protection
District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Council
may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.
Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the
Mayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be
addressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to the
members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.
Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any
activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.
The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the
business portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic
contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for these
business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of the
agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period
may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.
CONSENT CALENDARS:
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted
upon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and
Public Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion with
the City Council consent calendar.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
D1.Consideration of Meeting Minutes for the Regular Meetings of October 20, 2021 and November
3, 2021 and Special Meetings of October 18, 2021.
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$1,746,274.36 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $2,737,457.48 Dated October 25,
2021 Through November 07, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the
Month of October in the Total Amount of $1,458,936.82. (CITY/FIRE)
D3.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $13,795.20 Dated October 25, 2021
Through November 07, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of October 31, 2021 for
the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
(CITY/FIRE)
D5.Consideration to Adopt Development Impact Fee Study Prepared by NBS Government
Finance Group Dated December 16, 2020. (FIRE)
D6.Consideration to Authorize the Purchase of Banking Services from MUFG Union Bank, N.A. of
Los Angeles, CA, the Most Responsive Bidder in Accordance with the Request for Quote
(“RFQ”) #21/2201 in the Amount of $267,210 for a FiveYear Term. (CITY)
D7.Consideration of the Use of a County of San Bernardino Contract with Systems Source for the
Civic Center COVID and ADA Improvement Project. (CITY)
D8.Consideration of the Purchase of Traffic Signal Cabinets, Controllers and Related Equipment
from Econolite, in an Amount not to Exceed $165,000. (CITY)
D9.Consideration of the Purchase of ThirtyFive (35) Streetlight Poles and Seventeen (17)
Aluminum Pole Arms from Ameron Pole Products, LLC in the amount of $76,150. (CITY)
D10.Consideration of the Purchase of Fertilizer and Pesticides Supplies on an as Needed Basis
from Nutrien Ag Solutions and WilburEllis Co. in an Amount Not to Exceed $125,000. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Contract with Yunex, LLC. for the Traffic Signal Battery Backup System
Replacement in the Amount of $248,424 plus a Contingency in the Amount of $29,076. (CITY)
D12.Consideration to Approve Parcel Map 20101, Improvement Agreement, Improvement
Securities, and Resolutions Ordering the Annexation into Landscape Maintenance District
No.1, and Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Nos.1 and 2, Located on the East Side of
Vineyard Avenue, South of Azurite Avenue, Related to Case No. SUBTPM20101.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021126), (RESOLUTION NO. 2021127), AND (RESOLUTION NO.
2021128) (CITY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
E1.Consideration of Second Reading and Adoption of the Following:
Ordinance No. 988
An Ordinance of the City Of Rancho Cucamonga, Amending Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code to Permit Utility Companies to Store Materials and Equipment Associated with Utility
Facilities and Infrastructure and to Correct Errors and Omissions in the Allowed Land Use Table and
Industrial Development Standards Table and to Adopt an Uncodified Amendment to Ordinance No.
982 to Exempt Certain Buildings Currently Under Construction from the Amended Use Table, Making
Findings in Support Thereof, and Making a Determination that the Ordinance is Exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
F1.Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 989, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading Adding Chapter 8.15 (Mandatory Organics Waste Disposal Reduction) To Title 8 Health and
Safety of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, a Determination of Exemption Under CEQA.
(ORDINANCE NO. 989) (CITY)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 990, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading to Amend the Etiwanda Specific Plan Land Use Designation of a 6.96Acre Site Located at
12774 Banyan Street from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential, Related to the
Subdivision of the Property into 9 Residential Lots for Future SingleFamily Development. Staff has
Prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for Consideration.
(Specific Plan Amendment DRC201600730). APN: 022511107. (ORDINANCE NO. 990) (CITY)
G2.Continued Public Hearing for Consideration of General Plan Amendment DRC201800533 and Zoning
Map Amendment DRC201800534 – Arbor Express Car Wash – A Request for General Plan and
Zoning Map Amendments to Change the Land Use and Zoning Designation for One ProjectSpecific
Parcel of Land (APN: 020829103) from Low Medium (LM) Residential District to General
Commercial (GC) District and for Two NonProject Specific Adjacent Parcels of Land (020829101
and 020829102) From Low Medium (LM) Residential District to Medium (M) Residential District
Related to a Proposed Car Wash Located Approximately 200 Feet East of Archibald Avenue on the
North Side of Arrow Route. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021045) (CITY) (Continued from June 2, 2021
and August 4, 2021 City Council Meeting)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
H1.Consideration to Receive and File Quarterly Financial Update for the First Quarter of Fiscal Year
2021/22. (CITY/FIRE)
H2.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Toole Design Group, LLC for the
Completion of the Healthy RC Active Transportation Infrastructure Assessment and Improvement
Plan in the Amount of $349,882, Plus a 10% Contingency, and Authorization of Appropriations from
the State Grant (Fund 274) and Citywide Capital Infrastructure (Fund 198) Funds. (CITY)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I2.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
L. ADJOURNMENT
Adjournment in Memory of Jacquelin “Jackie” Amsler, Former Library Board of Trustees Member.
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 3
MayorL. Dennis MichaelMayor Pro TemLynne B. KennedyMembers of the CityCouncil:Ryan A. HutchisonKristine D. ScottSam Spagnolo AMENDED AGENDA(Amended on: 11/17/21 9:20 AM: Item D3 Closed Sessionupdated: Assessors parcel number 22916119 added)CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDANovember 17, 202110500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCILHOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLICFINANCE AUTHORITYCLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in theCouncil Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings ofmeetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. LiveBroadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M. TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTSD. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIOND1.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENTCODE SECTION 54956.9(A) SOUTHWEST VOTER REGISTRATION EDUCATION PROJECT ANDLOUISA OLLAGUE V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; SAN BERNARDINO SUPERIOR COURTCASE NO. CIVRS 1603632. (CITY)D2.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8685 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 22915128, FORMALLY22915115; NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT,OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANDCOLOMBERO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TONEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THEPROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. (CITY)D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8717 AND 8733 ETIWANDA AVENUE AND 12928 AND12934 WHITTRAM AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAXASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 22916102, 22916103, 22916104, 22916105 AND 22916119;NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT, OVERLAND,PACIFIC AND CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANDCOLOMBERO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TONEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THEPROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. (CITY)D4.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 22916222; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTHABOVE. (CITY)D5.THREAT TO PUBLIC SERVICES OF FACILITIES PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54957; CONSULTATION WITH DARRYL POLK, DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGYAND MICHELLE MUNSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY.(CITY/FIRE)D6.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the CouncilChambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.COUNCIL CHAMBERSPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCEROLL CALL:Mayor MichaelMayor Pro Tem KennedyCouncil Members Hutchison, Scott, and SpagnoloA. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDAB. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONSB1.Presentation of a Certificate of Sympathy in Memory of Jacquelin “Jackie” Amsler, Former LibraryBoard of Trustees Member.B2.Presentation of a Certificate of Recognition to Rancho Pop Warner Football & Cheer Junior VarsityPanthers Cheerleading Division who recently won a bid to compete at Nationals Cheer and DanceChampionships in Orlando Florida.B3.Recognition of the 2021 Digital Cities Award Received by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Recapof the 2021 Cyber Security Month Campaign.B4.Presentation of Refurbished Bicycle Distribution Program.C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONSMembers of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, SuccessorAgency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to addressthe Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public FinancingAuthority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits theFire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire ProtectionDistrict, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Councilmay receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by theMayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to beaddressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to themembers of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in anyactivity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of thebusiness portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topiccontained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for thesebusiness items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of the
agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period
may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.
CONSENT CALENDARS:
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted
upon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and
Public Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion with
the City Council consent calendar.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
D1.Consideration of Meeting Minutes for the Regular Meetings of October 20, 2021 and November
3, 2021 and Special Meetings of October 18, 2021.
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$1,746,274.36 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $2,737,457.48 Dated October 25,
2021 Through November 07, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the
Month of October in the Total Amount of $1,458,936.82. (CITY/FIRE)
D3.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $13,795.20 Dated October 25, 2021
Through November 07, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of October 31, 2021 for
the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
(CITY/FIRE)
D5.Consideration to Adopt Development Impact Fee Study Prepared by NBS Government
Finance Group Dated December 16, 2020. (FIRE)
D6.Consideration to Authorize the Purchase of Banking Services from MUFG Union Bank, N.A. of
Los Angeles, CA, the Most Responsive Bidder in Accordance with the Request for Quote
(“RFQ”) #21/2201 in the Amount of $267,210 for a FiveYear Term. (CITY)
D7.Consideration of the Use of a County of San Bernardino Contract with Systems Source for the
Civic Center COVID and ADA Improvement Project. (CITY)
D8.Consideration of the Purchase of Traffic Signal Cabinets, Controllers and Related Equipment
from Econolite, in an Amount not to Exceed $165,000. (CITY)
D9.Consideration of the Purchase of ThirtyFive (35) Streetlight Poles and Seventeen (17)
Aluminum Pole Arms from Ameron Pole Products, LLC in the amount of $76,150. (CITY)
D10.Consideration of the Purchase of Fertilizer and Pesticides Supplies on an as Needed Basis
from Nutrien Ag Solutions and WilburEllis Co. in an Amount Not to Exceed $125,000. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Contract with Yunex, LLC. for the Traffic Signal Battery Backup System
Replacement in the Amount of $248,424 plus a Contingency in the Amount of $29,076. (CITY)
D12.Consideration to Approve Parcel Map 20101, Improvement Agreement, Improvement
Securities, and Resolutions Ordering the Annexation into Landscape Maintenance District
No.1, and Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Nos.1 and 2, Located on the East Side of
Vineyard Avenue, South of Azurite Avenue, Related to Case No. SUBTPM20101.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021126), (RESOLUTION NO. 2021127), AND (RESOLUTION NO.
2021128) (CITY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
E1.Consideration of Second Reading and Adoption of the Following:
Ordinance No. 988
An Ordinance of the City Of Rancho Cucamonga, Amending Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code to Permit Utility Companies to Store Materials and Equipment Associated with Utility
Facilities and Infrastructure and to Correct Errors and Omissions in the Allowed Land Use Table and
Industrial Development Standards Table and to Adopt an Uncodified Amendment to Ordinance No.
982 to Exempt Certain Buildings Currently Under Construction from the Amended Use Table, Making
Findings in Support Thereof, and Making a Determination that the Ordinance is Exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
F1.Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 989, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading Adding Chapter 8.15 (Mandatory Organics Waste Disposal Reduction) To Title 8 Health and
Safety of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, a Determination of Exemption Under CEQA.
(ORDINANCE NO. 989) (CITY)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 990, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading to Amend the Etiwanda Specific Plan Land Use Designation of a 6.96Acre Site Located at
12774 Banyan Street from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential, Related to the
Subdivision of the Property into 9 Residential Lots for Future SingleFamily Development. Staff has
Prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for Consideration.
(Specific Plan Amendment DRC201600730). APN: 022511107. (ORDINANCE NO. 990) (CITY)
G2.Continued Public Hearing for Consideration of General Plan Amendment DRC201800533 and Zoning
Map Amendment DRC201800534 – Arbor Express Car Wash – A Request for General Plan and
Zoning Map Amendments to Change the Land Use and Zoning Designation for One ProjectSpecific
Parcel of Land (APN: 020829103) from Low Medium (LM) Residential District to General
Commercial (GC) District and for Two NonProject Specific Adjacent Parcels of Land (020829101
and 020829102) From Low Medium (LM) Residential District to Medium (M) Residential District
Related to a Proposed Car Wash Located Approximately 200 Feet East of Archibald Avenue on the
North Side of Arrow Route. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021045) (CITY) (Continued from June 2, 2021
and August 4, 2021 City Council Meeting)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
H1.Consideration to Receive and File Quarterly Financial Update for the First Quarter of Fiscal Year
2021/22. (CITY/FIRE)
H2.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Toole Design Group, LLC for the
Completion of the Healthy RC Active Transportation Infrastructure Assessment and Improvement
Plan in the Amount of $349,882, Plus a 10% Contingency, and Authorization of Appropriations from
the State Grant (Fund 274) and Citywide Capital Infrastructure (Fund 198) Funds. (CITY)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I2.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
L. ADJOURNMENT
Adjournment in Memory of Jacquelin “Jackie” Amsler, Former Library Board of Trustees Member.
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 4
MayorL. Dennis MichaelMayor Pro TemLynne B. KennedyMembers of the CityCouncil:Ryan A. HutchisonKristine D. ScottSam Spagnolo AMENDED AGENDA(Amended on: 11/17/21 9:20 AM: Item D3 Closed Sessionupdated: Assessors parcel number 22916119 added)CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDANovember 17, 202110500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCILHOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLICFINANCE AUTHORITYCLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in theCouncil Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings ofmeetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. LiveBroadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M. TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTSD. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIOND1.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENTCODE SECTION 54956.9(A) SOUTHWEST VOTER REGISTRATION EDUCATION PROJECT ANDLOUISA OLLAGUE V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; SAN BERNARDINO SUPERIOR COURTCASE NO. CIVRS 1603632. (CITY)D2.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8685 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 22915128, FORMALLY22915115; NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT,OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANDCOLOMBERO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TONEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THEPROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. (CITY)D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8717 AND 8733 ETIWANDA AVENUE AND 12928 AND12934 WHITTRAM AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAXASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 22916102, 22916103, 22916104, 22916105 AND 22916119;NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT, OVERLAND,PACIFIC AND CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANDCOLOMBERO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TONEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THEPROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. (CITY)D4.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 22916222; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTHABOVE. (CITY)D5.THREAT TO PUBLIC SERVICES OF FACILITIES PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54957; CONSULTATION WITH DARRYL POLK, DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGYAND MICHELLE MUNSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY.(CITY/FIRE)D6.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the CouncilChambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.COUNCIL CHAMBERSPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCEROLL CALL:Mayor MichaelMayor Pro Tem KennedyCouncil Members Hutchison, Scott, and SpagnoloA. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDAB. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONSB1.Presentation of a Certificate of Sympathy in Memory of Jacquelin “Jackie” Amsler, Former LibraryBoard of Trustees Member.B2.Presentation of a Certificate of Recognition to Rancho Pop Warner Football & Cheer Junior VarsityPanthers Cheerleading Division who recently won a bid to compete at Nationals Cheer and DanceChampionships in Orlando Florida.B3.Recognition of the 2021 Digital Cities Award Received by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Recapof the 2021 Cyber Security Month Campaign.B4.Presentation of Refurbished Bicycle Distribution Program.C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONSMembers of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, SuccessorAgency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to addressthe Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public FinancingAuthority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits theFire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire ProtectionDistrict, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Councilmay receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by theMayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to beaddressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to themembers of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in anyactivity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of thebusiness portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topiccontained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for thesebusiness items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of theagenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour periodmay resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.CONSENT CALENDARS:The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be actedupon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, andPublic Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion withthe City Council consent calendar.D. CONSENT CALENDARD1.Consideration of Meeting Minutes for the Regular Meetings of October 20, 2021 and November3, 2021 and Special Meetings of October 18, 2021.D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of$1,746,274.36 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued toSouthern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $2,737,457.48 Dated October 25,2021 Through November 07, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for theMonth of October in the Total Amount of $1,458,936.82. (CITY/FIRE)D3.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued toSouthern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $13,795.20 Dated October 25, 2021Through November 07, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)D4.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of October 31, 2021 forthe City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.(CITY/FIRE)D5.Consideration to Adopt Development Impact Fee Study Prepared by NBS GovernmentFinance Group Dated December 16, 2020. (FIRE)D6.Consideration to Authorize the Purchase of Banking Services from MUFG Union Bank, N.A. ofLos Angeles, CA, the Most Responsive Bidder in Accordance with the Request for Quote(“RFQ”) #21/2201 in the Amount of $267,210 for a FiveYear Term. (CITY)D7.Consideration of the Use of a County of San Bernardino Contract with Systems Source for theCivic Center COVID and ADA Improvement Project. (CITY)D8.Consideration of the Purchase of Traffic Signal Cabinets, Controllers and Related Equipmentfrom Econolite, in an Amount not to Exceed $165,000. (CITY)D9.Consideration of the Purchase of ThirtyFive (35) Streetlight Poles and Seventeen (17)Aluminum Pole Arms from Ameron Pole Products, LLC in the amount of $76,150. (CITY)D10.Consideration of the Purchase of Fertilizer and Pesticides Supplies on an as Needed Basis
from Nutrien Ag Solutions and WilburEllis Co. in an Amount Not to Exceed $125,000. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Contract with Yunex, LLC. for the Traffic Signal Battery Backup System
Replacement in the Amount of $248,424 plus a Contingency in the Amount of $29,076. (CITY)
D12.Consideration to Approve Parcel Map 20101, Improvement Agreement, Improvement
Securities, and Resolutions Ordering the Annexation into Landscape Maintenance District
No.1, and Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Nos.1 and 2, Located on the East Side of
Vineyard Avenue, South of Azurite Avenue, Related to Case No. SUBTPM20101.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021126), (RESOLUTION NO. 2021127), AND (RESOLUTION NO.
2021128) (CITY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
E1.Consideration of Second Reading and Adoption of the Following:
Ordinance No. 988
An Ordinance of the City Of Rancho Cucamonga, Amending Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code to Permit Utility Companies to Store Materials and Equipment Associated with Utility
Facilities and Infrastructure and to Correct Errors and Omissions in the Allowed Land Use Table and
Industrial Development Standards Table and to Adopt an Uncodified Amendment to Ordinance No.
982 to Exempt Certain Buildings Currently Under Construction from the Amended Use Table, Making
Findings in Support Thereof, and Making a Determination that the Ordinance is Exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
F1.Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 989, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading Adding Chapter 8.15 (Mandatory Organics Waste Disposal Reduction) To Title 8 Health and
Safety of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, a Determination of Exemption Under CEQA.
(ORDINANCE NO. 989) (CITY)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 990, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading to Amend the Etiwanda Specific Plan Land Use Designation of a 6.96Acre Site Located at
12774 Banyan Street from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential, Related to the
Subdivision of the Property into 9 Residential Lots for Future SingleFamily Development. Staff has
Prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for Consideration.
(Specific Plan Amendment DRC201600730). APN: 022511107. (ORDINANCE NO. 990) (CITY)
G2.Continued Public Hearing for Consideration of General Plan Amendment DRC201800533 and Zoning
Map Amendment DRC201800534 – Arbor Express Car Wash – A Request for General Plan and
Zoning Map Amendments to Change the Land Use and Zoning Designation for One ProjectSpecific
Parcel of Land (APN: 020829103) from Low Medium (LM) Residential District to General
Commercial (GC) District and for Two NonProject Specific Adjacent Parcels of Land (020829101
and 020829102) From Low Medium (LM) Residential District to Medium (M) Residential District
Related to a Proposed Car Wash Located Approximately 200 Feet East of Archibald Avenue on the
North Side of Arrow Route. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021045) (CITY) (Continued from June 2, 2021
and August 4, 2021 City Council Meeting)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
H1.Consideration to Receive and File Quarterly Financial Update for the First Quarter of Fiscal Year
2021/22. (CITY/FIRE)
H2.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Toole Design Group, LLC for the
Completion of the Healthy RC Active Transportation Infrastructure Assessment and Improvement
Plan in the Amount of $349,882, Plus a 10% Contingency, and Authorization of Appropriations from
the State Grant (Fund 274) and Citywide Capital Infrastructure (Fund 198) Funds. (CITY)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I2.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
L. ADJOURNMENT
Adjournment in Memory of Jacquelin “Jackie” Amsler, Former Library Board of Trustees Member.
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 5
MayorL. Dennis MichaelMayor Pro TemLynne B. KennedyMembers of the CityCouncil:Ryan A. HutchisonKristine D. ScottSam Spagnolo AMENDED AGENDA(Amended on: 11/17/21 9:20 AM: Item D3 Closed Sessionupdated: Assessors parcel number 22916119 added)CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDANovember 17, 202110500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCILHOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLICFINANCE AUTHORITYCLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in theCouncil Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings ofmeetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. LiveBroadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M. TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTSD. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIOND1.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENTCODE SECTION 54956.9(A) SOUTHWEST VOTER REGISTRATION EDUCATION PROJECT ANDLOUISA OLLAGUE V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; SAN BERNARDINO SUPERIOR COURTCASE NO. CIVRS 1603632. (CITY)D2.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8685 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 22915128, FORMALLY22915115; NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT,OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANDCOLOMBERO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TONEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THEPROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. (CITY)D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8717 AND 8733 ETIWANDA AVENUE AND 12928 AND12934 WHITTRAM AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAXASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 22916102, 22916103, 22916104, 22916105 AND 22916119;NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT, OVERLAND,PACIFIC AND CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANDCOLOMBERO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TONEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THEPROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. (CITY)D4.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 22916222; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTHABOVE. (CITY)D5.THREAT TO PUBLIC SERVICES OF FACILITIES PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54957; CONSULTATION WITH DARRYL POLK, DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGYAND MICHELLE MUNSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY.(CITY/FIRE)D6.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the CouncilChambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.COUNCIL CHAMBERSPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCEROLL CALL:Mayor MichaelMayor Pro Tem KennedyCouncil Members Hutchison, Scott, and SpagnoloA. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDAB. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONSB1.Presentation of a Certificate of Sympathy in Memory of Jacquelin “Jackie” Amsler, Former LibraryBoard of Trustees Member.B2.Presentation of a Certificate of Recognition to Rancho Pop Warner Football & Cheer Junior VarsityPanthers Cheerleading Division who recently won a bid to compete at Nationals Cheer and DanceChampionships in Orlando Florida.B3.Recognition of the 2021 Digital Cities Award Received by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Recapof the 2021 Cyber Security Month Campaign.B4.Presentation of Refurbished Bicycle Distribution Program.C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONSMembers of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, SuccessorAgency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to addressthe Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public FinancingAuthority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits theFire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire ProtectionDistrict, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Councilmay receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by theMayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to beaddressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to themembers of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in anyactivity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of thebusiness portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topiccontained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for thesebusiness items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of theagenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour periodmay resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.CONSENT CALENDARS:The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be actedupon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, andPublic Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion withthe City Council consent calendar.D. CONSENT CALENDARD1.Consideration of Meeting Minutes for the Regular Meetings of October 20, 2021 and November3, 2021 and Special Meetings of October 18, 2021.D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of$1,746,274.36 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued toSouthern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $2,737,457.48 Dated October 25,2021 Through November 07, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for theMonth of October in the Total Amount of $1,458,936.82. (CITY/FIRE)D3.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued toSouthern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $13,795.20 Dated October 25, 2021Through November 07, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)D4.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of October 31, 2021 forthe City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.(CITY/FIRE)D5.Consideration to Adopt Development Impact Fee Study Prepared by NBS GovernmentFinance Group Dated December 16, 2020. (FIRE)D6.Consideration to Authorize the Purchase of Banking Services from MUFG Union Bank, N.A. ofLos Angeles, CA, the Most Responsive Bidder in Accordance with the Request for Quote(“RFQ”) #21/2201 in the Amount of $267,210 for a FiveYear Term. (CITY)D7.Consideration of the Use of a County of San Bernardino Contract with Systems Source for theCivic Center COVID and ADA Improvement Project. (CITY)D8.Consideration of the Purchase of Traffic Signal Cabinets, Controllers and Related Equipmentfrom Econolite, in an Amount not to Exceed $165,000. (CITY)D9.Consideration of the Purchase of ThirtyFive (35) Streetlight Poles and Seventeen (17)Aluminum Pole Arms from Ameron Pole Products, LLC in the amount of $76,150. (CITY)D10.Consideration of the Purchase of Fertilizer and Pesticides Supplies on an as Needed Basisfrom Nutrien Ag Solutions and WilburEllis Co. in an Amount Not to Exceed $125,000. (CITY)D11.Consideration of a Contract with Yunex, LLC. for the Traffic Signal Battery Backup SystemReplacement in the Amount of $248,424 plus a Contingency in the Amount of $29,076. (CITY)D12.Consideration to Approve Parcel Map 20101, Improvement Agreement, ImprovementSecurities, and Resolutions Ordering the Annexation into Landscape Maintenance DistrictNo.1, and Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Nos.1 and 2, Located on the East Side ofVineyard Avenue, South of Azurite Avenue, Related to Case No. SUBTPM20101.(RESOLUTION NO. 2021126), (RESOLUTION NO. 2021127), AND (RESOLUTION NO.2021128) (CITY)E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTIONE1.Consideration of Second Reading and Adoption of the Following:Ordinance No. 988An Ordinance of the City Of Rancho Cucamonga, Amending Title 17 of the Rancho CucamongaMunicipal Code to Permit Utility Companies to Store Materials and Equipment Associated with UtilityFacilities and Infrastructure and to Correct Errors and Omissions in the Allowed Land Use Table andIndustrial Development Standards Table and to Adopt an Uncodified Amendment to Ordinance No.982 to Exempt Certain Buildings Currently Under Construction from the Amended Use Table, MakingFindings in Support Thereof, and Making a Determination that the Ordinance is Exempt from theCalifornia Environmental Quality Act F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)F1.Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 989, to be Read by Title Only and Waive FurtherReading Adding Chapter 8.15 (Mandatory Organics Waste Disposal Reduction) To Title 8 Health andSafety of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, a Determination of Exemption Under CEQA.(ORDINANCE NO. 989) (CITY)G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICTG1.Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 990, to be Read by Title Only and Waive FurtherReading to Amend the Etiwanda Specific Plan Land Use Designation of a 6.96Acre Site Located at12774 Banyan Street from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential, Related to theSubdivision of the Property into 9 Residential Lots for Future SingleFamily Development. Staff hasPrepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for Consideration.(Specific Plan Amendment DRC201600730). APN: 022511107. (ORDINANCE NO. 990) (CITY)G2.Continued Public Hearing for Consideration of General Plan Amendment DRC201800533 and ZoningMap Amendment DRC201800534 – Arbor Express Car Wash – A Request for General Plan andZoning Map Amendments to Change the Land Use and Zoning Designation for One ProjectSpecificParcel of Land (APN: 020829103) from Low Medium (LM) Residential District to GeneralCommercial (GC) District and for Two NonProject Specific Adjacent Parcels of Land (020829101and 020829102) From Low Medium (LM) Residential District to Medium (M) Residential DistrictRelated to a Proposed Car Wash Located Approximately 200 Feet East of Archibald Avenue on the
North Side of Arrow Route. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021045) (CITY) (Continued from June 2, 2021
and August 4, 2021 City Council Meeting)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
H1.Consideration to Receive and File Quarterly Financial Update for the First Quarter of Fiscal Year
2021/22. (CITY/FIRE)
H2.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Toole Design Group, LLC for the
Completion of the Healthy RC Active Transportation Infrastructure Assessment and Improvement
Plan in the Amount of $349,882, Plus a 10% Contingency, and Authorization of Appropriations from
the State Grant (Fund 274) and Citywide Capital Infrastructure (Fund 198) Funds. (CITY)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I2.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
L. ADJOURNMENT
Adjournment in Memory of Jacquelin “Jackie” Amsler, Former Library Board of Trustees Member.
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 6
DRAFT
October 20, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 1 of 10
October 20, 2021
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY, SUCCESSOR AGENCY,
PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY AND CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETINGS MINUTES
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a closed session on Wednesday, October 20, 2021, in
the Tri-Communities Conference Room at the Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Mayor Michael called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Present were Council Members: Ryan Hutchison, Kristine Scott, Sam Spagnolo and Mayor L. Dennis Michael.
Absent: Mayor Pro Tem Lynne Kennedy.
Also present were: John Gillison, City Manager; Nick Ghirelli, Assistant City Attorney; Elisa Cox, Deputy City
Manager/Cultural & Civic Services and Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community
Development.
A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
No public communications were made.
C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
D. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION
D1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: INITIATION OF LITIGATION
PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.9: 1 CASE INVOLVING THE ARTE APARTMENT COMPLEX ARISING OUT OF ALLEGED
VIOLATIONS OF THE PROJECT’S CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL – CITY
D2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 54956.9(A) - SOUTHWEST VOTER REGISTRATION EDUCATION PROJECT AND
LOUISA OLLAGUE V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; SAN BERNARDINO SUPERIOR COURT
CASE NO. CIVRS 1603632.- (CITY)
D3. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTH EAST CORNER OF ARROW
ROUTE AND ROCHESTER AVENUE IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL NUMBER 0229-012-97-0000;
NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND JON KELLY, CORE5 INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS.; REGARDING
PRICE AND TERMS. – CITY
D4. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA METROLINK
STATION IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL NUMBERS 020927211, 020914321, AND 020927222;
NEGOTIATING PARTIES CITY MANAGER JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, REPRESENTING
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CARRIE SCHINDLER REPRESENTING SBCTA, AND
SARAH WATERSON, PRESIDENT, REPRESENTING DESERTXPRESS ENTERPRISES;
REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. – CITY
Page 7
DRAFT
October 20, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 2 of 10
D5. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL; EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 54956.9(A); INLAND REAL ESTATE GROUP, LLC, ET AL V. CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA; U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, CASE
NO. 5:21-CV-01656-SP. (CITY)
D6. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCES
DIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONS
WITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (RCCEA), TEAMSTERS
LOCAL 1932, RANCHO CUCAMONGA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, EXECUTIVE
MANAGEMENT GROUP, RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 2274, FIRE SUPPORT
SERVICES AND FIRE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES GROUP – (CITY/FIRE)
D7. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8783 ETIWANDA AVENUE/12949 WHITTRAM AVENUE,
FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER
022916214; NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND,
PACIFIC AND CUTLER, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND KULAR
TRUCK LINE, INC., OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING
PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. – CITY
D8. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9333 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916223; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,
REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,
OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE.
NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. – CITY
D9. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916222; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,
REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,
OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE.
NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. – CITY
D10. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8768 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 0229-131-16; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT, OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND
CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SCG/DP ETIWANDA LLC,
A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO
NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE
PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. - CITY
Page 8
DRAFT
October 20, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 3 of 10
D11. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8688 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 0229-131-31; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT, OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND
CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND GOODMAN RANCHO SPE
LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO
NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE
PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. – CITY
D12. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8821 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 0229-162-15; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT, OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND
CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND WILLIAM A. JONES AND
JOAN F. JONES, TRUSTEES OF THE JONES FAMILY TRUST OF 2010, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED
ONE-THIRD (1/3) INTEREST, AND JAMES ROY GARNESS AND RHONDA ANN GARNESS,
UNDIVIDED ONE-THIRD (1/3) INTEREST, AND JAMES ROY GARNESS AND RHONDA ANN
GARNESS, TRUSTEES OF THE GARNESS FAMILY TRUST DATED JUNE 28, 2012, AS TO AN
UNDIVIDED ONE-THIRD (1/3) INTEREST, AND JOHN S. CLEMONS AND PATRICIA R. CLEMONS,
TRUSTEES OF THE CLEMONS REVOCABLE TRUST DATED DECEMBER 4, 2014, AS TO AN
UNDIVIDED ONE-THIRD (1/3) INTEREST, AS TENANTS IN COMMON, OWNER; REGARDING
INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY
NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. - CITY
D13. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8889 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 0229-291-17; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT, OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND
CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND LIGHTNING P.M. LLC, A
CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO
NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE
PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. - CITY
E. RECESS
The closed session recessed at 6:50 p.m.
Page 9
DRAFT
October 20, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 4 of 10
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The regular meetings of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor
Agency, Public Finance Authority, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council were held on October 20, 2021,
in the Council Chambers at City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Mayor
Michael called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Present were Council Members: Ryan Hutchison, Kristine Scott, Sam Spagnolo and Mayor L. Dennis Michael.
Absent: Mayor Pro Tem Lynne Kennedy.
Also present were: John Gillison, City Manager; Nick Ghirelli, Assistant City Attorney; and Linda A. Troyan, MMC,
Director of City Clerk Services.
Council Member Scott led the Pledge of Allegiance.
A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
None.
B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
B1. Presentation of a Certificate of Sympathy in Memory of U.S. Marine Lance Corporal Dylan Merola.
Mayor Michael announced that at the conclusion of the City Council Meeting, the City Council will have a moment
of silence and adjourn the meeting in memory of United States Marine Lance Corporal Dylan Merola. Mayor
Michael and Members of the City Council presented the family of Dylan Merola with a Certificate of Sympathy and
a replica of an Armed Forces banner in Dylan’s name, embellished with the gold star, reserved for those who
have made the ultimate sacrifice while serving our Nation. Mayor Michael informed that the Armed Forces banner
was installed at the northwest corner of Lemon Ave. and Haven Ave.
Dylan Merola’s mother, Cheryl Rex, thanked the Community, City staff along with Mayor Michael and Members
of the City Council for helping her bring her son home.
B2. Presentation of Electric Extrication Tool by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
Battalion Chief Eric Wells and Fire Captain Daniel Carson provided a PowerPoint presentation and demonstrated
the newly acquired All-Electric Extrication Tools by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Jonas Matsuzaki, Senior Patrol Leader, Boy Scout Troop 66, thanked the City for allowing the Boy Scouts to attend
U.S. Marine Lance Corporal Dylan Merola’s memorial in which they facilitated the distribution and collection of
sympathy cards from community members that attended the memorial for Dylan Merola on September 2, 2021.
Senior Patrol leader Matsuzaki presented Dylan Merola’s family with a box containing the collected sympathy cards.
Frank Atry, spoke about the reopening of City Hall, Cal/OSHA requirements and the conduct of City Business during
Closed Session meetings.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
D1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes for the Regular Meetings of August 4, 2021, August 18, 2021,
September 1, 2021, September 15, 2021 and Special Meeting of September 8, 2021.
Page 10
DRAFT
October 20, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 5 of 10
D2. Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Bi-Weekly Payroll in the Total Amount of $5,627,825.18
and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to Southern California
Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $12,772,036.38 Dated September 07, 2021 Through October
10, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the Month of September in the Total
Amount of $1,083,058.23. (CITY/FIRE)
D3. Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $7,516.92 Dated September 07, 2021
Through October 10, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D4. Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of August 31, 2021 for the City
of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)
D5. Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of September 30, 2021 for the
City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)
D6. Consideration to Accept Grant Revenue in the Amount of $82,383 Awarded by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency for the FY 2020 Fire Prevention and Safety Grant; and Authorization to
Appropriate $86,510 for Approved Grant Expenses and Required Local Match. (CITY/FIRE)
D7. Consideration of Amendment No. 003 to the Professional Services Agreement with Mary McGrath
Architects for Conceptual Design Services for the Fire Station 178 Project in the Amount of $33,640
and Authorization to Appropriate $33,640. (FIRE)
D8. Consideration of Amendment No. 005 to the Professional Services Agreement with 360 Deep
Cleaning Services, LLC for Janitorial Services as a Single Source Vendor in the Amount of $200,000
and Authorization to Appropriate $23,500. (FIRE)
D9. Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located on the West Side of East Avenue, South of
Victoria Street, Related to Case No. SUBTT16578, as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and
Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)
D10. Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Related to DRC2017-01023 as Complete, Located at
the 9417 19th Street, South of 19th Street, Between Amethyst Avenue and Hellman Avenue,
Submitted by Steadfast RC Senior, LLC. File the Notice of Completion and Authorize Release of
Bonds. (CITY)
D11. Consideration of a Purchase and Sale Agreement with Reza Afzali for the Sale of Fee Interest of a
Portion of City Owned Parcels Located at 8204 Foothill Boulevard and 8211 Red Hill Country Club
Drive Identified as a Portion of APN 0207-112-04 & 0207-112-14 and Execution of a Related Lot Line
Adjustment. (CITY)
D12. Consideration of an Improvement Agreement Extension for Case No. DRC2018-00912, Located on
the North Side of 9th Street, West of Vineyard Avenue, at 8768 9th Street, Submitted by 9th &
Vineyard, LLC. (CITY)
D13. Consideration of a Contract with Gentry Brother’s, Inc., in an Amount of $1,718,302, Plus 10%
Contingency for the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Local Overlay Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
D14. Consideration of a Contract with Doug Martin Contracting Co. Inc. in the amount of $127,496 plus
10% Contingency, for the Fiscal Year 2021/22 Local Slurry Seal Pavement Rehabilitation Project.
(CITY)
Page 11
DRAFT
October 20, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 6 of 10
D15. Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Accela, Inc. for Maintenance, Support and
Cloud Hosting Services in the Amount Not to Exceed $1,256,328 Over Five Years. (CITY/ FIRE)
D16. Consideration to Approve Change Order 001 to Public Works Contract No. 2021-049 with Southern
California Sound Image for the Council Chambers A/V Refresh. (CITY)
D17. Consideration of an Appropriation in the Amount of $170,681 from the Citywide Infrastructure fund
(Fund 198) and a Transfer from the Trust Account (Fund 882) in the Amount of $188,292 for the 6th
Street Cycle Track Project. (CITY)
D18. Consideration of a Resolution Declaring Pursuant to Government Code Section 54221 that a Portion
of Real Property Owned by the City Located at 8204 Foothill Boulevard and 8211 Red Hill Country
Club Drive and Identified as APN 0207-112-04 & 14 as Exempt Surplus Land and Not Necessary for
the City's Use. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-112) (CITY)
D19. Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Confirming Paying and Reporting the Value of Employer Paid
Member Contribution to CalPERS for the Rancho Cucamonga Management Association Bargaining
Unit. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-113). (CITY)
D20. Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Measure "I" Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan Covering
Fiscal Years 2021/2026 and a Resolution Adopting the Amended Measure “I” Five- Year Capital
Improvement Plan Covering Fiscal Years 2020/2025. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021- 114 & RESOLUTION
NO. 2021-115) (CITY)
D21. Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with KOA Corporation for the Completion of a
Local Roadway Safety Plan in the Amount of $70,948, Plus a 10% Contingency, and Authorization of
Appropriations from the Federal Grants (Fund 275) and Citywide Capital Infrastructure (Fund 198)
Funds. (CITY)
D22. Consideration to Approve Acceptance and Appropriation of Shuttered Venue Operators Grant Funds.
(CITY)
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Spagnolo, seconded by Council Member Hutchison, to approve Consent
Calendar Items D1 through D22, with Council Member Scott abstaining on item D3, due to her employment
with Southern California Gas Company. Motion carried, 4-0-1. Absent: Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy.
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
None.
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
F1. Consideration of a Resolution to Create a Residential Permit Parking District on Estacia Street,
Elmhurst Avenue, Stafford Street, Effen Street, and Cambridge Avenue Between Hermosa Avenue
and Ramona Avenue Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 10.50. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-100)
(CITY)
City Manager Gillison introduced Jason Welday, Director of Engineering Services and Anne McIntosh, Planning
Director, who provided a PowerPoint presentation on the proposed Residential Permit Parking District on Estacia
Street, Elmhurst Avenue, Stafford Street, Effen Street, and Cambridge Avenue between Hermosa Avenue and
Ramona Avenue pursuant to Municipal Code Section 10.50.
Mayor Michael opened the Administrative Hearing.
Page 12
DRAFT
October 20, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 7 of 10
Eight (8) public communications were made in opposition to item G1 by David VanGorden, Robert Ogburn, David
Espinosa, Dolores Robles, Ashley Camacho, Joe Robles, Cristina (last name unknown) and Traci Swanson.
Speakers expressed opposition to the proposed Residential Permit Parking District and shared concerns of
insufficient options to solve the overflow parking caused by Arte apartments and inconveniences caused by permit
parking districts to homeowners and guests.
Six (6) public communications were made in support of item G1 by Bettie Hensel, Jennifer Quan, Kevin Van
Lierde, Dan Daniels, Molly Cox-Esquibel and Shelly Volm. Speakers expressed current nuisances from the
overflow parking caused by Arte apartments and shared their support for the remedy offered by the proposed
Residential Permit Parking District.
Two (2) public communications were made by Ashley Cutbirth representing the corporate office for Arte
apartments and Venessa Alefosio, Arte Property Manager. Speakers spoke about the overflow parking issues
and asked that the City collaborate with Arte apartments to discuss viable options for a mutual agreement/ solution
that will address the needs of both residential and Arte apartment residents. Venessa Alefosio, Arte Property
Manager, suggested that Arte apartments work together with the City to provide street improvements to add
additional parking options by expanding the easement on Hermosa Avenue for Arte apartment residents.
Mayor Michael closed the Public Hearing.
City Manager Gillison addressed a comment made during public communications regarding a home described
as “abandoned and uninhabitable” and noted that the home was not “uninhabitable” and was maintained
appropriately and up-to code. He elaborated on private property rights regarding selling and buying private
property. He stated that if Arte apartments is interested in working with the City and pay all improvement costs to
widen the easement proposed during public communications, the City would be happy to discuss the option but
warned that the project could take up to nine (9) months for completion. He noted that if the expansion of the
easement on Hermosa Avenue occurred it should be designated as an Overnight Permit Parking zone. He
concluded by recommending that due to the length of time that the proposed remedies would take the City Council
could implement the proposed Residential Permit Parking District temporarily for six (6) months while alternative
options are explored with the option to remove the Residential Permit Parking District if needed.
Assistant City Attorney Ghirelli stated that when the developer for Arte apartments applied for the project they
requested the parking reduction for the development and today the successor to the developer admits that there
is a problem with the amount of parking at Arte apartments. He noted that the City understood that there would
be a possibility for parking issues due to the reduction of parking spaces and built in a condition that states that
Arte apartments had to comply with the Parking Management Plan and if it failed as was admitted during public
communications, the City could revisit the Parking Management Plan and require additional mitigation to try to
add additional parking. The City has a role in reforming the Parking Management Plan in ensuring that there are
more mitigations to make sure the Parking Management Plan is maximized. If Arte apartments violates the
Parking Management Plan there is a code enforcement system in place to ensure compliance.
Council discussion ensued on options of implementing the proposed Residential Permit Parking District for six
(6) months while alternative options are explored and if an alternative solution is agreed upon, residents could
rescind the Residential Permit Parking District by Resolution.
Assistant City Attorney Ghirelli stated that Staff could authorize the Resolution for six (6) months subject to the
City Council extending the Resolution at that time.
Council questions included if residents from Dorset Ct. which were excluded from the proposed Residential Permit
Parking District would be able to join or apply later, permit parking fee waivers, special/event guest parking
permits, and if having Residential Permit Parking Districts have proven to decrease the amount of trash in
neighborhoods.
Page 13
DRAFT
October 20, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 8 of 10
Director of Engineering Services Welday replied that the residents would have to go through the same process
and the Residential Permit Parking District would be adopted by Resolution and that there would be a first time
parking permit waiver fee and that there is a program in place for residents to obtain cost-free special/event guest
parking permits if needed.
City Manager Gillison answered that Residential Permit Parking Districts have unequivocally shown
improvements in the reduction of trash in neighborhoods.
Assistant City Attorney Ghirelli stated that the best solution was to work with Arte apartments to find a solution to
maximize the number of parking spaces as Arte cannot control the number of cars that residents can own.
Mayor Michael noted that working with Arte apartments to find solutions for the current parking issues would take
a while and recommended a temporary Residential Permit Parking District that could be revisited in six (6) months.
Director of Engineering Services Welday recommended to amend Resolution 2021-100 paragraph 2 to add
subparagraph G to read: Staff is directed to continue to work with Arte on the widening of Hermosa Avenue as
part of the Parking Management Plan and Amend Paragraph 3 to add the following sentence: The Permit Parking
District shall expire six (6) months after the effective date of the Permit Parking District (upon installation of signs
and issuance of the first permits) unless rescinded, extended, or modified by the City Council, however, it shall
remain in effect until such action is taken.
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Hutchison, seconded by Council Member Scott, to approve Resolution No.
2021-100 with amendments to paragraph 2 to add subparagraph G to read: Staff is directed to continue to work
with Arte on the widening of Hermosa Avenue as part of the Parking Management Plan and Amend Paragraph 3
to add the following sentence: The Permit Parking District shall expire six (6) months after the effective date of
the Permit Parking District (upon installation of signs and issuance of the first permits) unless rescinded, extended,
or modified by the City Council, however, it shall remain in effect until such action is taken. Motion carried, 4-0-
1. Absent: Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Mayor Michael recessed the meeting at 8:51 PM and reconvened the meeting at 8:57 PM.
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING ITEM(S) – CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Consideration of Resolutions and Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance Nos. 986 and 987, to be Read
by Title Only and Waive Further Reading Approving General Plan Amendment (DRC2020- 00213), Zoning
Map Amendment (DRC2020-00267), Tentative Parcel Map (SUBTPM20271), Design Review
(DRC2020-00202), Tree Removal Permit (DRC2020-00266), Minor Use Permit (DRC2021- 00315),
Development Agreement (DRC2021-00180) and Certification of Environmental Impact Report (SCH No.
2020100056) to Allow for the Development of Two Industrial Warehouse Buildings on Certain Property
Located Approximately 1,000 Feet East of Santa Anita Avenue and 2,300 Feet West of Etiwanda Avenue,
North of 4th Street and South of 6th Street; APNS: 0229-283-50 and 51. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2021-106,
2021-107, 2021-108, 2021-109, 2021-110 & 2021-111) (ORDINANCE NOS. 986 & 987) (CITY)
City Manager Gillison introduced Sean McPherson, Senior Planner, who provided a PowerPoint presentation
including the project background for Bridge Point Rancho Cucamonga, LLC (applicant and property owner) for
the redevelopment of a site with two new industrial buildings totaling approximately 2,175,000 square feet. He
informed that the property is currently split between various land uses and zoning districts. He concluded by
recommending the adoption of the proposed resolutions to redesignate the entire project area to General
Industrial Land Use designation and Neo-Industrial (NI) Zoning District; Demolish existing improvements,
subdivide into two new parcels and redevelop site for two new industrial buildings to operate as a “Large
Distribution Fulfillment Center,” (speculative, no tenant identified); and adding a new street to be constructed,
named in honor of Catherine Vail Bridge.
Page 14
DRAFT
October 20, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 9 of 10
Mayor Michael opened the Public Hearing.
Applicant, Heather Crossner, Senior Vice President of Development for Bridge Point Rancho
Cucamonga, LLC spoke in support of the project and of the project’s benefits for the community.
Two (2) public communications were made in support to item G1 by Leo Padilla and Sean Padilla. Speakers
spoke in favor of the project as it would provide job opportunities and better paying jobs.
Mayor Michael closed the Public Hearing.
Council discussion included how the demolishing/ removal of materials of the current site would occur and what
the difference is between a non-heritage tree and heritage tree.
Council expressed their appreciation of the project design/ compatibility, green efforts and dedication of the new
street in honor of Catherine Vail Bridge.
Senior Planner McPherson answered that Heritage Trees are determined by height and size.
Assistant City Attorney Ghirelli recommended that the following condition of approval be added: “The developer
shall construct a new bus shelter at the existing bus stop along the project frontage on 4th Street to the satisfaction
of the Planning Director. The design of the bus shelter shall be consistent with the design of the project. The
developer shall also evaluate the existing bus stop along 4th street, located at the easterly frontage of the project,
for conformance to current ADA regulations. If the bus stop does not meet current ADA regulations, then the
developer shall be responsible for providing design and reconstruction of the bus stop pad for compliance. Design
shall be completed, and improvements secured for prior to issuance of a Building permit. The reconstruction along
with all public improvements shall be completed prior to occupancy.”
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Hutchison, seconded by Council Member Scott, to Adopt Resolution Nos.
2021-106, 2021-107, 2021-108, 2021-109, 2021-110 & 2021-111 with the following condition of approval be
added: “The developer shall construct a new bus shelter at the existing bus stop along the project frontage on 4th
Street to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. The design of the bus shelter shall be consistent with the design
of the project. The developer shall also evaluate the existing bus stop along 4th street, located at the easterly
frontage of the project, for conformance to current ADA regulations. If the bus stop does not meet current ADA
regulations, then the developer shall be responsible for providing design and reconstruction of the bus stop pad
for compliance. Design shall be completed, and improvements secured for prior to issuance of a Building permit.
The reconstruction along with all public improvements shall be completed prior to occupancy.” and Introduce First
Reading of Ordinance Nos. 986 and 987, by title only and waive further readings.
Linda Troyan, City Clerk Services Director read the titles of Ordinance Nos. 986 and 987.
VOTES NOW CAST ON MOTION: Moved by Council Member Hutchison, seconded by Council Member Scott,
to Adopt Resolution Nos. 2021-106, 2021-107, 2021-108, 2021-109, 2021-110 & 2021-111 with the following
condition of approval be added: “The developer shall construct a new bus shelter at the existing bus stop along
the project frontage on 4th Street to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. The design of the bus shelter shall
be consistent with the design of the project. The developer shall also evaluate the existing bus stop along 4th
street, located at the easterly frontage of the project, for conformance to current ADA regulations. If the bus stop
does not meet current ADA regulations, then the developer shall be responsible for providing design and
reconstruction of the bus stop pad for compliance. Design shall be completed, and improvements secured for
prior to issuance of a Building permit. The reconstruction along with all public improvements shall be completed
prior to occupancy.” and Introduce First Reading of Ordinance Nos. 986 and 987, by title only and waive further
readings. Motion carried, 4-0-1. Absent: Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy.
Page 15
DRAFT
October 20, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 10 of 10
H. CITY MANAGERS STAFF REPORT(S)
None.
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
None.
I2. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
I3.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
Council Member Hutchison reported his attendance at a recent Solid Waste Advisory Task Force meeting
that included a legislative update including an update on the implementation of Senate Bill 1383.
Assistant City Attorney Ghirelli informed that the City Council would have to adopt an Ordinance to implement
the implementation requirements of Senate Bill 1383.
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
None.
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
None.
L. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Michael in adjourned the meeting in Memory of U.S. Marine Lance Corporal Dylan Merola at 9:39 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
__________________________________
Linda A. Troyan, MMC
City Clerk Services Director
Approved:
Page 16
November 3, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 1 of 7
November 03, 2021
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY, SUCCESSOR AGENCY,
PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY AND CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETINGS MINUTES
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a closed session on Wednesday, November 3, 2021, in
the Tri-Communities Conference Room at the Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Mayor Michael called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Present were Council Members: Ryan Hutchison, Kristine Scott, Sam Spagnolo, Mayor Pro Tem Lynne Kennedy,
and Mayor L. Dennis Michael.
Also present were: John Gillison, City Manager; James L. Markman, City Attorney; Lori Sassoon, Deputy City
Manager/Administrative Services; Elisa Cox, Deputy City Manager/Cultural & Civic Services and Matt Burris,
Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development.
A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
No public communications were made.
C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
D. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION
D1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 54956.9(A) SOUTHWEST VOTER REGISTRATION EDUCATION PROJECT AND
LOUISA OLLAGUE V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; SAN BERNARDINO SUPERIOR COURT
CASE NO. CIVRS 1603632. (CITY)
D2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCES
DIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONS
WITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (RCCEA), TEAMSTERS
LOCAL 1932, RANCHO CUCAMONGA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, EXECUTIVE
MANAGEMENT GROUP, RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 2274, FIRE SUPPORT
SERVICES AND FIRE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES GROUP – (CITY/FIRE)
D3. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8783 ETIWANDA AVENUE/12949 WHITTRAM AVENUE,
FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER
022916214; NEGOTIATING PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND,
PACIFIC AND CUTLER, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND KULAR
TRUCK LINE, INC., OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING
PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. – CITY
November 3, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 2 of 7
D4. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8996 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022928379; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT, OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND
CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND BTC III RANCHO
CUCAMONGA LOGISTICS CENTER LP, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, OWNER;
REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING
PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. - CITY
D5. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8939 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022929155; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND KELLY DEWITT, OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND
CUTLER, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND BCORE IE WEST OWNER
LLC, OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE.
NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. – CITY
D6. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 0229-162-22; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,
REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,
OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE.
NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. – CITY
D7. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12467 BASE LINE ROAD IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL
NUMBERS 1090331030000, 1090331040000, 1089581040000; NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN
GILLISON, CITY MANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND
JOSEPH FILIPPI, JOSEPH FILIPPI WINERY AND VINEYARDS; REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS.
– (CITY)
D8. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: INITIATION OF LITIGATION
PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.9: 1 CASE – CITY
E. RECESS
The closed session recessed at 6:50 p.m.
November 3, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 3 of 7
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The regular meetings of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor
Agency, Public Finance Authority, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council were held on November 3,
2021, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Mayor Michael called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Present were Council Members: Ryan Hutchison, Kristine Scott, Sam Spagnolo, Mayor Pro Tem Lynne Kennedy,
and Mayor L. Dennis Michael.
Also present were: John Gillison, City Manager; James L. Markman, City Attorney; and Linda A. Troyan, MMC,
Director of City Clerk Services.
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mayor Michael announced that the second Public Hearing on Redistricting would be heard at tonight’s meeting at
8:00 P.M.
A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
None.
B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
B1. Presentation of a Certificate of Sympathy in Memory of Lauren Wasserman, Former City Manager.
Mayor Michael announced that at the conclusion of this City Council Meeting, we will have a moment of silence
and adjourn the meeting in memory of Lauren Wasserman, the City’s first Council appointed City Manager. The
City and City Council expressed their heartfelt condolences to the family of Lauren Wasserman. Mayor Michael
and Members of the City Council presented Lauren Wasserman’s son, Scott Wasserman with a Certificate of
Sympathy.
B2. Rancho Cucamonga's Ranking for Best Cities Where Hispanic/Latinos Fare Best Economically.
Paige Garcia, Management Aide and Morgan Chavez Community Affairs Technician, shared a PowerPoint
presentation showcasing Rancho Cucamonga's Ranking for Best Cities Where Hispanic/Latinos Fare Best
Economically.
C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Janet Walton recited a poem and offered a prayer.
Robert Bancholtz spoke on traffic/ speeding concerns on Hermosa Avenue. He informed that the City’s Engineering
Department is currently conducting a traffic study but asked that the City Council consider temporary measures such
as installing LED Speed Limit signs or other remedies to address immediate traffic safety concerns as the current
study will take time to develop.
City Manager Gillison asked that Mr. Bancholtz speak with Director of Engineering Services Jason Welday and Chief
of Police Perez, since they are currently aware of the issue .
November 3, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 4 of 7
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
D1. Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Bi-Weekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$1,794,410.59 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $2,772,751.27 Dated October 11, 2021
Through October 24, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D2. Consideration to Approve City Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to Southern California Gas
Company in the Total Amount of $2009.03 Dated October 11, 2021 Through October 24, 2021. (CITY)
D3. Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Approving Side Letter Agreements Between the Rancho
Cucamonga Fire Protection District and Fire District Bargaining Units. (RESOLUTION NO. FD
2021-032) (FIRE)
D4. Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located South of Wilson Avenue on the East Side of
Winchester Court, Related to Case No. SUBTT18391, as Complete, File the Notice of Completion,
and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)
D5. Consideration to Accept Public Improvements on the North Side of Church Street East of Archibald
Avenue per the Improvement Agreement, Related to Case No. SUBTT17433, as Complete, File the
Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)
D6. Consideration of an Appropriation in the Amount of $20,010 from the Municipal Utility Fund for the
Haven Avenue Cable Bring Up Project. (CITY)
D7. Consideration of Amendment No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with Absolute Security
International (CO 18-102) for Security Guard Services in an Amount Not to Exceed $232,220 and an
Appropriation of $4,000 to Account 1133320-5304. (CITY)
D8. Consideration to Continue the Existing Local Emergency Due to the Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19)
Pandemic. (CITY)
D9. Consideration of Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Aufbau Corporation
(CO#19-107) for the Addition of City Surveyor Services to the Agreement Scope of Work with No
Change to the Rates in Said Agreement. (CITY)
D10. Consideration of the Improvement Agreement and Improvement Securities for Street Improvements,
Order Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B, Street Light Maintenance Districts Nos.
1 and 6 for Case No. DRC2015-00681, Located at the Northeast Corner of Archibald Avenue and
Arrow Route. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2021-116, 2021-117 AND 2021-118) (CITY)
D11. Consideration of a Resolution to Amend the Estacia Street, et al. Residential Permit Parking District
to Add Dorset Court East of Elmhurst Avenue Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 10.50.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021-119) (CITY)
D12. Consideration of the Improvement Agreement and Improvement Securities for Street Improvements,
Order Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B, Street Light Maintenance Districts Nos.
1 and 6 for Case No. DRC2019-00381, Located at the Northeast Corner of Foothill Boulevard and
Red Hill Country Club Drive. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2021-120, 2021-121 AND 2021-122) (CITY)
D13. Consideration to Order the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Light
Maintenance Districts Nos. 1 and 2 Related to Case No. PMT2021-01562, Located at 10163 26th
Street. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-123, 2021-124 AND 2021-125) (CITY)
November 3, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 5 of 7
D14. Consideration of an Appropriation in the Amount of $15,000 for the Central Park Dog Park project.
(CITY)
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Spagnolo, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy, to approve Consent
Calendar Items D1 through D14, with Council Member Scott abstaining on item D2, due to her employment
with Southern California Gas Company. Motion carried, 5-0.
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
E1. Consideration of Second Reading and Adoption of the Following:
Ordinance No. 986
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, Adopting Zoning Map
Amendment No. DRC2020-00267, a Request to Amend the Zoning Map Land Use District for Two Parcels
of Land from a Split Designation of the Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE) Districts to
Neo-Industrial (NI) District for 91.39 Acres of Land Located Approximately 1,000 Feet East of Santa Anita
Avenue and 2,300 Feet West of Etiwanda Avenue, North of Fourth Street and South of Sixth Street, and
Making Findings in Support Thereof
Ordinance No. 987
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, Approving Development
Agreement DRC2021-00180, Between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Bridge Point Rancho
Cucamonga, LLC, to Facilitate the Development of Two New Industrial Warehouse Buildings Totaling
Approximately 2,175,000 Square Feet on Property Located Approximately 1,000 Feet East of Santa Anita
Avenue and 2,300 Feet West of Etiwanda Avenue, North of Fourth Street and South of Sixth Street, Adopting
an Environmental Impact Report Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, and Making Findings
in Support Thereof
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Scott, seconded by Council Member Hutchison, to adopt Ordinance
Nos. 986 and 987 by titles only and waive full readings.
Linda Troyan, City Clerk Services Director read the titles of Ordinance Nos. 986 and 987.
VOTES NOW CAST ON MOTION: Moved by Council Member Scott, seconded by Council Member Hutchison,
to adopt Ordinance Nos. 986 and 987 by titles only and waive full readings. Motion carried 5-0.
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
None.
Mayor Michael announced in order to adhere to 8:00 p.m. time certain requirement for the Re-districting
Public Hearing, subsequent agenda items (sections G through K) would be heard next, followed by the Re-
districting Public Hearing.
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING ITEM(S) – CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G2. Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 988, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading, Amending, Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Permit Utility Companies to
Store Materials and Equipment Associated with Utility Facilities and Infrastructure, to Correct an Omission
for Food Manufacturing Uses in the Allowed Land Use Table, Delete an Errant Line Related to Building
Height in the Industrial Development Standards Table and Adopt an Uncodified Amendment to Ordinance
No. 982 to Exempt Certain Buildings Currently Under Construction from the Amended Use Table.
(ORDINANCE NO. 988) (CITY)
November 3, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 6 of 7
City Manager Gillison introduced Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst II, who provided a PowerPoint
presentation on Industrial Code Amendment revisions, Land Use Table revisions including adding a new use –
food processing/ manufacturing and a minor amendment to the Development Standards Table. She concluded
by stating that the Planning Commission unanimously endorsed the amendments and that the amendments are
exempt from CEQA and recommended the City Council conduct first reading of Ordinance No. 988.
Mayor Michael opened the Public Hearing.
There were no public communications.
Mayor Michael closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Hutchison, seconded by Council Member Scott, to Introduce First Reading
of Ordinance No. 988, by title only and waive further readings.
Linda Troyan, City Clerk Services Director read the title of Ordinance No. 988.
VOTES NOW CAST ON MOTION: Moved by Council Member Hutchison, seconded by Council Member Scott,
to Introduce First Reading of Ordinance No. 988, by title only and waive further readings. Motion carried 5-0.
H. CITY MANAGERS STAFF REPORT(S)
No items.
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mayor Michael congratulated and recognized Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy, for her recent appointment to the
Cal Cities Board of Directors by the League of California Cities.
Mayor Michael announced that Rancho Cucamonga Pop Warner Cheer recently announced that their 13
and Under Junior Varsity Panthers Cheer Division has qualified to compete at the Pop Warner National
Cheer and Dance Championship in Orlando, Florida, in December. He informed that Pop Warner Cheer
is seeking support from the community and shared a GoFundMe link www.gofund.me/1de80a46 , for
community members wishing to contribute funds to for the team to participate in the Pop Warner National
Cheer and Dance Championship in Orlando, Florida.
I2. INTERAGENCY UPDATES
None.
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
None.
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
None.
RECESS: Mayor Michael recessed the meeting at 7:33 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:00 p.m. to conduct
the Public Hearing on Redistricting.
November 3, 2021 | Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency,
Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 7 of 7
G1. 8:00 PM TIME CERTAIN: PUBLIC HEARING #2 - Consideration of City Council District
Boundaries, to Include Review of the Demographer’s Preliminary Analysis; Review of the
Public Mapping Tool and Inviting the Community to Submit Maps; Review of Staff’s
Presentation of Maps Prepared Using the Discussed Criteria; and Receipt of Public Input on
Communities of Interest and Potential District Boundaries. (CITY)
City Manager Gillison introduced Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/ Administrative Services and Todd Tatum
from National Demographics Corporation, who provided a PowerPoint presentation regarding the City’s 2021
Redistricting process. Mr. Tatum shared the Redistricting rules and goals, shared three (3) initial draft maps
developed by NDC for City Council’s review. He concluded by encouraging the public to participate in the
mapping process and submit maps using tools available at drawrc.org.
Mayor Michael opened the Public Hearing.
There were no public communications.
Mayor Michael closed the Public Hearing.
City Attorney Markman provided the background and update on the City’s existing litigation with Southwest Voter
Registration Education Project and Louisa Ollague v. City of Rancho Cucamonga, Case No. CIVRS 1603632.
Mayor Michael announced that no action will be taken at the second Redistricting Public Hearing and that Public
Hearing No. 03 will take place on January 19, 2022 at 8:00 p.m. time certain in the Council Chambers. He invited
the community to submit comments and review documents at www.drawrc.org.
L. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Michael adjourned the meeting in Memory of Lauren Wasserman at 8:16 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
__________________________________
Linda A. Troyan, MMC
City Clerk Services Director
Approved: November 17, 2021 – Regular Meeting
DRAFT
October 18, 2021 City Council Special Meeting Minutes
City of Rancho Cucamonga | Page 1 of 1
October 18, 2021
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY COUNCIL/FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
The City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council held a Special Meeting on Monday, October 18, 2021, in the Tri-
Communities Conference Room at City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Mayor Michael called the meeting to order at 12:44 p.m.
Present were Councilmembers: Ryan Hutchison, Kristine Scott, Sam Spagnolo, Mayor Pro Tem Lynne Kennedy,
and Mayor L. Dennis Michael.
Also present were: John Gillison, City Manager; Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager/Community and Economic
Development; and Linda A. Troyan, City Clerk Services Director.
Council Member Hutchison led the pledge of allegiance.
B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
There were no public communications.
C. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION
C1. Interview and Selection of Candidates to Fill Three Upcoming Vacancies on the Historic Preservation
and Planning Commission.
Council confirmed interview questions, and the following six (6) candidates were provided 25 minutes to respond
to questions.
12:45 pm to 1:10 pm Tony Morales
1:15 pm to 1:40 pm Francisco Oaxaca
1:45 pm to 2:10 pm Al Boling
Council took a 15-minute break. Interviews continued.
2:35 pm to 3:00 pm James Daniels
3:05 pm to 3:30 pm Natalie Navarrette
3:35 pm to 4:00 pm Don Smith
After the conclusion of the interviews, City Council discussion ensued.
Mayor Michael nominated Al Boling, James Daniels and Tony Morales, to fill the three 4-year terms on the Planning
Commission and proposed to place Natalie Navarrette and Don Smith on a Planning Commissioner eligibility list
in said order, should a vacancy occur.
Council consensus to add an item to discuss Planning Commission training to next year’s City Council Goals
Workshop.
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Scott, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Kenedy, to appoint Al Boling and James
Daniels and reappoint Tony Morales to the Planning Commission for 4-year terms (term ending December 31,
2025) and designated to place Natalie Navarrette and Don Smith on a Planning Commissioner eligibility list in said
order, should a vacancy occur. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
D. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Michael adjourned the meeting at 4:18 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
__________________________________
Linda A. Troyan, MMC
City Clerk Services Director
Approved:
Page 24
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Boards of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director
Veronica Lopez, Accounts Payable Supervisor
SUBJECT:Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Bi-Weekly Payroll in the
Total Amount of $1,746,274.36 and City and Fire District Weekly Check
Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to Southern California Gas
Company) in the Total Amount of $2,737,457.48 Dated October 25, 2021
Through November 07, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit
Registers for the Month of October in the Total Amount of $1,458,936.82.
(CITY/FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends City Council/Board of Directors of the Fire Protection District approve payment
of demands as presented. Bi-weekly payroll is $1,004,422.23 and $741,852.13 for the City and
the Fire District, respectively. Weekly check register amounts are $2,463,028.56 and
$274,428.92 for the City and the Fire District, respectively. Electronic Debit Register amounts are
$857,818.49 and $601,118.33 for the City and the Fire District, respectively.
BACKGROUND:
N/A
ANALYSIS:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adequate budgeted funds are available for the payment of demands per the attached listing.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Weekly Check Registers
Attachment 2 – Electronic Debit Register
Page 25
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
10/25/2021 through 11/7/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00013244 10/26/2021 AHUMADA, ALEXANDER R 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013245 10/26/2021 ALMAND, LLOYD 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013246 10/26/2021 BANTAU, VICTORIA 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013247 10/26/2021 BAZAL, SUSAN 0.00 865.08 865.08
AP 00013248 10/26/2021 BELL, MICHAEL L 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14
AP 00013249 10/26/2021 BERRY, DAVID 0.00 1,532.94 1,532.94
AP 00013250 10/26/2021 BROCK, ROBIN 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32
AP 00013251 10/26/2021 CAMPBELL, GERALD 0.00 851.32 851.32
AP 00013252 10/26/2021 CAMPBELL, STEVEN 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013253 10/26/2021 CARNES, KENNETH 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013254 10/26/2021 CLABBY, RICHARD 0.00 1,196.68 1,196.68
AP 00013255 10/26/2021 CLOUGHESY, DONALD R 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78
AP 00013256 10/26/2021 CORCORAN, ROBERT ANTHONY 0.00 893.07 893.07
AP 00013257 10/26/2021 COSTELLO, DENNIS M 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78
AP 00013258 10/26/2021 COX, KARL 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013259 10/26/2021 CRANE, RALPH 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013260 10/26/2021 CROSSLAND, WILBUR 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013261 10/26/2021 CURATALO, JAMES 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32
AP 00013262 10/26/2021 DAGUE, JAMES 0.00 1,246.33 1,246.33
AP 00013263 10/26/2021 DE ANTONIO, SUSAN 0.00 893.07 893.07
AP 00013264 10/26/2021 DEANS, JACKIE 0.00 238.25 238.25
AP 00013265 10/26/2021 DOMINICK, SAMUEL A 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32
AP 00013266 10/26/2021 EAGLESON, MICHAEL 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14
AP 00013267 10/26/2021 EGGERS, BOB 0.00 1,246.33 1,246.33
AP 00013268 10/26/2021 FEJERAN, TIM 0.00 1,598.58 1,598.58
AP 00013269 10/26/2021 FRITCHEY, JOHN D 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013270 10/26/2021 HEYDE, DONALD 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013271 10/26/2021 INTERLICCHIA, ROSALYN 0.00 238.25 238.25
AP 00013272 10/26/2021 JERKINS, PATRICK 0.00 1,598.58 1,598.58
AP 00013273 10/26/2021 KILMER, STEPHEN 0.00 1,196.68 1,196.68
AP 00013274 10/26/2021 KIRKPATRICK, WILLIAM M 0.00 903.04 903.04
AP 00013275 10/26/2021 LANE, WILLIAM 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013276 10/26/2021 LARKIN, DAVID W 0.00 1,598.58 1,598.58
AP 00013277 10/26/2021 LEE, ALLAN J 0.00 238.25 238.25
AP 00013278 10/26/2021 LENZE, PAUL E 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013279 10/26/2021 LONCAR, PHILIP 0.00 2,549.64 2,549.64
AP 00013280 10/26/2021 LONGO, JOE 0.00 181.48 181.48
AP 00013281 10/26/2021 LUTTRULL, DARRELL 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013282 10/26/2021 MACKALL, BEVERLY 0.00 181.48 181.48
AP 00013283 10/26/2021 MAYFIELD, RON 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013284 10/26/2021 MCKEE, JOHN 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013285 10/26/2021 MCNEIL, KENNETH 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013286 10/26/2021 MICHAEL, L. DENNIS 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013287 10/26/2021 MORGAN, BYRON 0.00 1,838.72 1,838.72
AP 00013288 10/26/2021 MYSKOW, DENNIS 0.00 1,196.68 1,196.68
AP 00013289 10/26/2021 NAUMAN, MICHAEL 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013290 10/26/2021 NEE, RON 0.00 865.08 865.08
08:37:25
11/08/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:1
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 26
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
10/25/2021 through 11/7/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00013291 10/26/2021 NELSON, MARY JANE 0.00 181.48 181.48
AP 00013292 10/26/2021 NOREEN, ERIC 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78
AP 00013293 10/26/2021 O'BRIEN, TOM 0.00 1,379.46 1,379.46
AP 00013294 10/26/2021 PLOUNG, MICHAEL J 0.00 556.94 556.94
AP 00013295 10/26/2021 POST, MICHAEL R 0.00 1,377.34 1,377.34
AP 00013296 10/26/2021 PROULX, PATRICK 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32
AP 00013297 10/26/2021 REDMOND, MIKE 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013298 10/26/2021 ROBERTS, BRENT 0.00 893.07 893.07
AP 00013299 10/26/2021 ROBERTS, CHERYL L 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78
AP 00013300 10/26/2021 ROEDER, JEFF 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14
AP 00013301 10/26/2021 SALISBURY, THOMAS 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013302 10/26/2021 SMITH, RONALD 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013303 10/26/2021 SORENSEN, SCOTT D 0.00 1,873.16 1,873.16
AP 00013304 10/26/2021 SPAGNOLO, SAM 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013305 10/26/2021 SPAIN, WILLIAM 0.00 851.32 851.32
AP 00013306 10/26/2021 SULLIVAN, JAMES 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013307 10/26/2021 TAYLOR, STEVEN 0.00 2,027.69 2,027.69
AP 00013308 10/26/2021 TULEY, TERRY 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14
AP 00013309 10/26/2021 VANDERKALLEN, FRANCIS 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013310 10/26/2021 VARNEY, ANTHONY 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013311 10/26/2021 WALTON, KEVIN 0.00 1,598.58 1,598.58
AP 00013312 10/26/2021 YOWELL, TIMOTHY A 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013313 10/27/2021 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC 12,931.66 0.00 12,931.66
AP 00013314 10/27/2021 HUITT-ZOLLARS INC 16,915.00 0.00 16,915.00
AP 00013315 10/27/2021 RC CONSTRUCTION SERVICES INC 0.00 67,625.75 67,625.75
AP 00013316 10/28/2021 BIBLIOTHECA LLC 5,000.00 0.00 5,000.00
AP 00013317 10/28/2021 BMI 1,469.00 0.00 1,469.00
AP 00013319 10/28/2021 BRODART BOOKS CO 8,068.60 0.00 8,068.60
AP 00013320 10/28/2021 BSN SPORTS LLC 895.78 0.00 895.78
AP 00013321 10/28/2021 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 461.40 0.00 461.40
AP 00013322 10/28/2021 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION 139.69 0.00 139.69
AP 00013323 10/28/2021 GENERATOR SERVICES CO INC 1,676.40 0.00 1,676.40
AP 00013324 10/28/2021 KME FIRE APPARATUS 0.00 1,110.49 1,110.49
AP 00013325 10/28/2021 OFFICE DEPOT 2,697.97 0.00 2,697.97
AP 00013326 11/03/2021 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC 11,614.24 0.00 11,614.24
AP 00013327 11/03/2021 CALIF GOVERNMENT VEBA / RANCHO CUCAMONGA 25,745.35 0.00 25,745.35
AP 00013328 11/03/2021 METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT, THE 1,200.00 0.00 1,200.00
AP 00013329 11/03/2021 RCCEA 1,550.25 0.00 1,550.25
AP 00013330 11/03/2021 RCPFA 12,450.81 0.00 12,450.81
AP 00013331 11/03/2021 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 8,514.34 0.00 8,514.34
AP 00013332 11/03/2021 SARGENT TOWN PLANNING INC 18,300.00 0.00 18,300.00
AP 00013333 11/04/2021 AIRGAS USA LLC 5,344.69 0.00 5,344.69
AP 00013334 11/04/2021 BRODART BOOKS CO 6,174.40 0.00 6,174.40
AP 00013335 11/04/2021 CARROT-TOP INDUSTRIES 1,060.12 0.00 1,060.12
AP 00013336 11/04/2021 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 204.66 0.00 204.66
AP 00013337 11/04/2021 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 885.27 0.00 885.27
AP 00013338 11/04/2021 KME FIRE APPARATUS 0.00 6.47 6.47
08:37:25
11/08/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:2
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 27
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
10/25/2021 through 11/7/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00013339 11/04/2021 MCFADDEN DALE HARDWARE 158.88 0.00 158.88
AP 00013340 11/04/2021 MINUTEMAN PRESS 630.40 0.00 630.40
AP 00013342 11/04/2021 OFFICE DEPOT 5,449.19 0.00 5,449.19
AP 00013343 11/04/2021 PSA PRINT GROUP 38.79 0.00 38.79
AP 00013344 11/04/2021 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 11,907.90 0.00 11,907.90
AP 00420890 10/25/2021 GUZMAN AND EASLEY LAW FIRM, VALERIE 40,000.00 0.00 40,000.00
AP 00420891 10/26/2021 RODRIGUEZ, VICTOR 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00420892 10/26/2021 TOWNSEND, JAMES 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78
AP 00420893 10/26/2021 WALKER, KENNETH 0.00 238.25 238.25
AP 00420894 10/26/2021 DH RC LLC 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00
AP 00420895 10/26/2021 JIACHEN GLOBAL INC 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00
AP 00420896 10/27/2021 ADVANCED CHEMICAL TRANSPORT INC 1,325.40 0.00 1,325.40
AP 00420897 10/27/2021 AERO FRESH HEATING & AC 629.28 0.00 629.28
AP 00420898 10/27/2021 AGUILAR, JUAN CARLOS LOPEZ 39.42 0.00 39.42
AP 00420899 10/27/2021 ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT INC 0.00 1,386.75 1,386.75
AP 00420900 10/27/2021 ALTA VISTA MOBILE HOME PARK 297.59 0.00 297.59
AP 00420901 10/27/2021 ALTOBELLO, LINDSAY 10,000.00 0.00 10,000.00
AP 00420902 10/27/2021 AM-TEC TOTAL SECURITY INC 10,706.23 0.00 10,706.23
AP 00420903 10/27/2021 AMERICAN SOCIETY OF SAFETY PROFESSIONALS 255.00 0.00 255.00
AP 00420904 10/27/2021 AMS PLANNING & RESEARCH CORP 6,390.37 0.00 6,390.37
AP 00420905 10/27/2021 AUTOLIFT SERVICES INC 2,086.32 0.00 2,086.32
AP 00420906 10/27/2021 BISHOP COMPANY 2,591.81 0.00 2,591.81
AP 00420907 10/27/2021 BRANDENBURG INDUSTRIAL SVC CO 248.94 0.00 248.94
AP 00420908 10/27/2021 BRAUN BLAISING SMITH WYNNE 2,319.56 0.00 2,319.56
AP 00420909 10/27/2021 BRAVO PATIO COVERS 514.29 0.00 514.29
AP 00420910 10/27/2021 BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE SERVICES INC 4,334.04 0.00 4,334.04
AP 00420911 10/27/2021 BRYSON, MOLLY M 19.95 0.00 19.95
AP 00420912 10/27/2021 C P GENERATOR INC 179.94 0.00 179.94
***AP 00420919 10/27/2021 C V W D 138,365.23 789.29 139,154.52
AP 00420920 10/27/2021 CA LLC - ALTA LAGUNA MHP 400.00 0.00 400.00
AP 00420921 10/27/2021 CALIX INC 5,485.47 0.00 5,485.47
AP 00420922 10/27/2021 CAMERON-DANIEL PC 915.00 0.00 915.00
AP 00420923 10/27/2021 CASA VOLANTE MOBILE HOME PARK 600.00 0.00 600.00
AP 00420924 10/27/2021 CCS ORANGE COUNTY JANITORIAL INC 5,031.07 0.00 5,031.07
AP 00420925 10/27/2021 CHAMPION FIRE SYSTEMS INC 2,700.00 0.00 2,700.00
AP 00420926 10/27/2021 CHAPARRAL HEIGHTS MOBILE HOME PARK 300.00 0.00 300.00
***AP 00420927 10/27/2021 CINTAS CORPORATION #150 1,493.45 561.17 2,054.62
AP 00420928 10/27/2021 CLIENT FIRST CONSULTING GROUP LLC 456.25 0.00 456.25
AP 00420929 10/27/2021 COAST RECREATION INC 448.24 0.00 448.24
AP 00420930 10/27/2021 COLIBRI ENTERTAINMENT INC 2,000.00 0.00 2,000.00
AP 00420931 10/27/2021 COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE COMPANY 3,000.00 0.00 3,000.00
AP 00420932 10/27/2021 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 560,000.00 0.00 560,000.00
***AP 00420933 10/27/2021 DELL MARKETING LP 272.28 544.57 816.85
AP 00420934 10/27/2021 DIG SAFE BOARD 66.22 0.00 66.22
AP 00420935 10/27/2021 DOING GOOD WORKS 746.51 0.00 746.51
AP 00420936 10/27/2021 EXECUTIVE DETAIL SERVICES 0.00 280.00 280.00
AP 00420937 10/27/2021 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY INC 85.28 0.00 85.28
08:37:25
11/08/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:3
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 28
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
10/25/2021 through 11/7/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00420938 10/27/2021 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS 0.00 540.51 540.51
AP 00420939 10/27/2021 FOLKENS, KIMBERLI 380.80 0.00 380.80
AP 00420940 10/27/2021 G/M BUSINESS INTERIORS 1,916.00 0.00 1,916.00
AP 00420941 10/27/2021 GAIL MATERIALS 2,024.74 0.00 2,024.74
AP 00420942 10/27/2021 GEO JOBE GIS CONSULTING 3,000.00 0.00 3,000.00
AP 00420943 10/27/2021 GOLDEN GATE CONSTRUCTION INC 106,928.34 0.00 106,928.34
***AP 00420944 10/27/2021 GRAINGER 260.05 472.16 732.21
AP 00420945 10/27/2021 GROVES ON FOOTHILL, THE 200.00 0.00 200.00
AP 00420946 10/27/2021 HARDEMAN, GEORGE 0.00 320.00 320.00
AP 00420947 10/27/2021 HAULAWAY STORAGE CONTAINERS INC 119.84 0.00 119.84
AP 00420948 10/27/2021 HI-LINE ELECTRIC COMPANY 1,228.58 0.00 1,228.58
AP 00420949 10/27/2021 HMC ARCHITECTS 0.00 390.00 390.00
AP 00420950 10/27/2021 HOMETOWN AMERICA RAMONA VILLA 500.00 0.00 500.00
AP 00420951 10/27/2021 HR GREEN PACIFIC INC 6,030.00 0.00 6,030.00
AP 00420952 10/27/2021 HYDRO TEK SYSTEMS INC 823.08 0.00 823.08
AP 00420953 10/27/2021 INLAND DESERT SECURITY & COMMUNICATIONS INC 78.00 0.00 78.00
AP 00420954 10/27/2021 INLAND PRESORT & MAILING SERVICES 226.34 0.00 226.34
AP 00420955 10/27/2021 INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY CENTER 849.74 0.00 849.74
AP 00420956 10/27/2021 INYO NETWORKS 11,119.50 0.00 11,119.50
AP 00420957 10/27/2021 JACOBY IE INC, ERIC 243.34 0.00 243.34
AP 00420958 10/27/2021 JOHNSON, KEN 0.00 501.88 501.88
AP 00420959 10/27/2021 KOSMONT COMPANIES 5,207.50 0.00 5,207.50
AP 00420960 10/27/2021 LANGE, MARVIN 234.81 0.00 234.81
AP 00420961 10/27/2021 LI, HAOTONG 93.58 0.00 93.58
AP 00420962 10/27/2021 LI, HONGMEI 5,000.00 0.00 5,000.00
AP 00420963 10/27/2021 LIFE-ASSIST INC 0.00 11,014.89 11,014.89
AP 00420964 10/27/2021 LISA WISE CONSULTING 41,886.25 0.00 41,886.25
AP 00420965 10/27/2021 MARK CHRISTOPHER INC 485.43 0.00 485.43
AP 00420966 10/27/2021 MCI 35.80 0.00 35.80
***AP 00420967 10/27/2021 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY 600.97 574.80 1,175.77
AP 00420968 10/27/2021 MONTECITO FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 0.00 134.75 134.75
AP 00420969 10/27/2021 MUTUAL PROPANE 0.00 20.00 20.00
***AP 00420970 10/27/2021 NAPA AUTO PARTS 346.87 818.81 1,165.68
AP 00420971 10/27/2021 NATIONAL FIRE FIGHTER WILDLAND 0.00 2,731.06 2,731.06
AP 00420972 10/27/2021 NATIONAL UTILITY LOCATORS LLC 1,260.00 0.00 1,260.00
AP 00420973 10/27/2021 NUCI, JESSICA 2,300.00 0.00 2,300.00
AP 00420974 10/27/2021 OCC BUILDERS INC 0.00 24,401.13 24,401.13
AP 00420975 10/27/2021 OPEN APPS INC 1,225.00 0.00 1,225.00
AP 00420976 10/27/2021 PACIFIC UTILITY INSTALLATION INC 2,736.00 0.00 2,736.00
AP 00420977 10/27/2021 PARKHOUSE TIRE INC 1,367.14 0.00 1,367.14
AP 00420978 10/27/2021 PERMIT RESOURCES 494.63 0.00 494.63
AP 00420979 10/27/2021 PINES MOBILE HOME PARK, THE 100.00 0.00 100.00
***AP 00420980 10/27/2021 PINNACLE PETROLEUM INC 30,187.87 23,634.67 53,822.54
AP 00420981 10/27/2021 PLACEWORKS 20,639.26 0.00 20,639.26
AP 00420982 10/27/2021 PRISTINE UNIFORMS LLC 0.00 756.42 756.42
AP 00420983 10/27/2021 PRO SALES GROUP INC 1,058.87 0.00 1,058.87
AP 00420984 10/27/2021 PVP COMMUNICATIONS INC 950.00 0.00 950.00
08:37:25
11/08/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:4
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 29
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
10/25/2021 through 11/7/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00420985 10/27/2021 QUADIENT INC 713.03 0.00 713.03
AP 00420986 10/27/2021 QUALLS, ELENA 165.00 0.00 165.00
AP 00420987 10/27/2021 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 3,166.00 0.00 3,166.00
AP 00420988 10/27/2021 RANCHO SMOG CENTER 494.45 0.00 494.45
AP 00420989 10/27/2021 RBM LOCK AND KEY SERVICE 11.00 0.00 11.00
AP 00420990 10/27/2021 RECREATIONAL EQUIPMENT INC 1,648.19 0.00 1,648.19
AP 00420991 10/27/2021 RESCUE RESPONSE GEAR LLC 0.00 6,437.33 6,437.33
AP 00420992 10/27/2021 SAFE-ENTRY TECHNICAL INC 0.00 1,421.77 1,421.77
AP 00420993 10/27/2021 SAN BERNARDINO CO AUDITOR CONT 7,041.80 0.00 7,041.80
AP 00420994 10/27/2021 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 0.00 12,181.12 12,181.12
AP 00420995 10/27/2021 SIEMENS MOBILITY INC 8,547.44 0.00 8,547.44
AP 00420996 10/27/2021 SIGN SHOP, THE 0.00 198.26 198.26
AP 00420998 10/27/2021 SOCIAL VOCATIONAL SERVICES 6,973.00 0.00 6,973.00
AP 00420999 10/27/2021 SOUTH COAST AQMD 0.00 582.74 582.74
***AP 00421007 10/27/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 26,051.93 1,625.81 27,677.74
AP 00421008 10/27/2021 STANLEY PEST CONTROL 595.00 0.00 595.00
AP 00421009 10/27/2021 STOTZ EQUIPMENT 28.94 0.00 28.94
AP 00421010 10/27/2021 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC 1,850.00 0.00 1,850.00
AP 00421011 10/27/2021 SYCAMORE VILLA MOBILE HOME PARK 400.00 0.00 400.00
AP 00421012 10/27/2021 TEACHING STRATEGIES LLC 7,500.00 0.00 7,500.00
AP 00421013 10/27/2021 TESLA ENERGY 1,014.02 0.00 1,014.02
AP 00421014 10/27/2021 TINT CITY WINDOW TINTING 280.00 0.00 280.00
AP 00421015 10/27/2021 TIREHUB LLC 802.11 0.00 802.11
AP 00421016 10/27/2021 TOMCO CNG INC 7,429.95 0.00 7,429.95
AP 00421017 10/27/2021 TOT LOT PROS INC 72,260.74 0.00 72,260.74
AP 00421018 10/27/2021 UNDERGROUND SVC ALERT OF SO CAL 120.55 0.00 120.55
AP 00421019 10/27/2021 UPS 82.22 0.00 82.22
AP 00421020 10/27/2021 VAN SCOYOC ASSOCIATES INC 4,000.00 0.00 4,000.00
AP 00421021 10/27/2021 VELOCITY TRUCK CENTERS 215.21 0.00 215.21
AP 00421022 10/27/2021 VIVINT SOLAR DEVELOPER LLC 552.76 0.00 552.76
AP 00421023 10/27/2021 VORTEX INDUSTRIES INC 0.00 770.00 770.00
AP 00421024 10/27/2021 VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY 156.06 0.00 156.06
AP 00421025 10/27/2021 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 2,199.44 0.00 2,199.44
***AP 00421026 10/27/2021 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 539.07 99.96 639.03
AP 00421027 10/27/2021 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 21,490.80 0.00 21,490.80
AP 00421028 10/27/2021 WEST END MATERIAL SUPPLY 239.72 0.00 239.72
AP 00421029 10/27/2021 WESTRUX INTERNATIONAL INC 76.16 0.00 76.16
AP 00421030 10/27/2021 WHITTIER FERTILIZER 779.03 0.00 779.03
AP 00421031 10/27/2021 WILSON & BELL AUTO SERVICE 1,205.67 0.00 1,205.67
AP 00421032 11/03/2021 CLUCK 'N' POLLO 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00
AP 00421033 11/03/2021 INLAND EMPIRE NMJ INC 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00
AP 00421034 11/03/2021 MALIK FAMILY COMPANY, S & S 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00
AP 00421035 11/03/2021 MAX FORTUNE GROUP LLC 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00
AP 00421036 11/03/2021 NELSON'S SERVICE STATION INC 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00
AP 00421037 11/03/2021 AFLAC GROUP INSURANCE 24.58 0.00 24.58
AP 00421038 11/03/2021 ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT INC 0.00 1,460.71 1,460.71
AP 00421039 11/03/2021 APTUS COURT REPORTING LLC 1,227.35 0.00 1,227.35
08:37:25
11/08/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:5
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 30
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
10/25/2021 through 11/7/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00421040 11/03/2021 ASCAP 1,967.33 0.00 1,967.33
AP 00421041 11/03/2021 AUTOLIFT SERVICES INC 408.52 0.00 408.52
AP 00421042 11/03/2021 BARH, ANTAR 0.00 200.00 200.00
AP 00421043 11/03/2021 BAUER COMPRESSORS 0.00 4,302.82 4,302.82
AP 00421044 11/03/2021 BEST OUTDOOR POWER INLAND LLC 265.04 0.00 265.04
AP 00421045 11/03/2021 BOB'S MUFFLER SHOP 100.00 0.00 100.00
AP 00421046 11/03/2021 BOOT BARN INC 1,619.85 0.00 1,619.85
AP 00421047 11/03/2021 BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP 681.25 0.00 681.25
AP 00421048 11/03/2021 BULMER, EUAN 0.00 320.00 320.00
***AP 00421049 11/03/2021 C V W D 300.95 170.35 471.30
***AP 00421055 11/03/2021 C V W D 83,999.28 954.00 84,953.28
AP 00421056 11/03/2021 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 314.11 0.00 314.11
AP 00421057 11/03/2021 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 342.73 0.00 342.73
AP 00421058 11/03/2021 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 32.26 0.00 32.26
AP 00421059 11/03/2021 CalPERS LONG-TERM CARE PROGRAM 177.08 0.00 177.08
AP 00421060 11/03/2021 CCS ORANGE COUNTY JANITORIAL INC 63,773.50 0.00 63,773.50
AP 00421061 11/03/2021 CDW GOVERNMENT INC 19,513.13 0.00 19,513.13
***AP 00421062 11/03/2021 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS 4,604.03 6,437.42 11,041.45
AP 00421063 11/03/2021 CHINO MOWER & EQUIPMENT 37.80 0.00 37.80
AP 00421064 11/03/2021 CHUA, ARTHUR 200.00 0.00 200.00
***AP 00421065 11/03/2021 CINTAS CORPORATION #150 4,380.05 520.09 4,900.14
AP 00421066 11/03/2021 CORPORATETRAININGMATERIALS.COM 3,493.00 0.00 3,493.00
AP 00421067 11/03/2021 COSTCO PHARMACY #0678 924.63 0.00 924.63
AP 00421068 11/03/2021 CUMMINS SALES & SERVICE 0.00 462.31 462.31
AP 00421069 11/03/2021 DAISYECO INC 85.08 0.00 85.08
AP 00421070 11/03/2021 DAPEER ROSENBLIT & LITVAK LLP 1,200.00 0.00 1,200.00
AP 00421071 11/03/2021 DELTA DENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY 1,143.24 0.00 1,143.24
AP 00421072 11/03/2021 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 0.00 80.00 80.00
AP 00421073 11/03/2021 DEPENDABLE COMPANY INC 95.00 0.00 95.00
AP 00421074 11/03/2021 ECORP CONSULTING INC 570.00 0.00 570.00
AP 00421075 11/03/2021 EIGHTH AVENUE ENTERPRISE LLC 263.99 0.00 263.99
AP 00421076 11/03/2021 FATHOLLAZADEH, MAHMOOD 59.57 0.00 59.57
AP 00421077 11/03/2021 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 37.89 0.00 37.89
AP 00421078 11/03/2021 FUEL SERV 617.48 0.00 617.48
AP 00421079 11/03/2021 GATORWRAPS INC 0.00 6,956.88 6,956.88
AP 00421080 11/03/2021 GILLISON, JOHN 200.30 0.00 200.30
AP 00421081 11/03/2021 GLOBALSTAR USA 315.25 0.00 315.25
AP 00421082 11/03/2021 GOVERNMENT TRAINING AGENCY/RTC 162.56 0.00 162.56
***AP 00421083 11/03/2021 GRAINGER 645.41 318.64 964.05
AP 00421084 11/03/2021 GUERRERO, RAMON MISAEL 500.00 0.00 500.00
AP 00421085 11/03/2021 HAPPYORNOT AMERICAS INC 8,351.43 0.00 8,351.43
AP 00421086 11/03/2021 HR GREEN PACIFIC INC 10,990.21 0.00 10,990.21
AP 00421087 11/03/2021 INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY CENTER 724.44 0.00 724.44
AP 00421088 11/03/2021 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC 246,083.57 0.00 246,083.57
AP 00421089 11/03/2021 KIMLEY HORN & ASSOCIATES INC 72,320.00 0.00 72,320.00
AP 00421090 11/03/2021 LANDSCAPE WEST MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC 6,651.44 0.00 6,651.44
AP 00421091 11/03/2021 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 4,588.00 0.00 4,588.00
08:37:25
11/08/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:6
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 31
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
10/25/2021 through 11/7/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00421092 11/03/2021 LOPEZ, JOSE 1,272.00 0.00 1,272.00
AP 00421093 11/03/2021 LOZANO SMITH LLP 18,474.10 0.00 18,474.10
AP 00421094 11/03/2021 MAGELLAN ADVISORS LLC 4,515.00 0.00 4,515.00
AP 00421095 11/03/2021 MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC 7,345.89 0.00 7,345.89
AP 00421096 11/03/2021 MCINTOSH, ANNE 763.10 0.00 763.10
AP 00421097 11/03/2021 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY 452.98 0.00 452.98
AP 00421098 11/03/2021 MDG ASSOCIATES INC 35,782.28 0.00 35,782.28
AP 00421099 11/03/2021 MIDWEST TAPE 105.00 0.00 105.00
***AP 00421100 11/03/2021 NAPA AUTO PARTS 42.80 128.91 171.71
AP 00421101 11/03/2021 NINYO & MOORE 0.00 2,552.50 2,552.50
AP 00421102 11/03/2021 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTRS OF CA 280.38 0.00 280.38
AP 00421103 11/03/2021 ONTRAC 59.81 0.00 59.81
AP 00421104 11/03/2021 ORTIZ, MOISES GARZON 436.00 0.00 436.00
AP 00421105 11/03/2021 PARS 3,500.00 0.00 3,500.00
AP 00421106 11/03/2021 PATTON SALES CORP 304.66 0.00 304.66
AP 00421107 11/03/2021 PRATER, REGINA 104.00 0.00 104.00
AP 00421108 11/03/2021 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 60.17 0.00 60.17
AP 00421109 11/03/2021 PRIVATE BRAND MFG 775.80 0.00 775.80
AP 00421110 11/03/2021 PROHEALTH PARTNERS A MEDICAL GROUP INC 0.00 300.00 300.00
AP 00421111 11/03/2021 RED WING BUSINESS ADVANTAGE ACCOUNT 485.91 0.00 485.91
AP 00421112 11/03/2021 SAFETY CENTER INC 2,900.00 0.00 2,900.00
AP 00421113 11/03/2021 SALDIVAR, ARACELI 112.00 0.00 112.00
AP 00421114 11/03/2021 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 15,443.92 0.00 15,443.92
AP 00421115 11/03/2021 SBPEA 2,284.84 0.00 2,284.84
***AP 00421116 11/03/2021 SHEAKLEY PENSION ADMINISTRATION 460.90 181.40 642.30
AP 00421117 11/03/2021 SHERIFFS COURT SERVICES 100.00 0.00 100.00
AP 00421118 11/03/2021 SHOETERIA INC 513.92 0.00 513.92
AP 00421119 11/03/2021 SKYRED PRODUCTIONS 0.00 1,250.00 1,250.00
AP 00421120 11/03/2021 SMITH, SUZANNE 500.00 0.00 500.00
AP 00421121 11/03/2021 SMITTY'S DIESEL 5,998.49 0.00 5,998.49
AP 00421124 11/03/2021 SOUND IMAGE INC 35,000.00 0.00 35,000.00
AP 00421125 11/03/2021 SOUTH COAST AQMD 935.73 0.00 935.73
***AP 00421128 11/03/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 25,313.95 172.47 25,486.42
AP 00421129 11/03/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 151.87 0.00 151.87
AP 00421130 11/03/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 48.10 0.00 48.10
AP 00421131 11/03/2021 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 11,968.64 0.00 11,968.64
AP 00421132 11/03/2021 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 11,868.82 0.00 11,868.82
AP 00421133 11/03/2021 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 3,394.26 0.00 3,394.26
***AP 00421134 11/03/2021 STANLEY PEST CONTROL 2,110.00 810.00 2,920.00
AP 00421135 11/03/2021 SUMARLI, LYDIA 75.00 0.00 75.00
AP 00421136 11/03/2021 TELEFLEX LLC 0.00 1,308.50 1,308.50
AP 00421137 11/03/2021 TRANSWEST TRUCK CENTER 4,599.60 0.00 4,599.60
AP 00421138 11/03/2021 TRIPEPI SMITH AND ASSOCIATES INC 2,400.00 0.00 2,400.00
AP 00421139 11/03/2021 ULINE 766.99 0.00 766.99
AP 00421140 11/03/2021 UNITED WAY 45.00 0.00 45.00
AP 00421141 11/03/2021 UNIVERSAL FLEET SUPPLY 0.00 459.24 459.24
AP 00421142 11/03/2021 UPS 68.83 0.00 68.83
08:37:25
11/08/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:7
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 32
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
10/25/2021 through 11/7/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00421143 11/03/2021 VALENZUELA, JOHN 0.00 525.00 525.00
AP 00421144 11/03/2021 VELOCITY TRUCK CENTERS 0.00 231.93 231.93
AP 00421145 11/03/2021 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA 0.00 6,983.77 6,983.77
AP 00421146 11/03/2021 VIRGIN PULSE INC 1,087.20 0.00 1,087.20
AP 00421147 11/03/2021 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 2,194.83 0.00 2,194.83
AP 00421148 11/03/2021 WEI, EMMA 49.00 0.00 49.00
AP 00421149 11/03/2021 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 132,671.95 0.00 132,671.95
AP 00421150 11/03/2021 WESTLAND GROUP INC 13,157.25 0.00 13,157.25
AP 00421151 11/03/2021 WHITMAN, DONALD 821.00 0.00 821.00
AP 00421152 11/03/2021 WINZER CORPORATION 0.00 11.64 11.64
AP 00421153 11/03/2021 XEROX FINANCIAL SERVICES 298.38 0.00 298.38
AP 00421154 11/03/2021 ZARATE-SANCHEZ, RACHEL 410.00 0.00 410.00
AP 00421155 11/03/2021 ZONES CORPORATE SOLUTIONS 29,971.33 0.00 29,971.33
$2,463,028.56
$2,737,457.48
$274,428.92
Note:
Grand Total:
Total Fire:
Total City:
*** Check Number includes both City and Fire District expenditures
08:37:25
11/08/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:8
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 33
DATE DESCRIPTION CITY FIRE AMOUNT
10/1 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 326.22 326.22
10/1 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 1,674.68 1,674.68
10/4 Bank Fee 96.15 96.15
10/4 WIRE PAYMENT - RCMU CAISO 26,446.99 26,446.99
10/4 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 3,058.53 3,058.53
10/4 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 1,540.56 1,540.56
10/5 U.S. BANK - Purchasing Card Payment 59,742.73 31,375.49 91,118.22
10/5 U.S. BANK - Corporate Card Payment -
10/5 U.S. BANK - Costco Card Payment -
10/5 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 46.15 46.15
10/5 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 606.45 606.45
10/6 CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit 56,285.54 56,285.54
10/6 CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit 107,728.87 107,728.87
10/7 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 3,293.04 3,293.04
10/7 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 3,436.12 3,436.12
10/7 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 5,302.85 5,302.85
10/7 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 10,241.65 10,241.65
10/7 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 29,510.02 29,510.02
10/7 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 115,119.37 115,119.37
10/7 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments 3,700.60 3,700.60
10/7 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments 1,732.50 1,732.50
10/7 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 571.01 571.01
10/7 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 426.47 426.47
10/8 WIRE PAYMENT - RCMU CAISO 15,897.50 15,897.50
10/8 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 1,165.98 1,165.98
10/8 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 2,612.00 2,612.00
10/12 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 1,308.72 1,308.72
10/13 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 63.99 63.99
10/13 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 139.77 139.77
10/14 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 1,841.00 1,841.00
10/14 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 4,597.60 4,597.60
10/15 WIRE PAYMENT - DEBT SERVICE 23,917.21 23,917.21
10/15 WIRE PAYMENT - DEBT SERVICE 224,728.13 224,728.13
10/15 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 520.00 520.00
10/18 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 7.50 7.50
10/18 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 685.23 685.23
10/19 WIRE PAYMENT - RCMU CAISO 138,811.07 138,811.07
10/19 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 37.05 37.05
10/19 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 206.08 206.08
10/20 CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit 56,062.32 56,062.32
10/20 CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit 109,064.99 109,064.99
10/21 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 3,293.04 3,293.04
10/21 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 3,437.80 3,437.80
10/21 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 4,907.31 4,907.31
10/21 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 9,977.46 9,977.46
10/21 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 28,747.89 28,747.89
10/21 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 114,805.45 114,805.45
10/21 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments 3,700.60 3,700.60
10/21 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments 1,732.50 1,732.50
10/21 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 321.13 321.13
10/21 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 356.14 356.14
10/25 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 2,257.34 2,257.34
10/25 WIRE PAYMENT - RCMU CAISO 25,929.96 25,929.96
10/26 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 31.93 31.93
10/26 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 712.62 712.62
10/27 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 1,956.82 1,956.82
10/27 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 3,076.16 3,076.16
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Electronic Debit Register
OCTOBER 1, 2021 to OCTOBER 31, 2021
1 Page 34
DATE DESCRIPTION CITY FIRE AMOUNT
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Electronic Debit Register
OCTOBER 1, 2021 to OCTOBER 31, 2021
10/27 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 20,778.95 20,778.95
10/27 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 198.75 198.75
10/27 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 347.20 347.20
10/28 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 184,239.91 184,239.91
10/28 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 463.79 463.79
10/28 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 2,746.94 2,746.94
10/29 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 989.00 989.00
TOTAL CITY 857,818.49
TOTAL FIRE 601,118.33
GRAND TOTAL 1,458,936.82
2 Page 35
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Boards of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director
Veronica Lopez, Accounts Payable Supervisor
SUBJECT:Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers
for Checks Issued to Southern California Gas Company in the Total
Amount of $13,795.20 Dated October 25, 2021 Through November 07,
2021. (CITY/FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends City Council/Board of Directors of the Fire Protection District approve payment
of demands as presented. Weekly check register amounts are $12,597.57 and $1,197.63 for the
City and the Fire District, respectively.
BACKGROUND:
N/A
ANALYSIS:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adequate budgeted funds are available for the payment of demands per the attached listing.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Weekly Check Register
Page 36
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
So Calif Gas Company Only.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
10/25/2021 through 11/7/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
***AP 00420997 10/27/2021 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 1,845.89 449.85 2,295.74
***AP 00421122 11/03/2021 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8,892.35 747.78 9,640.13
AP 00421123 11/03/2021 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 1,859.33 0.00 1,859.33
$12,597.57
$13,795.20
$1,197.63
Note:
Grand Total:
Total Fire:
Total City:
*** Check Number includes both City and Fire District expenditures
08:42:38
11/08/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:1
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 37
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Boards of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Lori E. Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services
Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director
SUBJECT:Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of
October 31, 2021 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho
Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council/Board of Directors of the Fire Protection District receive
and file the attached current investment schedules for the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) and
the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (District) as of October 31, 2021.
BACKGROUND:
The attached investment schedules as of October 31, 2021 reflect cash and investments
managed by the Finance Department/Revenue Management Division and are in conformity with
the requirements of California Government Code Section 53601 and the City of Rancho
Cucamonga’s and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District’s adopted Investment Policies
as approved on June 28, 2021.
ANALYSIS:
The City’s and District’s Treasurers are each required to submit a quarterly investment report to
the City Council and the Fire Board, respectively, in accordance with California Government Code
Section 53646. The quarterly investment report is required to be submitted within 30 days
following the end of the quarter covered by the report. However, the City and District Treasurers
have each elected to provide this report on a monthly basis.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The monthly investment schedule supports the City Council’s core value of providing and
nurturing a high quality of life for all by demonstrating the active, prudent fiscal management of
the City’s investment portfolio to ensure that financial resources are available to support the
various services the City provides to all Rancho Cucamonga stakeholders.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Investment Schedule (City)
Attachment 2 - Investment Schedule (Fire)
Page 38
Page 39
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021
Account Statement
Consolidated Summary Statement
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Investment Allocation
Investment Type Closing Market Value Percent
5,771,474.01 1.75 Asset-Backed Security
38,250,076.19 11.61 Federal Agency Bond / Note
31,885,856.25 9.68 Corporate Note
1,229,649.62 0.37 Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
1,009,190.00 0.31 Municipal Bond / Note
10,423,261.68 3.16 Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
179,354,395.21 54.44 U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
59,282,150.94 17.99 Local Agency Investment Fund
2,272,089.83 0.69 Passbook/Checking Accounts
$329,478,143.73 Total 100.00%
Portfolio Summary
and Income
Closing
Market ValuePortfolio Holdings
Cash Dividends
PFM Managed Account 204,946.49 267,923,902.96
Local Agency Investment Fund 0.00 59,282,150.94
Passbook/Checking Accounts 0.00 2,272,089.83
$204,946.49 $329,478,143.73 Total
Maturity Distribution (Fixed Income Holdings)
Portfolio Holdings Closing Market Value Percent
61,554,240.77
0.00
2,008,782.00
0.00
16,074,570.48
88,862,679.38
54,529,175.37
59,236,100.84
47,212,594.89
0.00
18.68
0.00
0.61
0.00
4.88
26.97
16.55
17.98
14.33
0.00
Under 30 days
31 to 60 days
61 to 90 days
91 to 180 days
181 days to 1 year
1 to 2 years
2 to 3 years
3 to 4 years
4 to 5 years
Over 5 years
Total $329,478,143.73
774
100.00%
Weighted Average Days to Maturity
Sector Allocation
1.75%
ABS
11.61%
Fed Agy Bond /
Note
9.68%
Corporate Note
0.37%
Cert of Deposit -
FDIC
0.31%
Muni Bond / Note
3.16%
Supra-National
Agency Bond / Note
54.44%
US TSY Bond / Note
17.99%
Local Agency
Investment Fund
0.69%
Passbook/Checking
Accounts
Summary Page 1
Page 40
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Summary Statement
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Total Cash Basis Earnings
Plus Net Realized Gains/Losses
Less Purchased Interest Related to Interest/Coupons
Interest/Dividends/Coupons Received
Earnings Reconciliation (Cash Basis) - Managed Account
Less Beginning Accrued Interest
Less Beginning Amortized Value of Securities
Less Cost of New Purchases
Plus Coupons/Dividends Received
Plus Proceeds of Maturities/Calls/Principal Payments
Plus Proceeds from Sales
Ending Accrued Interest
Ending Amortized Value of Securities
Earnings Reconciliation (Accrual Basis)
$268,979,389.12
0.00
(2,972,013.85)
3,394,054.69
0.00
(1,477,527.00)
$267,923,902.96
194,169.62
(386.98)
11,163.85
$204,946.49
Total
270,037,301.88
725,896.81
2,983,556.07
0.00
182,627.40
(3,394,441.67)
(269,741,221.09)
(670,326.84)
Total Accrual Basis Earnings $123,392.56
Closing Market Value
Change in Current Value
Unsettled Trades
Principal Acquisitions
Principal Dispositions
Maturities/Calls
Opening Market Value
Transaction Summary - Managed Account
_________________
_________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________Reconciling Transactions
Net Cash Contribution
Security Purchases
Principal Payments
Coupon/Interest/Dividend Income
Sale Proceeds
Maturities/Calls
Cash Transactions Summary - Managed Account
0.00
2,983,556.07
182,627.40
0.00
(3,394,441.67)
0.00
0.00
Cash Balance
$196,080.13 Closing Cash Balance
Account 73340000 Page 1
Page 41
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Portfolio Summary and Statistics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Account Summary
Percent Par Value Market ValueDescription
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note 178,270,000.00 179,354,395.21 66.94
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note 10,410,000.00 10,423,261.68 3.89
Municipal Bond / Note 1,000,000.00 1,009,190.00 0.38
Federal Agency Bond / Note 38,745,000.00 38,250,076.19 14.28
Corporate Note 31,250,000.00 31,885,856.25 11.90
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured 1,225,000.00 1,229,649.62 0.46
Asset-Backed Security 5,805,000.00 5,771,474.01 2.15
Managed Account Sub-Total 266,705,000.00 267,923,902.96 100.00%
Accrued Interest 725,896.81
Total Portfolio 266,705,000.00 268,649,799.77
Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00
Sector Allocation
2.15%
ABS
0.46%
Cert of Deposit -
FDIC
11.90%
Corporate Note
14.28%
Fed Agy Bond /
Note
0.38%
Muni Bond / Note
3.89%
Supra-National
Agency Bond / Note
66.94%
US TSY Bond / Note
0 - 6 Months 6 - 12 Months 1 - 2 Years 2 - 3 Years 3 - 4 Years 4 - 5 Years Over 5 Years
0.75%
6.00%
33.17%
20.35%22.11%
17.62%
0.00%
Maturity Distribution Characteristics
Yield to Maturity at Cost
Yield to Maturity at Market
Weighted Average Days to Maturity 951
0.48%
0.67%
Account 73340000 Page 2
Page 42
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Issuer Summary
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Credit Quality (S&P Ratings)
1.05%
A
0.57%
A+
2.79%
A-
1.68%
AA
84.60%
AA+
2.10%
AA-
5.32%
AAA
0.70%
BBB+
1.19%
NR
Issuer Summary
Percentof HoldingsIssuer
Market Value
1,442,628.14 0.54 AMAZON.COM INC
8,071,405.50 3.01 APPLE INC
1,658,655.35 0.62 ASTRAZENECA PLC
512,662.42 0.19 BMW FINANCIAL SERVICES NA LLC
2,446,972.45 0.91 CARMAX AUTO OWNER TRUST
658,514.34 0.25 CHARLES SCHWAB
242,593.61 0.09 CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK
243,979.09 0.09 ENERBANK USA
26,584,038.99 9.93 FANNIE MAE
2,948,640.00 1.10 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS
8,717,397.20 3.25 FREDDIE MAC
1,721,985.60 0.64 GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP
374,074.16 0.14 GM FINANCIAL CONSUMER AUTOMOBILE TRUST
512,974.71 0.19 GM FINANCIAL LEASINGTRUST
1,864,093.80 0.70 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC
527,588.29 0.20 HONDA AUTO RECEIVABLES
279,331.53 0.10 HYUNDAI AUTO LEASE SECURITIZATION TRUST
537,006.67 0.20 HYUNDAI AUTO RECEIVABLES
1,806,705.25 0.67 IBM CORP
5,273,400.97 1.97 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
5,149,860.71 1.92 INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND DEV
603,391.87 0.23 JP MORGAN CHASE & CO
913,787.25 0.34 KUBOTA CREDIT OWNER TRUST
1,687,547.20 0.63 LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP
243,037.55 0.09 MEDALLION BANK UTAH
179,738.95 0.07 MERCEDES-BENZ AUTO LEASE TRUST
249,932.59 0.09 MORGAN STANLEY
3,058,218.00 1.14 NOVARTIS AG
1,009,190.00 0.38 SAN MATEO-FOSTER CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
1,643,399.04 0.61 THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORPORATION
1,088,238.26 0.41 TOYOTA MOTOR CORP
435,277.48 0.16 UNILEVER PLC
Account 73340000 Page 3
Page 43
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Issuer Summary
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Percentof HoldingsIssuer
Market Value
179,354,395.21 66.95 UNITED STATES TREASURY
2,571,610.00 0.96 US BANCORP
3,061,524.00 1.14 WAL-MART STORES INC
250,106.78 0.09 WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
$267,923,902.96 Total 100.00%
Account 73340000 Page 4
Page 44
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 06/30/2020 0.125% 06/30/2022
4,500,702.90 4,499,669.04 1,895.38 4,499,121.09 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 4,500,000.00 912828ZX1 0.14
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2015 2.000% 07/31/2022
2,976,732.18 2,975,851.07 14,834.51 3,035,775.98 09/28/2009/28/20AaaAA+ 2,935,000.00 912828XQ8 0.13
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/15/2019 1.375% 10/15/2022
8,093,750.40 8,094,337.35 5,137.36 8,202,500.00 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 8,000,000.00 912828YK0 0.14
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/15/2012 1.625% 11/15/2022
5,837,148.15 5,837,657.75 43,164.06 5,921,152.34 11/05/2010/30/20AaaAA+ 5,750,000.00 912828TY6 0.15
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2015 2.000% 11/30/2022
8,565,375.00 8,568,383.68 70,688.52 8,695,312.50 01/08/2101/06/21AaaAA+ 8,400,000.00 912828M80 0.14
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2015 2.125% 12/31/2022
5,110,156.00 5,113,635.21 35,801.63 5,205,078.13 11/24/2011/23/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 912828N30 0.17
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2018 2.375% 01/31/2023
2,463,374.88 2,465,404.30 14,404.89 2,515,031.25 11/20/2011/17/20AaaAA+ 2,400,000.00 9128283U2 0.19
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2018 2.625% 02/28/2023
1,865,996.88 1,868,322.60 8,137.50 1,910,257.03 11/18/2011/16/20AaaAA+ 1,810,000.00 9128284A5 0.19
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/29/2016 1.500% 02/28/2023
7,111,562.50 7,126,966.74 17,983.43 7,200,156.25 01/26/2101/25/21AaaAA+ 7,000,000.00 912828P79 0.13
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/15/2020 0.500% 03/15/2023
5,013,281.00 5,023,005.32 3,245.86 5,039,648.44 11/05/2010/30/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 912828ZD5 0.16
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 04/30/2018 2.750% 04/30/2023
5,178,906.00 5,192,284.63 379.83 5,329,882.81 10/07/2010/06/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 9128284L1 0.17
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2016 1.625% 05/31/2023
3,568,906.25 3,580,178.76 23,931.01 3,630,429.69 11/05/2010/30/20AaaAA+ 3,500,000.00 912828R69 0.17
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 06/15/2020 0.250% 06/15/2023
6,485,781.25 6,510,913.35 6,171.45 6,518,281.25 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 6,500,000.00 912828ZU7 0.15
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.125% 07/31/2023
5,968,125.00 5,991,303.09 1,895.38 5,990,156.25 08/09/2108/06/21AaaAA+ 6,000,000.00 91282CCN9 0.21
Account 73340000 Page 5
Page 45
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/15/2020 0.125% 08/15/2023
4,971,875.00 4,994,867.15 1,324.73 4,991,796.88 10/07/2010/06/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 91282CAF8 0.18
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/15/2020 0.125% 09/15/2023
4,968,750.00 4,992,321.45 811.46 4,988,476.56 11/24/2011/23/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 91282CAK7 0.21
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/30/2021 0.250% 09/30/2023
1,991,875.00 1,999,171.49 439.56 1,999,140.63 10/06/2110/04/21AaaAA+ 2,000,000.00 91282CDA6 0.27
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2019 2.375% 02/29/2024
8,327,500.00 8,408,539.33 32,541.44 8,600,312.50 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 8,000,000.00 9128286G0 0.18
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/01/2017 2.000% 04/30/2024
3,735,876.56 3,773,983.53 199.72 3,836,983.59 11/05/2010/30/20AaaAA+ 3,615,000.00 912828X70 0.23
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
4,956,250.00 5,006,085.70 5,553.67 5,006,640.63 08/03/2108/02/21AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 91282CCL3 0.33
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2019 1.750% 07/31/2024
5,832,126.85 5,904,109.46 25,075.88 5,995,139.06 10/07/2010/06/20AaaAA+ 5,670,000.00 912828Y87 0.24
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 08/15/2021 0.375% 08/15/2024
3,963,124.80 3,996,455.43 3,179.35 3,996,250.00 09/03/2109/01/21AaaAA+ 4,000,000.00 91282CCT6 0.41
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/31/2019 1.250% 08/31/2024
2,277,973.44 2,308,743.21 4,806.28 2,325,942.78 01/26/2101/25/21AaaAA+ 2,245,000.00 912828YE4 0.24
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 09/15/2021 0.375% 09/15/2024
1,386,000.00 1,395,037.07 681.63 1,394,914.06 10/06/2110/04/21AaaAA+ 1,400,000.00 91282CCX7 0.50
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/02/2017 2.125% 09/30/2024
6,238,125.00 6,333,068.18 11,208.79 6,457,968.75 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 6,000,000.00 9128282Y5 0.21
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/31/2019 1.500% 10/31/2024
2,554,687.50 2,588,629.65 103.59 2,616,796.88 11/18/2011/16/20AaaAA+ 2,500,000.00 912828YM6 0.31
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
5,107,812.50 5,183,929.26 31,557.38 5,239,843.75 11/24/2011/23/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 912828YV6 0.30
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2018 2.750% 02/28/2025
6,373,125.00 6,499,663.10 28,259.67 6,663,750.00 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 6,000,000.00 9128283Z1 0.23
Account 73340000 Page 6
Page 46
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/31/2020 0.500% 03/31/2025
2,713,906.25 2,765,133.53 1,208.79 2,769,335.94 11/20/2011/17/20AaaAA+ 2,750,000.00 912828ZF0 0.34
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2020 0.250% 07/31/2025
4,379,062.50 4,482,333.51 2,843.07 4,478,730.47 01/26/2101/25/21AaaAA+ 4,500,000.00 91282CAB7 0.36
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2020 0.250% 07/31/2025
6,811,875.00 6,964,054.05 4,422.56 6,956,250.00 01/08/2101/06/21AaaAA+ 7,000,000.00 91282CAB7 0.39
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2020 0.375% 12/31/2025
3,787,875.00 3,843,673.79 4,927.99 3,837,082.03 05/07/2105/06/21AaaAA+ 3,900,000.00 91282CBC4 0.73
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
4,020,002.55 4,081,612.73 3,928.18 4,076,834.18 07/07/2107/06/21AaaAA+ 4,145,000.00 91282CBH3 0.74
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
5,819,062.80 5,917,066.78 5,686.14 5,912,578.13 08/09/2108/06/21AaaAA+ 6,000,000.00 91282CBH3 0.71
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2021 0.500% 02/28/2026
2,581,679.82 2,627,301.52 2,269.34 2,623,810.55 03/03/2103/02/21AaaAA+ 2,650,000.00 91282CBQ3 0.70
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 03/31/2021 0.750% 03/31/2026
2,951,250.00 2,976,660.69 1,978.02 2,973,632.81 04/06/2104/02/21AaaAA+ 3,000,000.00 91282CBT7 0.93
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/31/2021 0.750% 05/31/2026
5,991,343.75 6,087,754.80 19,250.00 6,086,656.25 06/04/2106/02/21AaaAA+ 6,100,000.00 91282CCF6 0.79
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.625% 07/31/2026
1,949,375.00 1,986,662.13 3,158.97 1,986,015.63 08/09/2108/06/21AaaAA+ 2,000,000.00 91282CCP4 0.77
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.625% 07/31/2026
2,924,062.50 2,992,424.66 4,738.45 2,992,031.25 08/03/2108/02/21AaaAA+ 3,000,000.00 91282CCP4 0.68
447,825.47 179,354,395.21 180,957,195.09 0.31 182,499,696.32 178,270,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND DEV
NOTE
DTD 01/26/2017 2.000% 01/26/2022
2,008,782.00 2,000,244.67 10,555.56 2,004,680.00 07/26/1707/26/17AaaAAA 2,000,000.00 459058FY4 1.95
Account 73340000 Page 7
Page 47
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
INTL BK OF RECON AND DEV NOTE
DTD 04/20/2021 0.126% 04/20/2023
1,738,674.38 1,742,352.74 67.18 1,741,387.85 04/20/2104/13/21AaaAAA 1,745,000.00 459058JV6 0.23
INTL BK RECON & DEVELOP NOTES
DTD 11/24/2020 0.250% 11/24/2023
1,402,404.33 1,407,915.32 1,537.29 1,406,968.50 11/24/2011/17/20AaaAAA 1,410,000.00 459058JM6 0.32
INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
3,728,876.47 3,752,320.18 1,981.81 3,752,221.30 09/23/2109/15/21AaaAAA 3,755,000.00 4581X0DZ8 0.52
INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
NOTES
DTD 01/16/2020 1.750% 03/14/2025
1,544,524.50 1,563,899.70 3,427.08 1,576,950.00 02/23/2102/19/21AaaAAA 1,500,000.00 4581X0DK1 0.47
17,568.92 10,423,261.68 10,466,732.61 0.71 10,482,207.65 10,410,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Municipal Bond / Note
SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST, CA TXBL GO
BO
DTD 05/19/2020 1.162% 08/01/2022
503,385.00 500,780.97 1,452.50 502,300.00 05/19/2005/19/20AaaAA+ 500,000.00 799055QR2 0.95
SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST, CA TXBL GO
BO
DTD 05/19/2020 1.266% 08/01/2023
505,805.00 501,847.42 1,582.50 503,385.00 05/19/2005/19/20AaaAA+ 500,000.00 799055QS0 1.05
3,035.00 1,009,190.00 1,002,628.39 1.00 1,005,685.00 1,000,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Federal Agency Bond / Note
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 07/10/2020 0.250% 07/10/2023
4,246,866.42 4,260,723.91 3,283.75 4,261,192.80 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 4,260,000.00 3135G05G4 0.24
FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 09/04/2020 0.250% 09/08/2023
4,779,388.80 4,801,841.24 1,766.67 4,802,928.00 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 4,800,000.00 3137EAEW5 0.23
FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 11/05/2020 0.250% 11/06/2023
1,690,712.90 1,698,973.95 2,065.97 1,698,470.00 11/05/2011/03/20AaaAA+ 1,700,000.00 3137EAEZ8 0.28
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/25/2020 0.250% 11/27/2023
4,375,267.60 4,396,543.21 4,705.56 4,394,984.00 11/25/2011/23/20AaaAA+ 4,400,000.00 3135G06H1 0.29
Account 73340000 Page 8
Page 48
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Federal Agency Bond / Note
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 06/19/2020 0.500% 06/17/2025
2,851,343.40 2,900,026.51 5,387.92 2,901,803.25 07/21/2007/21/20AaaAA+ 2,895,000.00 3135G04Z3 0.45
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 06/19/2020 0.500% 06/17/2025
4,924,600.00 5,013,678.00 9,305.55 5,017,800.00 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 3135G04Z3 0.42
FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES
DTD 07/02/2020 0.500% 07/02/2025
2,948,640.00 3,005,268.56 4,958.33 3,007,110.00 07/21/2007/21/20AaaAA+ 3,000,000.00 3133ELR71 0.45
FANNIE MAE NOTES (CALLABLE)
DTD 07/21/2020 0.625% 07/21/2025
2,466,277.50 2,499,256.30 4,340.28 2,499,000.00 07/21/2007/21/20AaaAA+ 2,500,000.00 3136G4ZJ5 0.63
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 08/27/2020 0.375% 08/25/2025
1,953,592.00 1,990,866.88 1,375.00 1,988,500.00 11/05/2010/30/20AaaAA+ 2,000,000.00 3135G05X7 0.50
FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 09/25/2020 0.375% 09/23/2025
2,247,295.50 2,294,602.79 910.42 2,293,077.00 09/25/2009/23/20AaaAA+ 2,300,000.00 3137EAEX3 0.44
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/12/2020 0.500% 11/07/2025
1,360,758.57 1,388,162.54 3,359.17 1,387,720.40 11/13/2011/12/20AaaAA+ 1,390,000.00 3135G06G3 0.53
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/12/2020 0.500% 11/07/2025
4,405,333.50 4,495,486.47 10,875.00 4,494,465.00 12/04/2012/02/20AaaAA+ 4,500,000.00 3135G06G3 0.53
52,333.62 38,250,076.19 38,745,430.36 0.39 38,747,050.45 38,745,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Corporate Note
WAL-MART STORES INC CORP (CALLABLE)
NOTE
DTD 10/20/2017 2.350% 12/15/2022
3,061,524.00 2,978,486.30 26,633.33 2,913,840.00 06/21/1806/21/18Aa2AA 3,000,000.00 931142DU4 3.04
APPLE INC GLOBAL NOTES
DTD 05/03/2013 2.400% 05/03/2023
3,483,855.54 3,374,429.81 40,228.00 3,348,574.20 05/06/1905/06/19Aa1AA+ 3,390,000.00 037833AK6 2.73
APPLE INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/11/2020 0.750% 05/11/2023
1,445,412.96 1,442,405.58 5,100.00 1,444,737.60 05/11/2005/11/20Aa1AA+ 1,440,000.00 037833DV9 0.64
APPLE INC (CALLABLE) BONDS
DTD 02/09/2017 3.000% 02/09/2024
3,142,137.00 3,008,342.52 20,500.00 3,019,140.00 02/11/1902/11/19Aa1AA+ 3,000,000.00 037833CG3 2.86
Account 73340000 Page 9
Page 49
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Corporate Note
CHARLES SCHWAB CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/18/2021 0.750% 03/18/2024
658,514.34 659,738.65 591.25 659,670.00 03/18/2103/16/21A2A 660,000.00 808513BN4 0.77
AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/12/2021 0.450% 05/12/2024
1,442,628.14 1,453,211.01 3,073.69 1,452,875.70 05/12/2105/10/21A1AA 1,455,000.00 023135BW5 0.50
UNILEVER CAPITAL CORP (CALLABLE)
CORPORA
DTD 08/12/2021 0.626% 08/12/2024
435,277.48 440,000.00 604.44 440,000.00 08/12/2108/09/21A1A+ 440,000.00 904764BN6 0.63
BMW US CAPITAL LLC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 08/12/2021 0.750% 08/12/2024
512,662.42 514,957.08 847.60 514,953.65 08/12/2108/09/21A2A 515,000.00 05565EBU8 0.75
US BANK NA CINCINNATI (CALLABLE)
CORPORA
DTD 01/21/2020 2.050% 01/21/2025
2,571,610.00 2,606,783.03 14,236.11 2,640,450.00 11/05/2010/30/20A1AA- 2,500,000.00 90331HPL1 0.69
NOVARTIS CAPITAL CORP
DTD 02/14/2020 1.750% 02/14/2025
3,058,218.00 3,107,939.77 11,229.17 3,144,750.00 09/28/2009/24/20A1AA- 3,000,000.00 66989HAP3 0.63
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 02/16/2021 0.563% 02/16/2025
603,391.87 610,000.00 715.48 610,000.00 02/16/2102/09/21A2A- 610,000.00 46647PBY1 0.56
LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 02/20/2015 2.900% 03/01/2025
1,687,547.20 1,694,891.32 7,733.33 1,714,864.00 03/09/2103/05/21A3A- 1,600,000.00 539830BE8 1.05
GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP (CALLABLE)
CORP NO
DTD 05/11/2018 3.500% 05/15/2025
1,721,985.60 1,731,884.17 25,822.22 1,757,296.00 03/09/2103/05/21A3A- 1,600,000.00 369550BG2 1.09
BANK OF NY MELLON CORP (CALLABLE)
CORPOR
DTD 01/28/2021 0.750% 01/28/2026
1,643,399.04 1,684,154.81 3,264.69 1,684,005.85 02/01/2101/28/21A1A 1,685,000.00 06406RAQ0 0.76
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 02/12/2021 0.855% 02/12/2026
1,864,093.80 1,903,328.98 3,564.88 1,903,876.00 02/17/2102/12/21A2BBB+ 1,900,000.00 38141GXS8 0.81
Account 73340000 Page 10
Page 50
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Corporate Note
IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
1,806,705.25 1,839,018.11 25,487.92 1,844,861.75 09/03/2109/01/21A3A- 1,675,000.00 459200JZ5 1.08
ASTRAZENECA FINANCE LLC (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 05/28/2021 1.200% 05/28/2026
1,658,655.35 1,683,779.22 8,542.50 1,684,095.25 09/03/2109/01/21A3A- 1,675,000.00 04636NAA1 1.08
TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 06/18/2021 1.125% 06/18/2026
1,088,238.26 1,102,616.02 4,592.66 1,102,546.90 09/13/2109/08/21A1A+ 1,105,000.00 89236TJK2 1.17
202,767.27 31,885,856.25 31,835,966.38 1.45 31,880,536.90 31,250,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
WELLS FARGO BANK NA
DTD 01/29/2020 1.900% 01/30/2023
250,106.78 245,000.00 38.26 245,000.00 01/29/2001/29/20NRNR 245,000.00 949763S64 1.90
MORGAN STANLEY PVT BANK
DTD 01/30/2020 1.850% 01/30/2023
249,932.59 245,000.00 1,167.27 245,000.00 01/30/2001/30/20NRNR 245,000.00 61760A6Q7 1.85
ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
243,979.09 245,000.00 24.16 245,000.00 07/24/2007/24/20NRNR 245,000.00 29278TQD5 0.45
CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK
DTD 07/29/2020 0.500% 07/29/2025
242,593.61 245,000.00 10.07 245,000.00 07/29/2007/29/20NRNR 245,000.00 169894AT9 0.50
MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
243,037.55 245,000.00 7.38 245,000.00 07/30/2007/30/20NRNR 245,000.00 58404DHQ7 0.55
1,247.14 1,229,649.62 1,225,000.00 1.06 1,225,000.00 1,225,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Asset-Backed Security
MBALT 2021-A A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.250% 01/16/2024
179,738.95 179,986.47 20.00 179,981.80 01/27/2101/20/21AaaAAA 180,000.00 58770GAC4 0.25
HALST 2021-A A4
DTD 01/20/2021 0.420% 12/16/2024
279,331.53 279,981.36 52.27 279,976.70 01/20/2101/12/21AaaAAA 280,000.00 44891TAD8 0.42
Account 73340000 Page 11
Page 51
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Asset-Backed Security
GMALT 2021-1 A4
DTD 02/24/2021 0.330% 02/20/2025
512,974.71 514,935.58 51.93 514,922.24 02/24/2102/17/21AaaNR 515,000.00 36261RAD0 0.33
HAROT 2021-1 A3
DTD 02/24/2021 0.270% 04/21/2025
527,588.29 529,991.90 39.75 529,990.30 02/24/2102/17/21AaaNR 530,000.00 43813GAC5 0.27
HART 2021-A A3
DTD 04/28/2021 0.380% 09/15/2025
537,006.67 539,949.83 91.20 539,943.19 04/28/2104/20/21NRAAA 540,000.00 44933LAC7 0.38
GMCAR 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/20/2021 0.350% 10/16/2025
374,074.16 374,950.13 54.69 374,940.30 01/20/2101/12/21AaaAAA 375,000.00 36261LAC5 0.35
KCOT 2021-2A A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.560% 11/17/2025
913,787.25 924,967.26 230.22 924,965.13 07/28/2107/20/21AaaNR 925,000.00 50117XAE2 0.56
CARMX 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.340% 12/15/2025
119,446.19 119,979.99 18.13 119,976.29 01/27/2101/20/21NRAAA 120,000.00 14316NAC3 0.34
CARMX 2021-2 A3
DTD 04/21/2021 0.520% 02/17/2026
807,683.32 809,844.66 187.20 809,825.45 04/21/2104/13/21NRAAA 810,000.00 14314QAC8 0.52
CARMX 2021-3 A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.550% 06/15/2026
1,519,842.94 1,529,761.87 374.00 1,529,748.32 07/28/2107/21/21AaaAAA 1,530,000.00 14317DAC4 0.55
1,119.39 5,771,474.01 5,804,349.05 0.46 5,804,269.72 5,805,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
266,705,000.00 271,644,446.04 0.48 725,896.81 270,037,301.88 267,923,902.96 Managed Account Sub-Total
$266,705,000.00 $271,644,446.04 $725,896.81 $270,037,301.88 $267,923,902.96 0.48%
$268,649,799.77
$725,896.81
Total Investments
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total
Account 73340000 Page 12
Page 52
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
1,033.86 1,581.81 4,500,702.90 100.02 WELLS_F 4,500,000.00 912828ZX1US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 06/30/2020 0.125% 06/30/2022
0.10 0.67
881.11 (59,043.80) 2,976,732.18 101.42 BONY 2,935,000.00 912828XQ8US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2015 2.000% 07/31/2022
0.10 0.75
(586.95)(108,749.60) 8,093,750.40 101.17 CITIGRP 8,000,000.00 912828YK0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/15/2019 1.375% 10/15/2022
0.15 0.96
(509.60)(84,004.19) 5,837,148.15 101.52 CITIGRP 5,750,000.00 912828TY6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/15/2012 1.625% 11/15/2022
0.17 1.03
(3,008.68)(129,937.50) 8,565,375.00 101.97 CITIGRP 8,400,000.00 912828M80US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2015 2.000% 11/30/2022
0.18 1.07
(3,479.21)(94,922.13) 5,110,156.00 102.20 NOMURA 5,000,000.00 912828N30US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2015 2.125% 12/31/2022
0.23 1.16
(2,029.42)(51,656.37) 2,463,374.88 102.64 CITIGRP 2,400,000.00 9128283U2US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2018 2.375% 01/31/2023
0.26 1.24
(2,325.72)(44,260.15) 1,865,996.88 103.09 CITIGRP 1,810,000.00 9128284A5US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2018 2.625% 02/28/2023
0.30 1.32
(15,404.24)(88,593.75) 7,111,562.50 101.59 BNP_PAR 7,000,000.00 912828P79US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/29/2016 1.500% 02/28/2023
0.30 1.33
(9,724.32)(26,367.44) 5,013,281.00 100.27 WELLS_F 5,000,000.00 912828ZD5US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/15/2020 0.500% 03/15/2023
0.31 1.38
(13,378.63)(150,976.81) 5,178,906.00 103.58 CITIGRP 5,000,000.00 9128284L1US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 04/30/2018 2.750% 04/30/2023
0.36 1.47
(11,272.51)(61,523.44) 3,568,906.25 101.97 NOMURA 3,500,000.00 912828R69US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2016 1.625% 05/31/2023
0.38 1.56
(25,132.10)(32,500.00) 6,485,781.25 99.78 WELLS_F 6,500,000.00 912828ZU7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 06/15/2020 0.250% 06/15/2023
0.39 1.63
(23,178.09)(22,031.25) 5,968,125.00 99.47 MERRILL 6,000,000.00 91282CCN9US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.125% 07/31/2023
0.43 1.75
(22,992.15)(19,921.88) 4,971,875.00 99.44 HSBC 5,000,000.00 91282CAF8US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/15/2020 0.125% 08/15/2023
0.44 1.79
(23,571.45)(19,726.56) 4,968,750.00 99.38 NOMURA 5,000,000.00 91282CAK7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/15/2020 0.125% 09/15/2023
0.46 1.88
(7,296.49)(7,265.63) 1,991,875.00 99.59 NOMURA 2,000,000.00 91282CDA6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/30/2021 0.250% 09/30/2023
0.46 1.92
Account 73340000 Page 13
Page 53
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
(81,039.33)(272,812.50) 8,327,500.00 104.09 RBS 8,000,000.00 9128286G0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2019 2.375% 02/29/2024
0.60 2.28
(38,106.97)(101,107.03) 3,735,876.56 103.34 MORGAN_ 3,615,000.00 912828X70US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/01/2017 2.000% 04/30/2024
0.65 2.43
(49,835.70)(50,390.63) 4,956,250.00 99.13 NOMURA 5,000,000.00 91282CCL3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
0.70 2.70
(71,982.61)(163,012.21) 5,832,126.85 102.86 WELLS_F 5,670,000.00 912828Y87US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2019 1.750% 07/31/2024
0.70 2.69
(33,330.63)(33,125.20) 3,963,124.80 99.08 NOMURA 4,000,000.00 91282CCT6US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 08/15/2021 0.375% 08/15/2024
0.71 2.78
(30,769.77)(47,969.34) 2,277,973.44 101.47 BNP_PAR 2,245,000.00 912828YE4US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/31/2019 1.250% 08/31/2024
0.72 2.79
(9,037.07)(8,914.06) 1,386,000.00 99.00 MERRILL 1,400,000.00 91282CCX7US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 09/15/2021 0.375% 09/15/2024
0.73 2.86
(94,943.18)(219,843.75) 6,238,125.00 103.97 CITIGRP 6,000,000.00 9128282Y5US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/02/2017 2.125% 09/30/2024
0.75 2.84
(33,942.15)(62,109.38) 2,554,687.50 102.19 CITIGRP 2,500,000.00 912828YM6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/31/2019 1.500% 10/31/2024
0.76 2.93
(76,116.76)(132,031.25) 5,107,812.50 102.16 NOMURA 5,000,000.00 912828YV6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
0.79 3.01
(126,538.10)(290,625.00) 6,373,125.00 106.22 MERRILL 6,000,000.00 9128283Z1US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2018 2.750% 02/28/2025
0.85 3.20
(51,227.28)(55,429.69) 2,713,906.25 98.69 MORGAN_ 2,750,000.00 912828ZF0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/31/2020 0.500% 03/31/2025
0.89 3.39
(103,271.01)(99,667.97) 4,379,062.50 97.31 BNP_PAR 4,500,000.00 91282CAB7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2020 0.250% 07/31/2025
0.98 3.74
(152,179.05)(144,375.00) 6,811,875.00 97.31 JPM_CHA 7,000,000.00 91282CAB7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2020 0.250% 07/31/2025
0.98 3.74
(55,798.79)(49,207.03) 3,787,875.00 97.13 HSBC 3,900,000.00 91282CBC4US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2020 0.375% 12/31/2025
1.08 4.14
(61,610.18)(56,831.63) 4,020,002.55 96.98 CITIGRP 4,145,000.00 91282CBH3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
1.10 4.22
(98,003.98)(93,515.33) 5,819,062.80 96.98 RBS 6,000,000.00 91282CBH3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
1.10 4.22
Account 73340000 Page 14
Page 54
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
(45,621.70)(42,130.73) 2,581,679.82 97.42 CITIGRP 2,650,000.00 91282CBQ3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2021 0.500% 02/28/2026
1.11 4.29
(25,410.69)(22,382.81) 2,951,250.00 98.38 NOMURA 3,000,000.00 91282CBT7US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 03/31/2021 0.750% 03/31/2026
1.13 4.35
(96,411.05)(95,312.50) 5,991,343.75 98.22 RBC 6,100,000.00 91282CCF6US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/31/2021 0.750% 05/31/2026
1.15 4.50
(37,287.13)(36,640.63) 1,949,375.00 97.47 CITIGRP 2,000,000.00 91282CCP4US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.625% 07/31/2026
1.17 4.68
(68,362.16)(67,968.75) 2,924,062.50 97.47 CITIGRP 3,000,000.00 91282CCP4US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.625% 07/31/2026
1.17 4.68
(3,145,301.11) 0.60 (1,602,799.88) 179,354,395.21 178,270,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.42
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
8,537.33 4,102.00 2,008,782.00 100.44 NEW ACC 2,000,000.00 459058FY4INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND
DEV NOTE
DTD 01/26/2017 2.000% 01/26/2022
0.16 0.24
(3,678.36)(2,713.47) 1,738,674.38 99.64 TD 1,745,000.00 459058JV6INTL BK OF RECON AND DEV NOTE
DTD 04/20/2021 0.126% 04/20/2023
0.37 1.47
(5,510.99)(4,564.17) 1,402,404.33 99.46 TD 1,410,000.00 459058JM6INTL BK RECON & DEVELOP NOTES
DTD 11/24/2020 0.250% 11/24/2023
0.51 2.06
(23,443.71)(23,344.83) 3,728,876.47 99.30 JPM_CHA 3,755,000.00 4581X0DZ8INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
0.74 2.88
(19,375.20)(32,425.50) 1,544,524.50 102.97 MORGAN_ 1,500,000.00 4581X0DK1INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
NOTES
DTD 01/16/2020 1.750% 03/14/2025
0.86 3.29
(58,945.97) 0.55 (43,470.93) 10,423,261.68 10,410,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.09
Municipal Bond / Note
2,604.03 1,085.00 503,385.00 100.68 NEW ACC 500,000.00 799055QR2SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST, CA TXBL
GO BO
DTD 05/19/2020 1.162% 08/01/2022
0.26 0.75
Account 73340000 Page 15
Page 55
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Municipal Bond / Note
3,957.58 2,420.00 505,805.00 101.16 NEW ACC 500,000.00 799055QS0SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST, CA TXBL
GO BO
DTD 05/19/2020 1.266% 08/01/2023
0.60 1.74
3,505.00 0.43 6,561.61 1,009,190.00 1,000,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 1.25
Federal Agency Bond / Note
(13,857.49)(14,326.38) 4,246,866.42 99.69 MORGAN_ 4,260,000.00 3135G05G4FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 07/10/2020 0.250% 07/10/2023
0.43 1.69
(22,452.44)(23,539.20) 4,779,388.80 99.57 KEYBANC 4,800,000.00 3137EAEW5FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 09/04/2020 0.250% 09/08/2023
0.48 1.85
(8,261.05)(7,757.10) 1,690,712.90 99.45 CITIGRP 1,700,000.00 3137EAEZ8FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 11/05/2020 0.250% 11/06/2023
0.52 2.01
(21,275.61)(19,716.40) 4,375,267.60 99.44 NOMURA 4,400,000.00 3135G06H1FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/25/2020 0.250% 11/27/2023
0.52 2.07
(48,683.11)(50,459.85) 2,851,343.40 98.49 NEW ACC 2,895,000.00 3135G04Z3FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 06/19/2020 0.500% 06/17/2025
0.92 3.60
(89,078.00)(93,200.00) 4,924,600.00 98.49 HSBC 5,000,000.00 3135G04Z3FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 06/19/2020 0.500% 06/17/2025
0.92 3.60
(56,628.56)(58,470.00) 2,948,640.00 98.29 NEW ACC 3,000,000.00 3133ELR71FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES
DTD 07/02/2020 0.500% 07/02/2025
0.98 3.64
(32,978.80)(32,722.50) 2,466,277.50 98.65 07/21/22NEW ACC 2,500,000.00 3136G4ZJ5FANNIE MAE NOTES (CALLABLE)
DTD 07/21/2020 0.625% 07/21/2025
0.99 0.73
(37,274.88)(34,908.00) 1,953,592.00 97.68 NOMURA 2,000,000.00 3135G05X7FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 08/27/2020 0.375% 08/25/2025
1.00 3.80
(47,307.29)(45,781.50) 2,247,295.50 97.71 CITIGRP 2,300,000.00 3137EAEX3FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 09/25/2020 0.375% 09/23/2025
0.98 3.87
(27,403.97)(26,961.83) 1,360,758.57 97.90 BMO 1,390,000.00 3135G06G3FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/12/2020 0.500% 11/07/2025
1.04 3.98
(90,152.97)(89,131.50) 4,405,333.50 97.90 JEFFERI 4,500,000.00 3135G06G3FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/12/2020 0.500% 11/07/2025
1.04 3.98
(496,974.26) 0.78 (495,354.17) 38,250,076.19 38,745,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.83
Account 73340000 Page 16
Page 56
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Corporate Note
83,037.70 147,684.00 3,061,524.00 102.05 11/15/22NEW ACC 3,000,000.00 931142DU4WAL-MART STORES INC CORP (CALLABLE)
NOTE
DTD 10/20/2017 2.350% 12/15/2022
0.52 1.03
109,425.73 135,281.34 3,483,855.54 102.77 NEW ACC 3,390,000.00 037833AK6APPLE INC GLOBAL NOTES
DTD 05/03/2013 2.400% 05/03/2023
0.55 1.48
3,007.38 675.36 1,445,412.96 100.38 NEW ACC 1,440,000.00 037833DV9APPLE INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/11/2020 0.750% 05/11/2023
0.50 1.52
133,794.48 122,997.00 3,142,137.00 104.74 12/09/23NEW ACC 3,000,000.00 037833CG3APPLE INC (CALLABLE) BONDS
DTD 02/09/2017 3.000% 02/09/2024
0.89 2.05
(1,224.31)(1,155.66) 658,514.34 99.77 02/18/24CSFB 660,000.00 808513BN4CHARLES SCHWAB CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/18/2021 0.750% 03/18/2024
0.85 2.29
(10,582.87)(10,247.56) 1,442,628.14 99.15 JPM_CHA 1,455,000.00 023135BW5AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/12/2021 0.450% 05/12/2024
0.79 2.52
(4,722.52)(4,722.52) 435,277.48 98.93 08/12/22DEUTSCH 440,000.00 904764BN6UNILEVER CAPITAL CORP (CALLABLE)
CORPORA
DTD 08/12/2021 0.626% 08/12/2024
1.02 0.78
(2,294.66)(2,291.23) 512,662.42 99.55 GOLDMAN 515,000.00 05565EBU8BMW US CAPITAL LLC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 08/12/2021 0.750% 08/12/2024
0.92 2.76
(35,173.03)(68,840.00) 2,571,610.00 102.86 12/20/24US_BANC 2,500,000.00 90331HPL1US BANK NA CINCINNATI (CALLABLE)
CORPORA
DTD 01/21/2020 2.050% 01/21/2025
1.14 3.04
(49,721.77)(86,532.00) 3,058,218.00 101.94 01/14/25US_BANC 3,000,000.00 66989HAP3NOVARTIS CAPITAL CORP
DTD 02/14/2020 1.750% 02/14/2025
1.15 3.12
(6,608.13)(6,608.13) 603,391.87 98.92 02/16/24JPM_CHA 610,000.00 46647PBY1JPMORGAN CHASE & CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 02/16/2021 0.563% 02/16/2025
0.90 2.28
(7,344.12)(27,316.80) 1,687,547.20 105.47 12/01/24MERRILL 1,600,000.00 539830BE8LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 02/20/2015 2.900% 03/01/2025
1.22 2.97
(9,898.57)(35,310.40) 1,721,985.60 107.62 03/15/25SUSQ 1,600,000.00 369550BG2GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP (CALLABLE)
CORP NO
DTD 05/11/2018 3.500% 05/15/2025
1.29 3.17
Account 73340000 Page 17
Page 57
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Corporate Note
(40,755.77)(40,606.81) 1,643,399.04 97.53 12/28/25MITSU 1,685,000.00 06406RAQ0BANK OF NY MELLON CORP (CALLABLE)
CORPOR
DTD 01/28/2021 0.750% 01/28/2026
1.35 4.10
(39,235.18)(39,782.20) 1,864,093.80 98.11 MERRILL 1,900,000.00 38141GXS8GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 02/12/2021 0.855% 02/12/2026
1.31 4.21
(32,312.86)(38,156.50) 1,806,705.25 107.86 MORGAN_ 1,675,000.00 459200JZ5IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
1.50 4.21
(25,123.87)(25,439.90) 1,658,655.35 99.02 04/28/26MORGAN_ 1,675,000.00 04636NAA1ASTRAZENECA FINANCE LLC (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 05/28/2021 1.200% 05/28/2026
1.42 4.45
(14,377.76)(14,308.64) 1,088,238.26 98.48 JPM_CHA 1,105,000.00 89236TJK2TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP
CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 06/18/2021 1.125% 06/18/2026
1.46 4.51
5,319.35 1.01 49,889.87 31,885,856.25 31,250,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.75
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
5,106.78 5,106.78 250,106.78 102.08 NEW ACC 245,000.00 949763S64WELLS FARGO BANK NA
DTD 01/29/2020 1.900% 01/30/2023
0.23 1.24
4,932.59 4,932.59 249,932.59 102.01 NEW ACC 245,000.00 61760A6Q7MORGAN STANLEY PVT BANK
DTD 01/30/2020 1.850% 01/30/2023
0.23 1.24
(1,020.91)(1,020.91) 243,979.09 99.58 NEW ACC 245,000.00 29278TQD5ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
0.60 2.72
(2,406.39)(2,406.39) 242,593.61 99.02 NEW ACC 245,000.00 169894AT9CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK
DTD 07/29/2020 0.500% 07/29/2025
0.77 3.72
(1,962.45)(1,962.45) 243,037.55 99.20 NEW ACC 245,000.00 58404DHQ7MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
0.77 3.71
4,649.62 0.52 4,649.62 1,229,649.62 1,225,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.51
Asset-Backed Security
(247.52)(242.85) 179,738.95 99.86 MITSU 180,000.00 58770GAC4MBALT 2021-A A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.250% 01/16/2024
0.32 1.12
Account 73340000 Page 18
Page 58
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Asset-Backed Security
(649.83)(645.17) 279,331.53 99.76 SOCGEN 280,000.00 44891TAD8HALST 2021-A A4
DTD 01/20/2021 0.420% 12/16/2024
0.50 1.59
(1,960.87)(1,947.53) 512,974.71 99.61 RBC 515,000.00 36261RAD0GMALT 2021-1 A4
DTD 02/24/2021 0.330% 02/20/2025
0.45 1.65
(2,403.61)(2,402.01) 527,588.29 99.55 JPM_CHA 530,000.00 43813GAC5HAROT 2021-1 A3
DTD 02/24/2021 0.270% 04/21/2025
0.40 1.27
(2,943.16)(2,936.52) 537,006.67 99.45 BARCLAY 540,000.00 44933LAC7HART 2021-A A3
DTD 04/28/2021 0.380% 09/15/2025
0.52 1.77
(875.97)(866.14) 374,074.16 99.75 DEUTSCH 375,000.00 36261LAC5GMCAR 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/20/2021 0.350% 10/16/2025
0.41 1.27
(11,180.01)(11,177.88) 913,787.25 98.79 MITSU 925,000.00 50117XAE2KCOT 2021-2A A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.560% 11/17/2025
0.86 2.54
(533.80)(530.10) 119,446.19 99.54 MITSU 120,000.00 14316NAC3CARMX 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.340% 12/15/2025
0.45 1.36
(2,161.34)(2,142.13) 807,683.32 99.71 MERRILL 810,000.00 14314QAC8CARMX 2021-2 A3
DTD 04/21/2021 0.520% 02/17/2026
0.59 1.46
(9,918.93)(9,905.38) 1,519,842.94 99.34 RBC 1,530,000.00 14317DAC4CARMX 2021-3 A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.550% 06/15/2026
0.70 2.34
(32,795.71) 0.60 (32,875.04) 5,771,474.01 5,805,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 1.87
266,705,000.00 267,923,902.96 (3,720,543.08)(2,113,398.92) 0.67 Managed Account Sub-Total 2.49
Total Investments $268,649,799.77
$725,896.81
$267,923,902.96
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total $266,705,000.00 ($3,720,543.08)($2,113,398.92) 0.67% 2.49
Account 73340000 Page 19
Page 59
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
BUY
10/06/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/30/2021 0.250% 09/30/2023
91282CDA6 (1,999,140.63)(82.42)(1,999,223.05) 2,000,000.00 10/04/21
10/06/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 09/15/2021 0.375% 09/15/2024
91282CCX7 (1,394,914.06)(304.56)(1,395,218.62) 1,400,000.00 10/04/21
(386.98)(3,394,441.67)(3,394,054.69) 3,400,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
INTEREST
10/01/21 MONEY MARKET FUND MONEY0002 0.00 7.44 7.44 0.00 10/01/21
10/15/21 CARMX 2021-3 A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.550% 06/15/2026
14317DAC4 0.00 701.25 701.25 1,530,000.00 10/15/21
10/15/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/15/2019 1.375% 10/15/2022
912828YK0 0.00 55,000.00 55,000.00 8,000,000.00 10/15/21
10/15/21 HALST 2021-A A4
DTD 01/20/2021 0.420% 12/16/2024
44891TAD8 0.00 98.00 98.00 280,000.00 10/15/21
10/15/21 HART 2021-A A3
DTD 04/28/2021 0.380% 09/15/2025
44933LAC7 0.00 171.00 171.00 540,000.00 10/15/21
10/15/21 CARMX 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.340% 12/15/2025
14316NAC3 0.00 34.00 34.00 120,000.00 10/15/21
10/15/21 MBALT 2021-A A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.250% 01/16/2024
58770GAC4 0.00 37.50 37.50 180,000.00 10/15/21
10/15/21 CARMX 2021-2 A3
DTD 04/21/2021 0.520% 02/17/2026
14314QAC8 0.00 351.00 351.00 810,000.00 10/15/21
10/15/21 KCOT 2021-2A A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.560% 11/17/2025
50117XAE2 0.00 431.67 431.67 925,000.00 10/15/21
10/16/21 GMCAR 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/20/2021 0.350% 10/16/2025
36261LAC5 0.00 109.38 109.38 375,000.00 10/16/21
10/20/21 INTL BK OF RECON AND DEV NOTE
DTD 04/20/2021 0.126% 04/20/2023
459058JV6 0.00 1,090.63 1,090.63 1,745,000.00 10/20/21
10/20/21 GMALT 2021-1 A4
DTD 02/24/2021 0.330% 02/20/2025
36261RAD0 0.00 141.63 141.63 515,000.00 10/20/21
10/21/21 HAROT 2021-1 A3
DTD 02/24/2021 0.270% 04/21/2025
43813GAC5 0.00 119.25 119.25 530,000.00 10/21/21
10/24/21 ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
29278TQD5 0.00 90.62 90.62 245,000.00 10/24/21
Account 73340000 Page 20
Page 60
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
INTEREST
10/29/21 CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK
DTD 07/29/2020 0.500% 07/29/2025
169894AT9 0.00 100.68 100.68 245,000.00 10/29/21
10/29/21 WELLS FARGO BANK NA
DTD 01/29/2020 1.900% 01/30/2023
949763S64 0.00 382.60 382.60 245,000.00 10/29/21
10/30/21 MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
58404DHQ7 0.00 110.75 110.75 245,000.00 10/30/21
10/31/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/01/2017 2.000% 04/30/2024
912828X70 0.00 36,150.00 36,150.00 3,615,000.00 10/31/21
10/31/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 04/30/2018 2.750% 04/30/2023
9128284L1 0.00 68,750.00 68,750.00 5,000,000.00 10/31/21
10/31/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/31/2019 1.500% 10/31/2024
912828YM6 0.00 18,750.00 18,750.00 2,500,000.00 10/31/21
182,627.40 182,627.40 0.00 27,645,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
SELL
10/06/21 MICROSOFT CORP (CALLABLE) NOTE
DTD 02/06/2017 2.400% 02/06/2022
594918BW3 457,488.85 1,820.00 459,308.85 2,488.85 2,488.85 FIFO 455,000.00 10/04/21
10/06/21 INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND
DEV NOTE
DTD 01/26/2017 2.000% 01/26/2022
459058FY4 2,514,525.00 9,722.22 2,524,247.22 8,675.00 14,126.70 FIFO 2,500,000.00 10/04/21
11,542.22 16,615.55 11,163.85 2,983,556.07 2,972,013.85 2,955,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
(422,040.84) 193,782.64 (228,258.20) 11,163.85 16,615.55 Managed Account Sub-Total
Total Security Transactions $11,163.85 ($228,258.20)$193,782.64 ($422,040.84)$16,615.55
Account 73340000 Page 21
Page 61
Trustee and/orPurchase Maturity CostBond Issue/DescriptionPaying AgentAccount NameTrust Account #FundInvestmentDateDate*YieldValueCFD 2003-01 Improvement Area 1 (2013) Wells Fargo Reserve Fund 46571801 865 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 1,417,016.83$ Agency Project 46571807 614 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 77,812.70$ Cultural Center Fund 46571808 615 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 191,846.48$ Bond Fund 46571800 864 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 4.51$ Developer Project 46571806 614 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 98,093.76$ Special Tax 46571805 864 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 77.15$ 1,784,851.43$ CFD 2003-01 Improvement Area 2 (2013) Wells Fargo Bond Fund 46659800 866 Money Market Fund 12/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 0.85$ Reserve Fund 46659801 867 Money Market Fund 12/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 132,475.28$ Special Tax Fund 46659805 866 Money Market Fund 12/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 7.23$ 132,483.36$ CFD No 2004-01 Rancho Etiwanda Series Wells Fargo Admin Expense Fund 48436802 Money Market Fund N/A 0.01% -$ Bond Fund 48436800 820 Money Market Fund N/A 0.01% 9.88Reserve Fund 48436801 821 Money Market Fund N/A 0.01% 1,187,380.02Special Tax Fund 48436807 820 Money Market Fund N/A 64.73Project Fund 48436809 617 Money Market Fund N/A 44,981.481,232,436.11$ 2014 Rancho Summit Wells Fargo Cost of Issuance Fund 48709906 Money Market Fund N/A -$ Bond Fund 48709900 858 Money Market Fund N/A 3.25 Reserve Fund 48709901 859 Money Market Fund N/A 260,756.57 Sepcial Tax Fund 48709907 858 Money Market Fund N/A 14.19 Rebate Fund 48709908 Money Market Fund N/A - Redemption Fund 48709903 Money Market Fund N/A - Prepayment Fund 48709904 Money Market Fund N/A - 260,774.01$ 2019 Lease Revenue Bonds Wells Fargo Bond Fund 82631600 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 0.81$ Interest 82631601 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 248,646.07 Principal 82631602 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 1.71 Acquisition and Construciton - Series A 82631605 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 7,632,989.85 Acquisition and Construciton - Series B 82631606 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 2,294,264.54 Cost of Issuance 82631607 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A - 10,175,902.98$ CFD No. 2000-01 South Etiwanda Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2000-1 AGY 6712140200 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140201 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 10,652.45 Bond Fund 6712140202 852 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.10 Prepayment Fund 6712140203 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140204 853 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 12,100.14 22,752.69$ City of Rancho Cucamonga Summary of Cash and Investments with Fiscal AgentsFor the Month Ended10/31/2021I:\FINANCE\KATHERINE\Fiscal Agent Stmts\FY 2021-22\10-2021\October 2021 Fiscal Agent Statements Workbook.xlsx Summary ReportPage 1 Page 62
Trustee and/orPurchase Maturity CostBond Issue/DescriptionPaying AgentAccount NameTrust Account #FundInvestmentDateDate*YieldValueCity of Rancho Cucamonga Summary of Cash and Investments with Fiscal AgentsFor the Month Ended10/31/2021CFD No. 2000-02 Rancho Cucamonga Corporate Park Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2000-2 AGY 6712140300 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140301 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 91,570.33$ Bond Fund 6712140302 856 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.96$ Prepayment Fund 6712140303 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Reserve Fund 6712140304 857 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 117,351.32 208,922.61$ CFD No. 2001-01 IA 1&2, Series A Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2001-1 AGY 6712140400 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140401 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 186,190.78 Bond Fund 6712140402 860 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 1.06 Prepayment Fund 6712140403 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140404 861 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 117,351.65 303,543.49$ CFD No. 2001-01 IA3, Series B Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2001-1 AGY 6712140500 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140501 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 3,223.10 Bond Fund 6712140502 862 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.10 Prepayment Fund 6712140503 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140504 863 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 26,250.23 29,473.43$ CFD No. 2006-01 Vintner's Grove Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2006-1 AGY 6712140600 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140601 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 304.45 Bond Fund 6712140602 869 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.41 Prepayment Fund 6712140603 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140604 870 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 130,467.92 130,772.78$ CFD No. 2006-02 Amador on Rt. 66 Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2006-2 AGY 6712140700 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140701 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 1,190.56 Bond Fund 6712140702 871 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.25 Prepayment Fund 6712140703 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140704 872 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 78,282.27 79,473.08$ 14,361,385.97 TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS WITH FISCAL AGENTS14,361,385.97$ * Note: These investments are money market accounts which have no stated maturity date as they may be liquidated upon demand.I:\FINANCE\KATHERINE\Fiscal Agent Stmts\FY 2021-22\10-2021\October 2021 Fiscal Agent Statements Workbook.xlsx Summary ReportPage 2 Page 63
Page 64
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021
Account Statement
Consolidated Summary Statement
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Investment Allocation
Investment Type Closing Market Value Percent
1,873,095.47 3.12 Corporate Note
487,016.64 0.81 Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
1,589,348.90 2.65 Commercial Paper
2,736,032.47 4.56 Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
18,011,554.65 29.99 U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
34,401,018.92 57.28 Local Agency Investment Fund
952,817.81 1.59 Passbook/Checking Accounts
$60,050,884.86 Total 100.00%
Portfolio Summary
and Income
Closing
Market ValuePortfolio Holdings
Cash Dividends
PFM Managed Account 11,324.63 24,697,048.13
Local Agency Investment Fund 0.00 34,401,018.92
Passbook/Checking Accounts 0.00 952,817.81
$11,324.63 $60,050,884.86 Total
Maturity Distribution (Fixed Income Holdings)
Portfolio Holdings Closing Market Value Percent
35,353,836.73
0.00
794,676.44
794,672.46
0.00
6,605,010.08
5,473,959.25
4,564,843.80
6,463,886.10
0.00
58.88
0.00
1.32
1.32
0.00
11.00
9.12
7.60
10.76
0.00
Under 30 days
31 to 60 days
61 to 90 days
91 to 180 days
181 days to 1 year
1 to 2 years
2 to 3 years
3 to 4 years
4 to 5 years
Over 5 years
Total $60,050,884.86
406
100.00%
Weighted Average Days to Maturity
Sector Allocation
3.12%
Corporate Note
0.81%
Cert of Deposit -
FDIC
2.65%
Commercial Paper
4.56%
Supra-National
Agency Bond / Note
29.99%
US TSY Bond / Note
57.28%
Local Agency
Investment Fund
1.59%
Passbook/Checking
Accounts
Summary Page 1
Page 65
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Summary Statement
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Total Cash Basis Earnings
Plus Net Realized Gains/Losses
Less Purchased Interest Related to Interest/Coupons
Interest/Dividends/Coupons Received
Earnings Reconciliation (Cash Basis) - Managed Account
Less Beginning Accrued Interest
Less Beginning Amortized Value of Securities
Less Cost of New Purchases
Plus Coupons/Dividends Received
Plus Proceeds of Maturities/Calls/Principal Payments
Plus Proceeds from Sales
Ending Accrued Interest
Ending Amortized Value of Securities
Earnings Reconciliation (Accrual Basis)
$24,844,884.49
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
(147,836.36)
$24,697,048.13
11,324.63
0.00
0.00
$11,324.63
Total
24,927,578.80
100,661.29
0.00
0.00
11,324.63
0.00
(24,941,648.34)
(88,748.26)
Total Accrual Basis Earnings $9,168.12
Closing Market Value
Change in Current Value
Unsettled Trades
Principal Acquisitions
Principal Dispositions
Maturities/Calls
Opening Market Value
Transaction Summary - Managed Account
_________________
_________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________Reconciling Transactions
Net Cash Contribution
Security Purchases
Principal Payments
Coupon/Interest/Dividend Income
Sale Proceeds
Maturities/Calls
Cash Transactions Summary - Managed Account
0.00
0.00
11,324.63
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Cash Balance
$50,643.63 Closing Cash Balance
Account 73340100 Page 1
Page 66
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Portfolio Summary and Statistics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Account Summary
Percent Par Value Market ValueDescription
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note 17,835,000.00 18,011,554.65 72.93
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note 2,810,000.00 2,736,032.47 11.08
Corporate Note 1,790,000.00 1,873,095.47 7.58
Commercial Paper 1,590,000.00 1,589,348.90 6.44
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured 490,000.00 487,016.64 1.97
Managed Account Sub-Total 24,515,000.00 24,697,048.13 100.00%
Accrued Interest 100,661.29
Total Portfolio 24,515,000.00 24,797,709.42
Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00
Sector Allocation
1.97%
Cert of Deposit -
FDIC
6.44%
Commercial Paper
7.58%
Corporate Note
11.08%
Supra-National
Agency Bond / Note
72.93%
US TSY Bond / Note
0 - 6 Months 6 - 12 Months 1 - 2 Years 2 - 3 Years 3 - 4 Years 4 - 5 Years Over 5 Years
6.45%
0.00%
26.74%
22.16%
18.48%
26.17%
0.00%
Maturity Distribution Characteristics
Yield to Maturity at Cost
Yield to Maturity at Market
Weighted Average Days to Maturity 986
0.44%
0.74%
Account 73340100 Page 2
Page 67
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Issuer Summary
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Credit Quality (S&P Ratings)
0.44%
A+
3.45%
A-
6.44%
A-1
1.50%
AA
72.93%
AA+
11.08%
AAA
2.19%
BBB+
1.97%
NR
Issuer Summary
Percentof HoldingsIssuer
Market Value
371,285.63 1.50 AMAZON.COM INC
148,536.30 0.60 ASTRAZENECA PLC
178,058.93 0.72 BANK OF AMERICA CO
182,943.80 0.74 CITIGROUP INC
243,979.09 0.99 ENERBANK USA
178,763.15 0.72 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC
161,794.50 0.66 IBM CORP
362,460.70 1.47 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
2,373,571.77 9.61 INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND DEV
363,470.20 1.47 JP MORGAN CHASE & CO
794,676.44 3.22 LMA AMERICAS LLC
243,037.55 0.98 MEDALLION BANK UTAH
794,672.46 3.22 MITSUBISHI UFJ FINANCIAL GROUP INC
179,911.55 0.73 MORGAN STANLEY
108,331.41 0.44 TOYOTA MOTOR CORP
18,011,554.65 72.93 UNITED STATES TREASURY
$24,697,048.13 Total 100.00%
Account 73340100 Page 3
Page 68
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2020 0.125% 11/30/2022
2,438,856.13 2,440,339.54 1,283.33 2,440,476.56 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 2,440,000.00 91282CAX9 0.11
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2018 2.750% 05/31/2023
2,381,062.50 2,388,720.31 26,555.53 2,414,591.02 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 2,295,000.00 9128284S6 0.16
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.125% 07/31/2023
994,687.50 998,550.52 315.90 998,359.38 08/09/2108/06/21AaaAA+ 1,000,000.00 91282CCN9 0.21
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 08/31/2021 0.125% 08/31/2023
790,403.95 793,801.55 170.20 793,695.70 09/03/2109/02/21AaaAA+ 795,000.00 91282CCU3 0.21
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2018 2.875% 11/30/2023
2,369,468.75 2,384,303.17 27,339.21 2,410,342.97 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 2,260,000.00 9128285P1 0.22
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
1,954,324.12 1,971,773.71 2,280.91 1,971,219.73 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 1,975,000.00 91282CCC3 0.31
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 06/15/2021 0.250% 06/15/2024
543,726.59 548,516.05 522.20 548,367.19 07/28/2107/26/21AaaAA+ 550,000.00 91282CCG4 0.35
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
2,395,564.06 2,420,844.17 14,800.41 2,431,563.48 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 2,345,000.00 912828YV6 0.44
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2020 0.250% 05/31/2025
1,926,242.19 1,952,646.16 2,077.53 1,949,926.76 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 1,975,000.00 912828ZT0 0.57
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
484,921.90 493,169.81 473.85 492,910.16 09/03/2109/01/21AaaAA+ 500,000.00 91282CBH3 0.70
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 04/30/2021 0.750% 04/30/2026
688,078.16 698,777.83 14.50 698,660.16 05/27/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 700,000.00 91282CBW0 0.79
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2019 2.125% 05/31/2026
1,044,218.80 1,064,167.31 8,941.26 1,067,851.56 07/28/2107/26/21AaaAA+ 1,000,000.00 9128286X3 0.70
84,774.83 18,011,554.65 18,155,610.13 0.34 18,217,964.67 17,835,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
362,460.70 364,739.51 192.64 364,729.90 09/23/2109/15/21AaaAAA 365,000.00 4581X0DZ8 0.52
Account 73340100 Page 4
Page 69
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
INTL BK RECON & DEVELOP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 02/10/2021 0.650% 02/10/2026
2,373,571.77 2,425,005.81 3,575.81 2,422,970.55 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAAA 2,445,000.00 459058JS3 0.85
3,768.45 2,736,032.47 2,789,745.32 0.80 2,787,700.45 2,810,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Corporate Note
MORGAN STANLEY CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/27/2016 3.875% 01/27/2026
179,911.55 183,178.84 1,669.48 185,034.30 05/27/2105/25/21A1BBB+ 165,000.00 61746BDZ6 1.19
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORP NOTES
(CALL
DTD 02/25/2016 3.750% 02/25/2026
178,763.15 181,784.88 1,134.38 183,570.75 05/27/2105/25/21A2BBB+ 165,000.00 38143U8H7 1.30
JP MORGAN CORP (CALLABLE) NOTES
DTD 03/23/2016 3.300% 04/01/2026
363,470.20 370,426.59 935.00 373,585.20 05/27/2105/25/21A2A- 340,000.00 46625HQW3 1.20
BANK OF AMERICA CORP NOTES
DTD 04/19/2016 3.500% 04/19/2026
178,058.93 181,320.51 192.50 182,902.50 05/27/2105/25/21A2A- 165,000.00 06051GFX2 1.21
CITIGROUP CORP NOTES
DTD 05/02/2016 3.400% 05/01/2026
182,943.80 185,611.68 2,890.00 187,113.90 05/27/2105/25/21A3BBB+ 170,000.00 172967KN0 1.29
AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/12/2021 1.000% 05/12/2026
371,285.63 375,325.17 1,760.42 375,356.25 05/27/2105/25/21A1AA 375,000.00 023135BX3 0.98
IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
161,794.50 164,688.19 2,282.50 165,211.50 09/03/2109/01/21A3A- 150,000.00 459200JZ5 1.08
ASTRAZENECA FINANCE LLC (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 05/28/2021 1.200% 05/28/2026
148,536.30 150,786.20 765.00 150,814.50 09/03/2109/01/21A3A- 150,000.00 04636NAA1 1.08
TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 06/18/2021 1.125% 06/18/2026
108,331.41 109,762.68 457.19 109,755.80 09/13/2109/08/21A1A+ 110,000.00 89236TJK2 1.17
12,086.47 1,873,095.47 1,902,884.74 1.15 1,913,344.70 1,790,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Account 73340100 Page 5
Page 70
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Commercial Paper
LMA AMERICAS LLC COMM PAPER
DTD 05/25/2021 0.000% 01/25/2022
794,676.44 794,699.67 0.00 794,137.87 05/26/2105/25/21P-1A-1 795,000.00 53944RAR9 0.16
MUFG BANK LTD/NY COMM PAPER
DTD 05/25/2021 0.000% 02/18/2022
794,672.46 794,638.94 0.00 794,112.25 05/26/2105/25/21P-1A-1 795,000.00 62479MBJ1 0.15
0.00 1,589,348.90 1,589,338.61 0.16 1,588,250.12 1,590,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
243,979.09 245,000.00 24.16 245,000.00 07/24/2007/24/20NRNR 245,000.00 29278TQD5 0.45
MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
243,037.55 245,000.00 7.38 245,000.00 07/30/2007/30/20NRNR 245,000.00 58404DHQ7 0.55
31.54 487,016.64 490,000.00 0.50 490,000.00 490,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
24,515,000.00 24,997,259.94 0.44 100,661.29 24,927,578.80 24,697,048.13 Managed Account Sub-Total
$24,515,000.00 $24,997,259.94 $100,661.29 $24,927,578.80 $24,697,048.13 0.44%
$24,797,709.42
$100,661.29
Total Investments
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total
Account 73340100 Page 6
Page 71
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
(1,483.41)(1,620.43) 2,438,856.13 99.95 HSBC 2,440,000.00 91282CAX9US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2020 0.125% 11/30/2022
0.17 1.09
(7,657.81)(33,528.52) 2,381,062.50 103.75 HSBC 2,295,000.00 9128284S6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2018 2.750% 05/31/2023
0.37 1.55
(3,863.02)(3,671.88) 994,687.50 99.47 MERRILL 1,000,000.00 91282CCN9US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.125% 07/31/2023
0.43 1.75
(3,397.60)(3,291.75) 790,403.95 99.42 CITIGRP 795,000.00 91282CCU3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 08/31/2021 0.125% 08/31/2023
0.44 1.84
(14,834.42)(40,874.22) 2,369,468.75 104.84 CITIGRP 2,260,000.00 9128285P1US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2018 2.875% 11/30/2023
0.53 2.02
(17,449.59)(16,895.61) 1,954,324.12 98.95 BARCLAY 1,975,000.00 91282CCC3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
0.67 2.54
(4,789.46)(4,640.60) 543,726.59 98.86 MERRILL 550,000.00 91282CCG4US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 06/15/2021 0.250% 06/15/2024
0.69 2.62
(25,280.11)(35,999.42) 2,395,564.06 102.16 GOLDMAN 2,345,000.00 912828YV6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
0.79 3.01
(26,403.97)(23,684.57) 1,926,242.19 97.53 WELLS_F 1,975,000.00 912828ZT0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2020 0.250% 05/31/2025
0.95 3.57
(8,247.91)(7,988.26) 484,921.90 96.98 NOMURA 500,000.00 91282CBH3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
1.10 4.22
(10,699.67)(10,582.00) 688,078.16 98.30 BNP_PAR 700,000.00 91282CBW0US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 04/30/2021 0.750% 04/30/2026
1.14 4.42
(19,948.51)(23,632.76) 1,044,218.80 104.42 CITIGRP 1,000,000.00 9128286X3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2019 2.125% 05/31/2026
1.13 4.36
(206,410.02) 0.62 (144,055.48) 18,011,554.65 17,835,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.47
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
(2,278.81)(2,269.20) 362,460.70 99.30 JPM_CHA 365,000.00 4581X0DZ8INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
0.74 2.88
(51,434.04)(49,398.78) 2,373,571.77 97.08 11/10/21KEYBANC 2,445,000.00 459058JS3INTL BK RECON & DEVELOP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 02/10/2021 0.650% 02/10/2026
1.36 0.04
(51,667.98) 1.28 (53,712.85) 2,736,032.47 2,810,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 0.42
Account 73340100 Page 7
Page 72
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Corporate Note
(3,267.29)(5,122.75) 179,911.55 109.04 BNP_PAR 165,000.00 61746BDZ6MORGAN STANLEY CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/27/2016 3.875% 01/27/2026
1.66 3.93
(3,021.73)(4,807.60) 178,763.15 108.34 11/25/25JPM_CHA 165,000.00 38143U8H7GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORP NOTES
(CALL
DTD 02/25/2016 3.750% 02/25/2026
1.74 3.80
(6,956.39)(10,115.00) 363,470.20 106.90 01/01/26JSEB 340,000.00 46625HQW3JP MORGAN CORP (CALLABLE) NOTES
DTD 03/23/2016 3.300% 04/01/2026
1.67 3.93
(3,261.58)(4,843.57) 178,058.93 107.91 FIFTH_3 165,000.00 06051GFX2BANK OF AMERICA CORP NOTES
DTD 04/19/2016 3.500% 04/19/2026
1.66 4.19
(2,667.88)(4,170.10) 182,943.80 107.61 JPM_CHA 170,000.00 172967KN0CITIGROUP CORP NOTES
DTD 05/02/2016 3.400% 05/01/2026
1.64 4.16
(4,039.54)(4,070.62) 371,285.63 99.01 UBS 375,000.00 023135BX3AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/12/2021 1.000% 05/12/2026
1.23 4.42
(2,893.69)(3,417.00) 161,794.50 107.86 MORGAN_ 150,000.00 459200JZ5IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
1.50 4.21
(2,249.90)(2,278.20) 148,536.30 99.02 04/28/26MORGAN_ 150,000.00 04636NAA1ASTRAZENECA FINANCE LLC (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 05/28/2021 1.200% 05/28/2026
1.42 4.45
(1,431.27)(1,424.39) 108,331.41 98.48 JPM_CHA 110,000.00 89236TJK2TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP
CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 06/18/2021 1.125% 06/18/2026
1.46 4.51
(40,249.23) 1.54 (29,789.27) 1,873,095.47 1,790,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 4.16
Commercial Paper
(23.23) 538.57 794,676.44 99.96 JPM_CHA 795,000.00 53944RAR9LMA AMERICAS LLC COMM PAPER
DTD 05/25/2021 0.000% 01/25/2022
0.17 0.24
33.52 560.21 794,672.46 99.96 MITSU 795,000.00 62479MBJ1MUFG BANK LTD/NY COMM PAPER
DTD 05/25/2021 0.000% 02/18/2022
0.13 0.31
1,098.78 0.15 10.29 1,589,348.90 1,590,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 0.28
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
Account 73340100 Page 8
Page 73
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
(1,020.91)(1,020.91) 243,979.09 99.58 NEW ACC 245,000.00 29278TQD5ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
0.60 2.72
(1,962.45)(1,962.45) 243,037.55 99.20 NEW ACC 245,000.00 58404DHQ7MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
0.77 3.71
(2,983.36) 0.68 (2,983.36) 487,016.64 490,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 3.22
24,515,000.00 24,697,048.13 (300,211.81)(230,530.67) 0.74 Managed Account Sub-Total 2.24
Total Investments $24,797,709.42
$100,661.29
$24,697,048.13
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total $24,515,000.00 ($300,211.81)($230,530.67) 0.74% 2.24
Account 73340100 Page 9
Page 74
For the Month Ending October 31, 2021Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
INTEREST
10/01/21 JP MORGAN CORP (CALLABLE) NOTES
DTD 03/23/2016 3.300% 04/01/2026
46625HQW3 0.00 5,610.00 5,610.00 340,000.00 10/01/21
10/01/21 MONEY MARKET FUND MONEY0002 0.00 0.76 0.76 0.00 10/01/21
10/19/21 BANK OF AMERICA CORP NOTES
DTD 04/19/2016 3.500% 04/19/2026
06051GFX2 0.00 2,887.50 2,887.50 165,000.00 10/19/21
10/24/21 ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
29278TQD5 0.00 90.62 90.62 245,000.00 10/24/21
10/30/21 MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
58404DHQ7 0.00 110.75 110.75 245,000.00 10/30/21
10/31/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 04/30/2021 0.750% 04/30/2026
91282CBW0 0.00 2,625.00 2,625.00 700,000.00 10/31/21
11,324.63 11,324.63 0.00 1,695,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
0.00 11,324.63 11,324.63 Managed Account Sub-Total
Total Security Transactions $11,324.63 $11,324.63 $0.00
Account 73340100 Page 10
Page 75
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:President and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Ivan Rojer, Fire Chief
Robert Ball, Fire Marshal
Darci Vogel, Fire Business Manager
SUBJECT:Consideration to Adopt Development Impact Fee Study Prepared by NBS
Government Finance Group Dated December 16, 2020. (FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Fire Board receive, file and adopt the Development Impact Fee (DIF)
study prepared by NBS Government Finance Group (NBS) dated December 16, 2020 regarding
fire impact fees. No impact fees are proposed for adoption; however, the study establishes a
baseline for the future in the event impact fees are proposed.
BACKGROUND:
The City collects various development impact fees per Government Code Section 66000, et seq.
(also known as AB1600). Section 66001 requires that an agency establishing, increasing or
imposing impact fees, make findings to:
1. Identify the purpose of the fee;
2. Identify the use of the fee; and,
3. Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a) The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed;
b) The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is
imposed; and
c) The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development
project. (Applies when fees are imposed on a specific project).
In 2014, the City contracted with Colgan Consulting Corporation, now a partner with NBS, to
prepare an impact fee study to analyze the impact of development on certain public facilities and
to calculate impact fees based on that analysis. Subsequently, the City adopted fees for Park
InLieu/Park Impact Fees, Community and Recreation Center Impact Fees, Library Impact Fees,
Animal Center Impact Fees, and Police Impact Fees.
In 2020, the Fire District contracted with NBS for a comprehensive update to the fees previously
established by the 2014 Development Impact Fee Study Report to include Fire impact fees. The
purpose was to analyze the impacts of development on fire facilities and equipment to ensure that
new development pays its own way for necessary infrastructure to meet the new demands that
development creates for services. As development occurs, Fire DIF revenue would be used to
expand the District's fire facilities, apparatus, and equipment.
Page 76
Page 2
1
0
3
8
ANALYSIS:
With the study complete, staff recommends that the Fire Board adopt the fire impact fee study. A
copy of the study is attached (Attachment 1). No impact fees are proposed for adoption; however,
the study establishes a baseline for the future in the event impact fees are proposed.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact of adopting the fire impact fee study and no fees are being adopted
at this time. It is important, however, to establish a baseline study in the event future fees are
proposed.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the City Council’s core value of promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy
community for all, as well as intentionally embracing and anticipating the future.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Fire Development Impact Fee Study
Page 77
nbsgov.com
Prepared by:
December 16, 2020
Corporate Headquarters
32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Toll free: 800.676.7516
Final Draft Report
Development Impact Fee Study
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 78
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .............................................................................................................S-1
Organization of the Report .......................................................................................................S-1
Existing and Future Development ............................................................................................S-1
Impact Fee Analysis ..................................................................................................................S-2
Impact Fees Calculated in This Report .....................................................................................S-2
Projected Revenue ...................................................................................................................S-3
Introduction .......................................................................................................1-1
Purpose .....................................................................................................................................1-1
Legal Framework for Developer Fees .......................................................................................1-1
Recent Legislation ....................................................................................................................1-5
Impact Fee Calculation Methodology ......................................................................................1-6
Development Data .............................................................................................2-1
Study Area ................................................................................................................................2-1
Time Frame ...............................................................................................................................2-1
Development Types ..................................................................................................................2-1
Demand Variable ......................................................................................................................2-2
Calls per Unit per Year ..............................................................................................................2-3
Existing and Forecasted Development .....................................................................................2-3
Fire District Facilities Impact Fees .......................................................................3-1
Fire Protection District Law of 1987 .........................................................................................3-1
Service Area ..............................................................................................................................3-1
Demand Variable ......................................................................................................................3-1
Methodology ............................................................................................................................3-2
Facilities, Apparatus and Equipment ........................................................................................3-2
Cost per Call for Service............................................................................................................3-5
Impact Fees per Unit ................................................................................................................3-6
Projected Revenue ...................................................................................................................3-6
Updating the Fees ....................................................................................................................3-7
Nexus Summary ........................................................................................................................3-7
Page 79
Implementation .................................................................................................4-1
Adoption ...................................................................................................................................4-1
Administration ..........................................................................................................................4-2
Recent Legislation ....................................................................................................................4-7
Training and Public Information ...............................................................................................4-8
Recovery of Administration and Study Costs ...........................................................................4-8
Appendicies
Comparative Fee Survey Appendix A
Page 80
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page S-1
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Executive Summary
The Rancho Cucamonga Fire District (RCFD)has retained NBS Government Finance
Group to prepare this study to analyze the impacts of new development on the District’s
facility and equipment needs and to calculate impact fees based on that analysis.The
methods used in this study are intended to satisfy all legal requirements of the U. S.
Constitution, the California Constitution and the California Mitigation Fee Act
(Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.).RCFD does not currently collect impact fees
from new development.
It is important to note that the District does not have authority under California law to
charge impact fees on development projects . Consequently,any impact fees benefitting
the District must be established by a city or a county.
The District boundaries encompass the City of Rancho Cucamonga and a portion of
unincorporated San Bernardino County. However,there appears to be little or no
development potential in the portion of the District outside the City and its sphere of
influence, so the impact fees calculated in this study are expected to be applied only
within the City, including portions of its sphe re of influence to be annexed in the future.
So,it is probably not necessary for the impact fees to be adopted by San Bernardino
County. RCFD will have to rely on the City to adopt the impact fees calculated in this
report for the benefit of the District.
Organization of the Report
Chapter 1 of this report provides an overview of the legal requirements for establishing
and imposing such fees,and the methods used to calculate impact fees.
Chapter 2 contains data on existing and future development and the demand factors
used to allocate costs in the impact fee analysis.
Chapter 3 presents the impact fee calculations and explains the data and methodology
used in the calculations. Chapter 3 also project s the potential future revenue from
impact fees calculated in this report.
Chapter 4 contains recommendations for adopting and implementing impact fees,
including suggested findings to satisfy the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act.
Existing and Future Development
Chapter 2 of this report presents estima tes of existing development and projections of
future development out to buildout of the City’s General Plan. Data on existing and
future development was provided primarily by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Department, with some additional informati on acquired from the California Department
of Finance, the U. S. Census Bureau and map analysis by NBS.
Page 81
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page S-2
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Impact Fee Analysis
Chapter 3 of this report calculates fire impact fees for the District based on costs for
capital assets including both existing and future facilities, apparatus and equipment
needed to serve the District . Those costs are allocated to both existing and future
development so that they are shared equitably by all development in the District.
The impact of development on the need for fire protection facilities , apparatus and
equipment is represented in this study by calls for service per year.As part of this study,
NBS analyzed a random sample of all calls for service logged by RCFD in 2019 to
estimate the number of calls per unit per year generated by each type of development
defined in this study.
To calculate the impact fees, costs for existing and future facilities, apparatus and
equipment, were allocated to both existing and future develo pment so that the impact
fees represent future development’s proportionate share of the cost of all capital assets
needed to serve the District at buildout. The total cost of existing and future capital
assets was divided by the projected number of calls f or service per year at buildout to
get at a cost per call. Then, that cost per call was multiplied by the number of calls per
unit per year for each type of development defined in this study to calculate impact fees
per unit.
Impact Fees Calculated in This Report
Table 3.6 from Chapter 3 of this report is reproduced on the next page.It shows the
impact fees per unit of development calculated in this study.A 2% administrative charge
is added to those fees to recover the cost of complying with Mitigation Fe e Act
accounting and reporting requirements, as well as the cost of future impact fee update
studies.
It is a common practice for California local governments to include an administrative
charge of 2-2.5% in impact fees. Once the District and the City of Rancho Cucamonga
have some experience working with these proposed impact fees, it may be possible to
do more detailed assessment of actual administrative costs.
Page 82
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page S-3
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Projected Revenue
Table 3.7 in Chapter 3 projects future revenue to buildout in current dolla rs for the
impact fees calculated in this report.The projected revenue of $1 8.17 million is about
60% of the estimated cost of constructing and equipping the two future fire stations
planned by the District .
Table 3.6 Impact Fee per Unit
Development Cost per CFS Cost 2% Admin Impact Fee
Type Units 1 CFS 2 per Unit 3 per Unit 4 Charge per Unit 5
Residential, Single-Family (Detached)DU $3,988.03 0.228 908.26$18.17$926.43$
Residential, Multi-Family (Attached)DU $3,988.03 0.173 690.31$13.81$704.11$
Residential, Mobile Home Park DU $3,988.03 0.320 1,276.17$25.52$1,301.69$
Assisted Living Facility DU $3,988.03 1.040 4,147.55$82.95$4,230.51$
Commercial/Retail KSF $3,988.03 0.232 923.44$18.47$941.91$
Office KSF $3,988.03 0.120 480.23$9.60$489.84$
Industrial KSF $3,988.03 0.003 11.88$0.24$12.12$
Hotel/Motel Room $3,988.03 0.045 180.63$3.61$184.24$
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; room = guest room or suite
2 Cost per call for service per year; see Table 3.5
3 Calls for service per unit per year; see Table 2.1
4 Cost per unit = cost per call for service X calls for service per unit
5 Impact fee per unit = cost per unit + 2% administrative charge
Page 83
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 1-1
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Introduction
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to analyze the impacts of development on the need for
capital assets including facilities, apparatus and vehicles used by the Rancho Cucamonga
Fire District (RCFD)and to calculate impact fees based on that analysis .Impact fees are
one-time charges imposed on new development to pay for all or a part of the cost of
capital assets that will be needed to serve that development.This report documents the
approach, data and methodology used in this study to calculate impact fees.
The methods used to calculate impact fees and in-lieu fees in this report are intended to
satisfy all legal requirements governing such fees, including provisions of the U. S.
Constitution, the California Constitu tion,the California Mitigation Fee Act (Government
Code Sections 66000-66025 and relevant case law.
Legal Framework for Developer Fees
This brief summary of the legal framework for development fees is intended as a
general overview.It was not prepared by an attorney and should no t be treated as legal
advice.
U. S. Constitution.Like all land use regulations, developm ent exactions, including
impact fees, are subject to the 5th Amendment prohibition on taking of private property
for public use without just compensation. Both state and federal courts have
recognized the imposition of impact fees on development as a legi timate form of land
use regulation, provided the fees meet standards intended to protect against
“regulatory takings.” A regulatory taking occurs when regulations unreasonably deprive
landowners of property rights protected by the Constitution .
In two landmark cases dealing with exactions, the U. S. Supreme Court has held that
when a government agency requires the dedication of land or an interest in land as a
condition of development approval, or imposes ad hoc exactions as a condition of
approval on a single development project that do not apply to development generally ,a
higher standard of judicial scrutiny applies. To meet that standard,the agency must
demonstrate an "essential nexus" between such exactions and the burden created by a
development project (See Nollan v. California Coastal Commission,1987) and make an”
individualized determination”that the exaction imposed is "roughly pro portional" to
that burden (See Dolan v. City of Tigard,1994).
Until recently, it was widely accepted that legislatively enacted impact fees that apply to
all development in a jurisdiction are not subject to the higher standard of judicial
scrutiny flowing from the Nollan and Dolan decisions. But after the U. S. Supreme Court
decision in Koontz v. St. Johns Water Management District (2013),state courts have
reached conflicting conclusions on that issue.
Page 84
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 1-2
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
In light of that uncertainty, any agency enacting o r imposing impact fees would be wise
to demonstrate a nexus and ensure proportionality in the calculation of those fees.This
study follows that practice.
Defining the “Nexus.”While courts have not been entirely consistent in defining the
nexus required to justify exactions and impact fees,that term can be thought of as
having the three elements discussed below. We think proportionality is logically
included as one element of that nexus, even though it was discussed separately in Dolan
v. Tigard.The elements of the nexus discussed below mirror the three “reasonable
relationship” findings required by the Mitigation Fee Act for establishment and
imposition of impact fees.
Need or Impact.Development must create a need for the facilities to be funded by
impact fees. All new development in a community creates additional demands on some
or all public facilities provided by local government. If the capacity of facilities is not
increased to satisfy the additional demand, the quality or availability of public services
for the entire community will deteriorate. Impact fees may be used to recover the cost
of development-related facilities, but only to the extent that the need for facilities is
related to the development project subject to the fees.
The Nollan decision reinforced the principle that development exactions may be used
only to mitigate impacts created by the development projects upon which they are
imposed. In this study, the impact of development on facility needs is analyzed in terms
of quantifiable relationships between various types of development and t he demand for
public facilities based on applicable level-of-service standards. This report contains all of
the information needed to demonstrate compliance with this element of the nexus.
Benefit.Development must benefit from facilities funded by impact fees. With respect
to the benefit relationship, the most basic requirement is that facilities funded by
impact fees be available to serve the development paying the fees. A sufficient benef it
relationship also requires that impact fee revenues be segregated from other funds and
expended in a timely manner on the facilities for which the fees were charged. Nothing
in the U.S. Constitution or California law requires that facilities paid for w ith impact fee
revenues be available exclusively to development projects paying the fees.
Procedures for earmarking and expenditure of fee revenues are mandated by the
Mitigation Fee Act, as are procedures to ensure that the fees are either expended
expeditiously or refunded.Those requirements are intended to ensure that
developments benefit from the impact fees they are required to pay. Thus, over time,
procedural issues as well as substantive issues can come into play with respect to the
benefit element of the nexus.
Proportionality.Impact fees must be proportional to the impact created by a particular
development project. Proportionality in impact fees depends on properly identifying
development-related facility costs and calculating the fees in su ch a way that those
costs are allocated in proportion to the facility needs created by different types and
Page 85
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 1-3
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
amounts of development. The section on impact fee methodology, below, describes
methods used to allocate facility costs and calculate impact fees th at meet the
proportionality standard.
California Constitution.The California Constitution grants broad police power to local
governments, including the authority to regulate land use and development. That
police power is the source of authority for local governments in California to impose
impact fees on development. Some impact fees have been challenged on grounds that
they are special taxes imposed without voter approval i n violation of Article XIIIA.
However, that objection is valid only if the fees charged to a project exceed the cost of
providing facilities needed to serve the project.In that case,the fees would also run
afoul of the U. S. Constitution and the Mitigation Fee Act.
Articles XIIIC and XIIID, added to the California Constitution by Proposition 218 in 1996,
require voter approval for some “property-related fees,” but exempt “the imposition of
fees or charges as a condition of property development.”
The Mitigation Fee Act.California’s impact fee statute originated in Assembly Bill 1600
during the 1987 session of the Legislature, and took effect in January, 1989. AB 1600
added several sections to the Government Code, beginning with Section 66000. Since
that time,the impact fee statute has been amended from time to time, and in 1997 was
officially titled the “Mitigation Fee Act.” Unless other wise noted, code sections
referenced in this report are from the Government Code.
The Mitigation Fee Act does not limit the types of capital improvements for which
impact fees may be charged. It defines public facilities very broadly to include "public
improvements, public services and community amenities." Although the issue is not
specifically addressed in the Mitigation Fee Act,it is clear both in case law and statute
(see Government Code Section 65913.8)that impact fees may not be used to pay for
maintenance or operating costs. Consequently, the fees calculated in this report are
based on the cost of capital assets only.
The Mitigation Fee Act does not use the term “mitigation fee” except in its official title.
Nor does it use the more common ter m “impact fee.” The Act simply uses the word
“fee,” which is defined as “a monetary exaction, other t han a tax or special
assessment…that is charged by a local agency to the applicant in connection with
approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the
cost of public facilities related to the development project ….”
To avoid confusion with other types of fees, this report uses the widely -accepted terms
“impact fee”and “development impact fee”which both should be understood to mean
“fee” as defined in the Mitigation Fee Act.
The Mitigation Fee Act contains requirements for establishing, increasing and imposing
impact fees. They are summarized below. It also contains provisions that govern the
collection and expenditure of fees and requires annual reports and periodic re-
Page 86
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 1-4
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
evaluation of impact fee programs. Those administrative requirements are discussed in
the implementation chapter of this report.
Required Findings.Section 66001 requires that an agency establishing, increasing or
imposing impact fees, must make findings to:
1.Identify the purpose of the fee;
2.Identify the use of the fee; and,
3.Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the development type on which i t is imposed;
b.The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is
imposed; and
c.The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the developm ent
project.(Applies when fees are imposed on a specific project .)
Each of those requirements is discussed in more detail below.
Identifying the Purpose of the Fees.The broad purpose of impact fees is to pro tect
public health, safety and general welfare by providing for adequate public facilities. The
specific purpose of the fees calculated in this study is to fund construction of certain
capital improvements that will be needed to mitigate the i mpacts of planned new
development on City facilities and to maintain an acceptable level of public services as
the City grows.
This report recommends that f indings regarding the purpose of an impact fee should
define the purpose broadly,as providing for the funding of adequate public facilities to
serve additional development.
Identifying the Use of the Fees.According to Section 66001, if a fee is used to finance
public facilities, those facilities must be identified. A capital improvement pl an may be
used for that purpose but is not mandatory if the facilities are identified in a General
Plan, a Specific Plan, or in other public documents.In this case,we recommend that the
City Council adopt this report as the public document that identifies the facilities to be
funded by the fees.
Reasonable Relationship Requirement.As discussed above, Section 66001 requires that,
for fees subject to its provisions, a "reasonable relationship" must be demonstrated
between:
1.the use of the fee and the type of development on which it is imposed;
2.the need for a public facility and the type of development on which a fee is
imposed;and,
3.the amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development
on which the fee is imposed.
Page 87
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 1-5
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
These three reasonable relationship requirements ,as defined in the statute,mirror the
nexus and proportionality requirements often cited in court decisions as the standard
for defensible impact fees.The term “dual rational nexus” is often used to characterize
the standard used by courts in evaluat ing the legitimacy of impact fees. The “duality” of
the nexus refers to (1) an impact or need created by a development project subject to
impact fees, and (2)a benefit to the project from the expenditure of the fees.
Although proportionality is reasonably implied in the dual rational nexus formulation ,it
was explicitly addressed by the Supreme Court in the Dolan case, and we prefer to list it
as the third element of a complete nexus.
Development Agreements and Reimbursement Agreements.The requirements of the
Mitigation Fee Act do not apply to fees collected under development agreements (see
Govt. Code Section 66000) or reimbursement agreements (see Govt. Code Section
66003). The same is true of fees in lieu of park land dedication imposed under the
Quimby Act (see Govt. Code Section 66477).
Existing Deficiencies.In 2006,Section 66001(g) was added to the Mitigation Fee Act (by
AB 2751)to clarify that impact fees “shall not include costs attributable to existing
deficiencies in public facilities ,…”The legislature’s intent in adopting this amendment,
as stated in the bill, was to codify the holdings of Bixel v. City of Los Angeles (1989),
Rohn v. City of Visalia (1989), and Shapell Industries Inc. v. Governing Board (1991).
That amendment does not appear to be a substantive change. It is widely understood
that other provisions of law make it improper for impact fees to include costs for
correcting existing deficiencies.
However,Section 66001(g)also states that impact fees “may include the costs
attributable to the increased demand for public facilities reasonably related to the
development project in order to (1) refurbish existing facilities to maintain the e xisting
level of service or (2) achieve an adopted level of service that is consistent with the
general plan.” (Emphasis added.)
Impact Fees for Existing Facilities.Impact fees may be used to recover costs for existing
facilities to the extent that thos e facilities are needed to serve additional development
and have the capacity to do so. In other words, it must be possible to show that fees
used to pay for existing facilities meet the need and benefit elements of the nexus.
Recent Legislation
Several new laws enacted by the State of California in 2019 to facilitate development of
affordable housing will affect the implementation of in-lieu fees and impact fees
calculated in this study.Below are brief overviews of some key bills passed in 2019.
SB 330 –The Housing Crisis Act of 2019.Amendments to existing law contained in SB
330 prohibit the imposition of new approval requirements on a housing development
project once a preliminary application has been submitted. That provision applies to
Page 88
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 1-6
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
increases in impact fees and in-lieu fees, except when the resolution or ordinance
establishing the fee authorizes automatic, inflationary adjustments to the fee or
exaction.
AB 1483 –Housing Data: Collection and Reporting.AB 1483 requires that a city, county
or special district must post on its website a current schedule of its fees and exactions,
as well as associated nexus studies and annual reports. Updates must be posted within
30 days.
SB 13 –Accessory Dwelling Units.SB 13 prohibits the imposition of impact fees on
accessory dwelling units (ADUs)smaller than 750 square feet and provides that impact
fees for ADUs of 750 square feet or more must be proportional to the square footage of
the primary dwelling unit.In our opinion, the proportionality requirement means that
impact fees for ADUs of 750 square feet or more must be calculated on a case-by-case
basis during the approval process because the sizes of the ADU and the primary unit will
be different in each case.The calculation is quite simple , as shown in the following
formula:(ADU Square Feet / Primary Unit Square Feet) X Impact Fee for a Single-
Family Residential Unit.So, for example, if the ADU is 1,000 square feet and the
primary unit is 2,000 square feet, the impact fee for the ADU would by 0.5 times the
impact fee for a single-family residential unit.
Previously, the law required a water or sewer connection fee or capacity charge for an
accessory dwelling unit requiring a new or separate utility connection to be based on
either the accessory dwelling unit’s size or the number of its plumbing fixtures.SB 13
revises the basis for calculating the connection fee or capacity charge to either the
accessory dwelling unit’s square feet o r the number of its drainage fixture unit s.
Impact Fee Calculation Methodology
Any one of several legitimate methods may be used to calculate impact fees. The choice
of a particular method depends primarily on the service characteristics of,and planning
requirements for,the facility type being addressed. Each method has advantages and
disadvantages in a particular situation.To some extent they are interchangeable,
because they all allocate facility costs in proportion to the needs created by
development.
Allocating facility costs to various types and amounts of development is central to all
methods of impact fee calculation. Costs are allocated by means of formulas that
quantify the relationship between development and the need for facilities. In a cost
allocation formula, the impact of development is measured by some attribute of
development such as added population or added vehicle trips that represent the
impacts created by different types and amounts of devel opment.The plan-based
method is used in this study.
Plan-Based or Improvements-Driven Method.Plan-based impact fee calculations are
based on the relationship between a specified set of improvements and a specified
Page 89
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 1-7
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
increment of development.The improvements are typically identified in a facility plan,
while the development is identified in a land use plan that forecasts potential
development by type and quantity.
Using this method, facility costs are allocated to various categories of development in
proportion to the service demand created by each type of development . To calculate
plan-based impact fees, it is necessary to determine what facilities will be needed to
serve a particular increment of new development.
With this method, the total cost of eligible facilities is divided b y the total units of
additional demand to calculate a cost per unit of demand (e.g.a cost per capita for
parks). Then, the cost per unit of demand is multiplied by factors representing demand
per unit of development (e.g.population per unit) to arrive at a cost per unit of
development.
This method is somewhat inflexible in that it is based on the r elationship between a
specific facility plan and a specific land use plan. If either plan changes significant ly the
fees will have to be recalculated.
Capacity-Based or Consumption-Driven Method. This method calculates a cost per unit
of capacity based on the relationship between total cost and total capacity of a system.
It can be applied to any type of development, provided the capacity required to serv e
each increment of development can be estimated and the facility has adequate capacity
available to serve the development. Since the cost per unit of demand does not depend
on the particular type or quantity of development to be served, this method is fl exible
with respect to changing development plans.
In this method, the cost of unused capacity is not allocated to development. Capacity -
based fees are most commonly used for water and wastewater systems, where the cost
of a system component is divided by the capacity of that component to derive a unit
cost. However, a similar analysis can be applied to other types of facilities. To produce
a schedule of impact fees based on standardized units of development (e.g. dwelling
units or square feet of non-residential building area), the cost per unit of capacity is
multiplied by the amount of capacity required to serve a typical unit of development in
each of several land use categories.
Standard-Based or Incremental Expansion Method.Standard-based fees are calculated
using a specified relationship or standard that determines the number of service units to
be provided for each unit of development.The standard can be established as a matter
of policy or it can be based on the level of service being provide d to existing
development in the study area.
Using the standard-based method,costs are defined on a generic unit-cost basis and
then applied to development according to a standard that sets the number of service
units to be provided for each unit of development.
Page 90
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 1-8
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Park in-lieu and impact fees are commonly calculated this way.The level of service
standard for parks is typically stated in terms of acres of parks per thousand residents. A
cost-per-acre for park land or park improvements can usually be estimated without
knowing the exact size or location of a particular park.The ratio of park acreage to
population and the cost per acre for parks is used to calculate a cost per capita.The
cost per capita can then be converted into a cost per unit of development based on the
average population per dwelling unit for various types of residential developme nt.
Buy-In or Recoupment Impact Fees.Buy-in fees can be used to recover some portion of
the cost of existing facilities, provided those facilities have capacity available to serve
additional development. This is not a completely separate fee calculation method but
can be used as a variation of one of the other methods described above. It is particularly
applicable when there is outstanding debt related to an existing facility.
Method Used in This Study.The method used to calculate impact fees in this st udy is a
version of the plan-based method in which the cost of all of the facilities, apparatus and
equipment needed to serve the District at projected buildout is allocated to both
existing and future development in proportion to the number of calls for s ervice per
year generated by various types of development. The result is that impact fees charged
to new development reflect the share of demand that will be created by that new
development. Projected revenue from those impact fees is well below the amount that
will be needed to construct and equip the two additional fire stations planned by RCFD
for the future.
Page 91
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 2-1
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Development Data
This chapter presents data on existing and future development that will be used to
calculate impact fees in subsequent chapters of this report.
The information in this chapter may be used to establish levels of service, analyze facility
needs, and/or allocate the cost of capital assets between existing and future
development and among various types of new development.
Study Area
The study area for this impact fee study is the area within the boundaries of the Rancho
Cucamonga Fire District.The City of Rancho Cucamonga and its sphere of influence (SOI)
comprise most of that area, but there is a small portion of the District that extends
beyond the northern limits of the City and its SOI.
Time Frame
No time frame is assumed for the buildout of future development projected in this
study. The methods used to calculate impact fees in this study do not require
assumptions regarding the rate or timing of development.
Development Types
The development types for which impact fees are calculated in this report correlate with
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan land use designations, or groups of land use
designations. Impact fees calculated in this report are intended to be applied based on
actual land uses rather than zoning or general plan land use designations.
Residential Development.Residential development types used in this study are:
Residential, Single-Family (Detached)
Residential, Multi-Family (Attached)
Residential, Mobile Home Park
Assisted Living Facilities
The Residential, Single -Family (Detached) category, above, corresponds to residential
development at densities up to and including the Low-Medium Density (LMD)
designation in the City’s General Plan.
The Residential, Multi-Family (Attached) category, above, corresponds to residential
development at densities above the Low-Medium Density (LMD) designation in the
City’s General Plan, including residential development in Mixed Use projects.Assisted
living facilities are permitted in some residential zoning districts with a conditional use
permit.
Page 92
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 2-2
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Non-Residential Development.Non-residential development types used in this study
are:
Commercial/Retail
Office
Industrial
Hotel/Motel
The Commercial/Retail category corresponds to develop ment covered by the
Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, and General Commercial
designations in the City’s General Plan and assumes that Mixed Use development is 10-
20% Commercial/Retail and 80-90%High Density residential.
The Office category corresponds to development covered by the Office and Haven
Office Overlay designations in the City’s General Plan as well as 40% of the land
designated Industrial Park.In this report, the basic unit of development for
Commercial/Retail, Office and Indust rial development is gross building area in
thousands of square feet, which is abbreviated “KSF.”
The Hotel/Motel category breaks out hotel and motel development from the broader
Commercial/Retail category.Development in that category is represented by the
number of guest rooms in a project.
Note on Assisted Living Facilities.Assisted living facilities are allowed in some higher-
density residential zoning districts with a conditional use permit, but their impacts may
be quite different from the uses typically expected in those districts.Although the
tables in this chapter do not show existing or future development in the assisted living
category, impact fees are calculated in this report for assisted living facilities.
Demand Variable
To calculate impact fees, the relationship between facility needs and development must
be quantified in cost allocation formulas. Certain measurable attributes of development
(for example, added populatio n) are used as “demand variables” in those formulas to
represent the impact of different types of develo pment on various types of capital
assets.
Demand variables are selected either because they directly measure the service demand
created by various types of development, or because they are reasonably corr elated
with that demand.The demand variable used to calculate impact fees in this report is
calls for service per year.
Calls for Service per Year.Demand for fire protection, emergency medical response and
other services provided by RCFD is impacted by both residential and non-residential
development in the District. In this study, the number of calls for service per unit per
year to RCFD is used to represent the demand for District services by various types of
development.The calls-for-service factors used in this study are based on analysis by
Page 93
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 2-3
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
NBS of a random sample of all 2019 calls for service to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire
District.
In 2019, the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District logged 16,625 calls for service.As part of
this study, NBS analyzed a random sample of 700 of those calls and classified them by
development type based on address or location. Calls that could not be associated with
a particular type of development were excluded from the analysis.
The percentage of sampled calls associated with each type of development defined in
this study was applied to the total number of 2019 calls to get the number of calls
generated by that type of development for the year. Then that number was divided by
the number of existing units for each type of development to arrive at the average
number of calls per unit per year.For mobile home parks and assisted living facilities
which had too few calls to be adequately represented in the sample,NBS analyzed the
number of calls and the number of units for several properties of each type to calculate
calls per unit per year factors for those development types.Those factors are shown in
Table 2.1, below.
Calls per Unit per Year
Table 2.1 shows the calls-per-unit-per-year factors by development type used in this
study.
Existing and Forecasted Development
Tables 2.2 through 2.4, beginning on the next page, present summaries of existing and
future development by development type for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District.
Assisted living units are not shown in those tables because limited information is
Table 2.1: Demand Factors Used in This Study
Development Dev RCFD Calls
Type Units 1 per Unit 2
Residential, Single-Family (Detached)DU 0.228
Residential, Multi-Family (Attached)DU 0.173
Residential, Mobile Home Park DU 0.320
Assisted Living Facility DU 1.040
Commercial/Retail KSF 0.232
Office KSF 0.120
Industrial KSF 0.003
Hotel/Motel Room 0.045
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross
square feet of building area; Room = hotel/motel room or suite
2 Estimated average RCFD calls for service per unit per year from
analysis of a random sample of 2019 calls for service by NBS;
see discussion in text
Page 94
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 2-4
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
available on existing and future units in that category.However, as noted above,this
study does calculate impact fees for assisted living facilities.
Existing development shown in Table 2.2 is based largely on data for the City of Rancho
Cucamonga with some additions to reflect existing development outside the City ’s
planning area (the City and its sphere of influence)and within the RCFD service area.
Those additions are based on analysis of satellite photos by NBS.
Table 2.2 shows estimated existing development in the RCFD service area as of January
1, 2020, in terms of units and calls for service per year.
Table 2.3 on the next page shows forecasted future development in the RCFD service
area to buildout.Future development shown in Table 2.3 is based on forecasts by the
City of Rancho Cucamonga. NBS did not identify any future de velopment within the
RCFD service area aside from future development in the City and its sphere of influence
(SOI).
Table 2.2: Existing Development - January, 2020
Development Dev Existing Existing
Types Units 1 Units 2 RCFD Calls 3
Residential, Single-Family (Detached)DUs 37,364 8,510
Residential, Multi-Family (Attached)DUs 20,718 3,586
Residential, Mobile Home Park DU 1,550 496
Commercial/Retail KSF 8,400 1,945
Office KSF 5,300 638
Industrial KSF 40,800 122
Hotel/Motel Rooms 1,342 61
Total 15,357
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet
of building area; Room = hotel/motel room or suite
2 Existing residential units based on California Department of Finance
January 2020 estimates for the City of RC plus existing units outside the
City and within the RCFD service area; non-residential units provided by
the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department
3 Existing RCFD calls for service per year based on analysis of a random
sample of 2019 calls for service to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District
Page 95
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 2-5
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Table 2.4 shows total development in terms of units and calls for service per year in the
RCFD service area at buildout.
The numbers presented in Tables 2.2 through 2.4 indicate that existing development in
the RCFD service area represents about 77% of total projected calls for service per year
at buildout.
Table 2.3: Forecasted Future Development
Development Dev Added Added
Types Units 1 Units 2 RCFD Calls 3
Residential, Single-Family (Detached)DUs 4,743 1,080
Residential, Multi-Family (Attached)DUs 2,224 385
Residential, Mobile Home Park DU 0 0
Commercial/Retail KSF 10,990 2,545
Office KSF 3,838 462
Industrial KSF 23,559 70
Hotel/Motel Rooms 320 14
Total 4,556
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet
of building area; Room = hotel/motel room or suite
2 Forecasted new development units = the difference between buildout
units in Table 2.4 and existing units in Table 2.2
4 Added RCFD calls = added units X RCFD calls per unit from Table 2.1
Table 2.4: Forecasted Total Development at General Plan Buildout
Development Dev Buildout Buildout
Types Units 1 Units 2 RCFD Calls 3
Residential, Single-Family (Detached)DU 42,107 9,590
Residential, Multi-Family (Attached)DU 22,942 3,971
Residential, Mobile Home Park DU 1,550 496
Commercial/Retail KSF 19,390 4,490
Office KSF 9,138 1,100
Industrial KSF 64,359 192
Hotel/Motel Rooms 1,662 75
Total 19,913
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet
of building area; Room = hotel/motel room or suite
2 Buildout development units for the City provided by the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Department; additional units in the RC Fire District
service area based on existing residential units in that area
3 Buildout RCFD calls = buildout units X RCFD calls per unit from Table 2.1
Page 96
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 3-1
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Fire District Facilities Impact Fees
This chapter calculates impact fees for fire protection and emergency response facilities
apparatus and equipment needed to serve future development in the area served by
the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District (RCFD).Where the general term “facilities” is used
in this chapter, it is intended to include all types of capital assets needed by RCFD to
carry out its mission.
At present, RCFD operates seven fire stations as well as an all -risk training center (ARTC)
and a shop facility. Two additional fire stations are planned for the future.
As discussed in more detail below, t he impact fees calculated in this chapter are based
on the forecasted level of service at buildout, defined as the relationship between
projected calls for service per year at buildout and the replacement cost of the
department’s existing and future facilities.
Fire Protection District Law of 1987
California Health and Safety Code Section 13916, which is part of the Fire Protection
District Law of 1987, states: “A (fire protection) district board shall not charge a fee on
new construction or development for the construction of public improvements or
facilities or the acquisition of equipment.” However, although the District itself may not
charge such fees, it is quite common in California for cities and counties to impose fire
impact fees for fire protection districts that provide services within the ir jurisdiction.
Since the City of Rancho Cucamonga comp rises almost all of RCFD’s service area, it will
be important that the City adopt these impact fees on behalf of the District.This study
does not forecast any future development in the portion of th e District outside the City
and its sphere of influence. However, it is possible that some development may be
proposed in that area in the future. If that occurs,RCFD should consider requesting that
these impact fees be adopted by San Bernardino County fo r that portion of the District.
Service Area
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are intended to apply to all future
development within the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District .
Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of develo pment that is used in fee
calculation formulas to represent the impact of development on a certain type of capital
facilities. The demand variable used to calculate impact fees for fire district facilities in
this report is calls for service per year.
As part of this study, NBS analyzed a random sample of the 16,625 calls for service
logged by RCFD in 2019 to estimate the number of calls per unit per year generated by
each type of development defined in this study.Chapter 2 discusses that analysis and
Page 97
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 3-2
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Table 2.1 shows the calls per unit per year factors derived from that analysis. Those
factors are used to calculate impact fees per unit later in this chapter.
Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the plan-based method discussed in Chapter 1.
Plan-based fees allocate costs of a specific set of facilities to a specific increment of
development.
In this case, the costs for all existing and future RCFD facilities, apparatus and
equipment are allocated to all existing and future development, so that impact fees
charged to future development will pay future development’s proportionate share of
the overall cost of those assets.
Facilities, Apparatus and Equipment
Table 3.1 on the next page lists the District’s existing and planned fire stations as well as
the training center buildings and the shop facility. Seven of the fire stations show n in
Table 3.1 (Stations 171-177) are existing. Stations 178 and 179 are p lanned for future
construction. Sites have been acquired for those buildings.
The facility replacement cost in the right -hand column of Table 3.1 includes the
depreciated replacement cost for existing buildings plus the estimated site value for
each building. Where multiple buildings are located on one site, the site value is shown
for the first building and the site value for the other buildings on that site is shown as
“included.” For future fire stations, the costs shown are estimates based on current
costs and those costs are not depreciated.
Page 98
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 3-3
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Table 3.2 on the next page lists RCFD’s existing firefighting apparatus and other vehicles
and equipment. Costs for all vehicles and equipment shown in the far-right column of
Table 3.2 are depreciated replacement cost s based on the useful life shown in that
table. Vehicles and equipment are assumed to have a residual value of at least 15% of
replacement cost, regardless of age.
Table 3.1: Existing and Future Fire Stations
Constr Bldg Site Building Useful Land Depreciated Facility Repl
Facility Location Date Sq Ft Acres Repl Cost 1 Life 2 Cost 3 Bldg Cost 4 Cost 5
Station 171 Amethyst St 1974 4,480 0.99 466,773$50 519,750$37,342$557,092$
Admin Bldg Amethyst St 1977 2,754 Included 1,270,978$50 177,937$177,937$
Station 172 San B'dino Rd 2020 13,341 2.90 10,174,875$50 2,657,502$10,174,875$12,832,377$
Station 173 Firehouse Ct 2005 12,000 2.36 4,940,536$50 1,239,000$3,458,375$4,697,375$
Storage Bldg Firehouse Ct 2005 2,500 Included 169,480$50 118,636$118,636$
Station 174 Jersey Blvd 1992 17,000 6.14 6,505,209$50 3,223,500$2,862,292$6,085,792$
Shop/Garage Jersey Blvd 2001 14,304 Included 4,566,096$50 2,830,980$2,830,980$
Trng Ctr Bldg A Jersey Blvd 2016 7,000 Included 2,598,358$50 2,390,489$2,390,489$
Trng Ctr Bldg B Jersey Blvd 2016 1,900 Included 854,538$50 786,175$786,175$
Trng Ctr Bldg C Jersey Blvd 2016 2,455 Included 770,622$50 708,972$708,972$
Trng Ctr Bldg D Jersey Blvd 2016 15,415 Included 2,900,697$50 2,668,641$2,668,641$
Trng Ctr Bldg E Jersey Blvd 2016 3,064 Included 647,989$50 596,150$596,150$
Trng Ctr Bldg I Jersey Blvd 2016 1,300 Included 1,030,266$50 947,845$947,845$
Station 175 Banyan St 1992 13,000 3.05 5,288,362$50 1,601,250$2,326,879$3,928,129$
Station 176 East Av 2003 9,594 1.07 3,111,849$50 561,750$2,053,820$2,615,570$
Station 177 Rancho St 2012 6,000 1.23 2,914,383$50 209,337$2,448,082$2,657,419$
Station 178 Town Ctr Dr Future 16,000 3.80 15,375,000$50 3,321,877$15,375,000$18,696,877$
Station 179 8th St Future 13,000 0.94 9,035,000$50 842,470$9,035,000$9,877,470$
Total 72,621,011$14,176,436$58,997,490 73,173,926$
1 Estimated replacement cost for existing buildings or estimated cost for future buildings provided by RCFD staff;
estimated cost includes soft construction costs, utilities, site development and furniture, fixtures and equipment
2 Estimated useful life of buildings in years
3 Estimated land value for existing fire stations or land cost for future fire stations; except where specific cost information is
available for a site, land cost is estimated at $525,000 per acre
4 Depreciated building replacement cost for existing stations using straight-line depreciation over the useful life of the
asset; no depreciation applies to future buiding costs
5 Facility replacement cost = depreciated building replacement cost or new building cost + estimated land cost or value
Page 99
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 3-4
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Table 3.2: Existing Fire Apparatus and Vehicles
Model Useful Unit Repl Depr Unit Total Depr
Quantity Year Description Life (Yrs)Cost 1 Repl Cost 2 Repl Cost 3
2 2014 Type 1 Engine (KME)10 724,000$289,600$579,200$
2 2003 Type 1 Engine (KME Excel)10 724,000$108,600$217,200$
1 2017 Type 1 Engine (KME)10 724,000$506,800$506,800$
1 2008 KME Severe Duty Predator 10 724,000$108,600$108,600$
1 2005 Type 1 Engine (KME Excel)10 724,000$108,600$108,600$
1 2018 Type 1 Engine (KME)10 724,000$579,200$579,200$
1 2010 Type 1 Engine (KME)10 724,000$108,600$108,600$
1 2006 Type 1 Engine (KME Predator)10 724,000$108,600$108,600$
1 1997 Type 1 Engine (KME)10 724,000$108,600$108,600$
1 2005 Type 1 Engine (KME Excel)10 724,000$108,600$108,600$
1 1994 Type 1 Engine (KME Renegade)10 724,000$108,600$108,600$
1 2006 International 7400 Brush Unit 10 450,000$67,500$67,500$
1 2007 International 7400 Brush Unit 10 300,000$45,000$45,000$
1 2002 KME Aerial Ladder Truck 10 800,000$120,000$120,000$
1 2008 KME Aerial Ladder Truck 10 800,000$120,000$120,000$
1 2015 Rosenbauer Aerial Ladder Truck 10 1,162,131$581,066$581,066$
1 1997 Spartan Heavy Rescue 10 340,000$51,000$51,000$
1 1997 Heavy Rescue Trailer 10 80,000$12,000$12,000$
1 2006 KME Hazmat Unit 10 400,000$60,000$60,000$
1 2003 KME Water Tender 10 400,000$60,000$60,000$
1 2012 Dodge Ram Long Bed Pickup 7 53,805$8,071$8,071$
2 2012 Dodge Ram Short Bed Pickup 7 53,617$8,043$16,085$
1 2015 Ford F-450 Super Duty 7 62,000$17,714$17,714$
1 2008 Ford F-350 Medic Squad 10 100,000$15,000$15,000$
1 2002 Ford Ranger 7 20,000$3,000$3,000$
3 2019 Chevy Bolt EV 7 36,000$30,857$92,571$
3 2013 Ford C-Max Hybrid 7 25,438$3,816$11,447$
4 2012 Ford Escape Hybrid 7 30,977$4,647$18,586$
1 2008 Saturn Vue 7 31,000$4,650$4,650$
2 2020 Toyota RAV-4 Hybrid 7 30,000$30,000$60,000$
2 2018 Chevy Colorado 4WD 7 32,252$23,037$46,074$
1 2010 Ford Explorer 4WD 7 36,000$5,400$5,400$
1 2012 Ford F-350 Super Duty Long Bed 7 63,296$9,494$9,494$
1 2002 Ford Explorer XLT 4WD 7 30,000$4,500$4,500$
1 2006 Ford Crown Victoria 7 26,000$3,900$3,900$
1 2017 Ford F-350 7 153,906$87,946$87,946$
1 2019 Ford F-350 7 153,906$131,919$131,919$
2 2016 Chevy Colorado 4WD 7 30,000$12,857$25,714$
1 2005 Gem Car 7 20,000$3,000$3,000$
2 2008 Chevy F-2500 4WD 7 45,000$6,750$13,500$
1 2012 Chevy 3/4 Ton Suburban 7 89,762$13,464$13,464$
1 2019 Dodge Ram 4WD 7 165,000$141,429$141,429$
1 2005 GMC Yukon 7 95,000$14,250$14,250$
1 2002 Dodge Ram 2500 4WD 7 40,000$6,000$6,000$
1 2003 Ford Explorer 7 30,000$4,500$4,500$
1 2003 Ford Expedition XLT 4WD 7 36,250$5,438$5,438$
1 2004 GMC 7500 Series w/ Equipment 7 90,000$13,500$13,500$
1 2001 Fork Lift Utility Trailer 10 5,000$750$750$
1 2001 Mitsubishi Forklift 10 15,000$2,250$2,250$
1 2008 JLG Scissorlift 10 15,140$2,271$2,271$
1 2014 CERT Training Trailer 10 16,800$6,720$6,720$
1 2007 Trailer E612 10 5,000$750$750$
1 2008 Wells Cargo Trailer 10 5,349$802$802$
1 2000 Air Compressor Trailer 10 10,000$1,500$1,500$
1 2019 Big Tex Trailer 10 6,350$5,715$5,715$
1 2012 Carrier 15' Enclosed UTV Trailer 10 9,455$1,891$1,891$
1 2020 Progressive Trailer 10 22,100$22,100$22,100$
1 2012 Polaris ATV 10 15,933$3,187$3,187$
2 2020 Nissan Cargo Van 7 22,000$22,000$44,000$
Total 14,423,467$4,044,083$4,628,255$
1 Replacement cost provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District
2 Depreciated replacement cost using straight-line depreciation over the useful life of the asset; minimum
depreciated value = 15% of replacement cost
3 Total depreciated replacement cost = depreciated unit replacement cost X number of units
Page 100
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 3-5
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Table 3.3 lists the future vehicles and equipment that will be needed to equip the two
future fire stations planned by RCFD including personal protective equipment for 18
firefighters needed to staff those stations. The costs shown in Table 3.3 are estimated
costs for the items listed.
Table 3.4 summarizes the costs from the preceding three tables.
Cost per Call for Service
Table 3.5 calculates the cost per ca ll for service for RCFD facilities, apparatus and
equipment using the total cost from Table 3.4 and the projected number of calls for
service per year at buildout.
Table 3.3: Future Fire Apparatus, Vehicles and Equipment
No. of Cost Total New
Description Units 1 per Unit 2 Equpt Cost
New Type 1 Engine (Stations 178 and 179)2 724,000$1,448,000$
Personal Protective Equipment 3 18 9,153$164,754$
Total 1,612,754$
1 Additional units required for future fire stations 178 and 179
2 Cost per unit provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District
3 Personal protective equipment for future added firefighters; estimated cost
includes uniforms and personal protective equipment for fire suppression,
wild land firefighting and tactical response
Table 3.4: Impact Fee Cost Basis - Existing and Future Assets
Total Asset
Component Cost 1
Existing and Future Fire Stations 73,173,926$
Existing - Fire Apparatus, Vehicles and Equipment 4,628,255$
Future - Fire Apparatus, Vehicles and Equipment 1,612,754$
Total 79,414,935$
1 See Tables 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3
Table 3.5: Cost per Call for Service
Total Asset Buildout Calls for Cost per Call for
Cost1 Service per Year 2 Service per Year 3
$79,414,935 19,913 $3,988.03
1 Total asset cost; see Table 3.4
2 Projected 2040 service population for the District; see Table 2.4
3 Cost per call for service = total facility cost / buildout calls for service
Page 101
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 3-6
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Impact Fees per Unit
Table 3.6 shows the calculation of fire facilities impact fees per unit of develop ment by
development type. Those fees are calculated using the cost per ca ll for service from
Table 3.5 and the calls-per-unit-per-year factors from Table 2.1.A 2% administrative
charge is included in the impact fee per unit to cover the cost of compliance with
accounting and reporting procedures mandated by the Mitigation Fee Act, as well as the
cost of periodic updates to the impact fee calculations.Inclusion of that charge is up to
the discretion of City Council or County Board of Supervisors upon adopt ion.
Projected Revenue
Potential revenue from the fire district facilities impact fees can be estimated by
applying the fees per unit from Table 3.6 to forecasted future units from Table 2.3.
Table 3.7 on the next page shows the projected revenue to buildout from the fire
district facilities impact fees calculated in this chapter.
Projected revenue does not include the 2% administrative charge.This projection
assumes that future development occurs as shown in Chapter 2.Due to a lack of data,
no revenue is projected for future units in mobile home parks or in assisted living
facilities.There appears to be a potential for some future assisted living facilities in the
District and revenue from impact fees paid by developers of those facilities could add 3
to 5% to the total revenue shown in Table 3.7.
Table 3.6 Impact Fee per Unit
Development Cost per CFS Cost 2% Admin Impact Fee
Type Units 1 CFS 2 per Unit 3 per Unit 4 Charge per Unit 5
Residential, Single-Family (Detached)DU $3,988.03 0.228 908.26$18.17$926.43$
Residential, Multi-Family (Attached)DU $3,988.03 0.173 690.31$13.81$704.11$
Residential, Mobile Home Park DU $3,988.03 0.320 1,276.17$25.52$1,301.69$
Assisted Living Facility DU $3,988.03 1.040 4,147.55$82.95$4,230.51$
Commercial/Retail KSF $3,988.03 0.232 923.44$18.47$941.91$
Office KSF $3,988.03 0.120 480.23$9.60$489.84$
Industrial KSF $3,988.03 0.003 11.88$0.24$12.12$
Hotel/Motel Room $3,988.03 0.045 180.63$3.61$184.24$
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; room = guest room or suite
2 Cost per call for service per year; see Table 3.5
3 Calls for service per unit per year; see Table 2.1
4 Cost per unit = cost per call for service X calls for service per unit
5 Impact fee per unit = cost per unit + 2% administrative charge
Page 102
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 3-7
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
The total revenue projected in Table 3.7 is substantially less than the cost of the two
planned future fire stations shown in Table 3.1 and the additional apparatus and
equipment shown in Table 3.3 , so additional funding will be required to cover the entire
cost to construct and equip the two future fire stations.
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated replacement
costs for fire district facilities, with depreciation as shown in this chapter .We
recommend that the fees be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data or an
index such as the Engineering News Record Building Cost Index.See the Implementation
Chapter for more on indexing of fees.
Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act
requires an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees to make findings to:
Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed;
b.The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is
imposed; and
c.The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the
development project.
Table 3.7 Projected Revenue
Development Future Impact Fee Projected
Type Units 1 Units 2 per Unit 3 Revenue 4
Residential, Single-Family (Detached)DU 4,743 908.26$4,307,891$
Residential, Multi-Family (Attached)DU 2,224 690.31$1,535,239$
Commercial/Retail KSF 10,990 923.44$10,148,951$
Office KSF 3,838 480.23$1,843,127$
Industrial KSF 23,559 11.88$279,939$
Hotel/Motel Room 320 180.63$57,801$
Total 18,172,948$
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; room = guest
room or suite
2 Future units; see Table 2.3
3 Impact fee per unit excluding the 2% administrative charge; see Table 3.6
4 Projected revenue = future units X impact fee per unit
Page 103
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 3-8
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and
“rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decis ions bearing on
impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact
Fees” in Chapter 1.)The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in
this chapter satisfy those requirements.
Purpose of the Fee:The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to
mitigate the impact of new development on the need for fire district facilities provided
by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District (RCFD).
Use of the Fee.Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be us ed to provide additional
fire district facilities to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for those
facilities in the City. As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees
may also be used for temporary loans from one impact f ee fund or account to another.
Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on
Which It Is Imposed.The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide
additional fire district facilities and to serve the added demand for fire protection and
other emergency services associated with new development in Rancho Cucamonga.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of
Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed.New development increases the demand
for fire protection and other emergency services provided by RCFD.Without additional
facilities,apparatus and equipment,the increase in demand associated with new
development would negatively impact the ability of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District
to provide services efficiently and effectively to all development in the City.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost
Attributable to the Development Project.The amount of the fire district facilities
impact fees charged to a development project will depend on the increase in calls for
service associated with that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this
chapter for each type of development are based on the estimated calls for service per
unit per year for that type of development in in the RCFD service area. Thus, the fee
charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the overall need
for facilities, apparatus and equipment used by RCFD to serve d evelopment in the
district.
Page 104
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 4-1
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Implementation
This chapter of the report contains recommendations for adoption and administration
of impact fees, and for the interpretation and application of the developme nt impact
fees calculated in this study.It was not prepared by an attorney and is not intended as
legal advice.
Statutory requirements for the adoption and administration of fees imposed as a
condition of development approval (impact fees)are found in the Mitigation Fee Act
(Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.).
Adoption
As discussed in Chapter 1, California Health and Safety Code Section 13916, which is
part of the Fire Protection District Law of 1987, does not allow the board of a fire
protection district to charge a fee on new construction or development for the
construction of public improvements or facilities or the acquisition of equipment.
Consequently, the fire protection impact fees calculated in this report must be adopted
by the agencies having authority to approve development projects in the areas served
by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District (RCFD), namely the City of Rancho Cucamonga
and possibly San Bernardino County.This study has not identified any future
development in the portion of the Distri ct outside the City and its Sphere of Influence,
so it may not be necessary for the County to adopt the impact fees calculated in this
report.
The form in which development impact fees are enacted should be determined in
consultation with the attorneys for the City and potentially the County .Procedures for
adoption of fees subject to the Mitigation Fee Act, including notice and public hearing
requirements, are specified in Government Code Sections 66016 and 66018. It should
be noted that Section 66018 refers to Government Code Section 6062a, which requires
that the public hearing notice be published at least twice during the required 10-day
notice period. Government Code Section 66017 provides that fees subject to the
Mitigation Fee Act do not become effe ctive until 60 days after final action by the
governing body.
Actions establishing or increasing fees subject to the Mitigation Act require certain
findings, as set forth in Government Code Section 66001 and discussed below and in
Chapter 1 of this report.
Establishment of Fees. Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act , Section 66001(a), when an
agency establishes fees to be imposed as a condition of development approval,it must
make findings to:
1.Identify the purpose of the fee;
2.Identify the use of the fee; and
Page 105
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 4-2
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
3.Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the type of development project
on which it is imposed;and,
b.The need for the facility and the type of development
project on which the fee is imposed
Examples of findings that could be used for impact fees calculated in this study are
shown below. The specific language of such findings should be reviewed and approved
by the attorney for the agency adopting the fees.A more complete discussion of the
nexus for the RCFD impact fees can be found in Chapter 3 of this report.
Sample Finding: Purpose of the Fee.The [City Council or Board of Supervisors]
finds that the purpose of the impact fees hereby enacted is to protect the public
health,safety and welfare by requiring new development to contribute to the cost
of fire protection and emergency response facilities needed to mitigate the impacts
created by that development.
Sample Finding: Use of the Fee.The [City Council or Board of Supervisors]finds
that revenue from the impact fees hereby enacted w ill be used to provide public
facilities needed to mitigate the impacts of new development . Those facilities are
identified in the 2020 Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Impact Fee Study by NBS.1
Sample Finding: Reasonable Relationship:Based on analysis presented in the 2020
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Impact Fee Study by NBS , the [City Council or Board
of Supervisors]finds that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fees and the types of development projects on
which they are imposed; and,
b.The need for facilities and the types of development projects
on which the fees are imposed.
Administration
The California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.) mandates
procedures for administration of impact fee programs, including collection and
accounting, reporting, and refunds. References to code sections in the following
paragraphs pertain to the California Government Code.
1 According to Gov’t Code Section 66001 (a) (2), the use of the fee may be specified in a capital im-
provement plan, the General Plan, or other public documents that identify the public facilities for
which the fee is charged. The findings recommended here identify this impact fee study as the source
of that information.
Page 106
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 4-3
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Interagency Coordination.It will be necessary for RCFD to reach an agreement with the
agency that actually imposes and collects the impact fees (the City or County) regarding
the transmittal of those fees to the District as well as the responsibility for complying
with the administrative procedures and reporting requirements established by the
Mitigation Fee Act. The Executive Summary in this report recommends adding an
administrative charge to the fees to cover the cost of complying with those
requirements.
Imposition of Fees.Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act , Section 66001(a), when an
agency imposes an impact fee upon a specific development project, it must make
essentially the same findings adopted upon establishment of the fees to:
1.Identify the purpose of the fee;
2.Identify the use of the fee; and
3.Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the type of development project
on which it is imposed;
b.The need for the facility and the type of development
project on which the fee is imposed
Per Section 66001 (b), at the time when an impact fee is imposed on a specific
development project, the agency is also required to make a finding to determine how
there is a reasonable relationsh ip between:
c.The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable
to the development project on which it is imposed.
In addition, Section 66006 (f)provides that a local agency, at the time it imposes a fee
for public improvements on a specific development project, "... shall identify the public
improvement that the fee will be used to finance."The required notification could refer
to the improvements identified in this study.
Section 66020 (d) (1)requires that the agency, at the time it imposes an impact fee,
provide the applicant with a written statement of the amount of the fee and written
notice of a 90-day period during which the imposition of the fee can be protested.
Failure to protest imposition of the fee during that period may deprive the fee payer of
the right to subsequent legal challenge.
Section 66022 (a)provides a separate procedure for challenging the establishment of an
impact fee. Such challenges must be filed within 120 days of enactment.
Collection of Fees.Section 66007 (a), provides that a local agency shall not require
payment of fees by developers of residential projects prior to the date of final
inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first.
Page 107
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 4-4
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
However, "utility service fees" (not defined) may be collected upon application for utility
service.In a residential development project of more than one dwelling unit,Section
66007 (a) allows the agency to choose to collect fees either for individual units or for
phases upon final inspection, or for the entire project upon final inspection of the first
dwelling unit completed.
Section 66007 (b) provides two exceptions when the local agency may require the
payment of fees from developers of residential projects at an earlier time: (1) whe n the
local agency determines that the fees “will be collected for public improvements or
facilities for which an account has been established and funds appropriated and for
which the local agency has adopted a proposed construction schedule or plan prior to
final inspection or issuance of the certificate of occupancy” or (2) the fees are “to
reimburse the local agency for expenditures previously made.”
These statutory restrictions on the time at which fees may be collected do not apply to
non-residential development.
In cases where the fees are not collected upon issuance of building permits ,Subsections
66007 (c) (1) and (2) provide that the agency may require the property owner to
execute a contract to pay the fee, and to record that contract as a lien against the
property until the fees are paid.
Earmarking and Expenditure of Fee Revenue.Section 66006 (a)mandates that fees be
deposited “with other fees for the impro vement in a separate capital facilities account
or fund in a manner to avoid any com mingling of the fees with other revenues and
funds of the local agency, except for temporary investments ,and expend those fees
solely for the purpose for which the fee was collected .”Section 66006 (a) also requires
that interest earned on the fee revenues be placed in the capital account and used for
the same purpose.
The language of the law is not clear as to whether depositing fees "with other fees for
the improvement" refers to a specific capital improvement or a class of improvements
(e.g., street improvements).
We are not aware of any agency that has interpreted that language to mean that funds
must be segregated by individual projects. A nd, as a practical matter, that approach
would be unworkable because it would mean that no pay -as-you-go project could be
constructed until all benefi ting development had paid the fees. Common practice is to
maintain separate funds or accounts for impact fee revenues by facili ty category (e.g.,
fire protection or park improvements), but not for individual projects .
Impact Fee Exemptions, Reductions, and Waivers . In the event that a development
project is found to have no impact on facilities for which impact fees are charged, such
project must be exempted from the fees.
If a project has characteristics that will make its impacts on a particular public facility or
infrastructure system significantly and permanently smaller than the average impact
Page 108
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 4-5
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
used to calculate impact fees in this study, the fees should be reduced accordingly.Per
Section 66001 (b), there must be a reasonable relationship between the amount of the
fee and the cost of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee
is imposed. The fee reduction is required if the fee is not proportional to the impact of
the development on relevant public facilities.
In some cases, the agency may desire to voluntarily waive or reduce impact fees that
would otherwise apply to a project as a way of promoting goals such as affordable
housing or economic development. Such a waiver or reduction may not result in
increased costs to other development projects,so the effect of such policies is that the
lost revenue must be made up from other fund sources.
Credit for Improvements Provided by Developers. If an agency requires a developer,as
a condition of project approval to dedicate land or construct facilities or improvements
for which impact fees are charged,the agency should ensure that the impact fees are
adjusted so that the overall contribution by the develop er does not exceed the impact
created by the development.
In the event that a developer voluntarily offers to dedicate land,or construct facilities or
improvements in lieu of paying imp act fees, the agency may accept or reject such offers
and may negotiate the terms under which such an offer would be accepted . Excess
contributions by a developer may be offset by reimbursement agreements.
Credit for Existing Development.If a project involves replacement, redevelopment or
intensification of previously existing development, impact fees should be applied only to
the portion of the project that represents a net increase in demand for relevant
facilities, applying the demand factors used in this study to calculate that particular
impact fee.
Annual Reports.Section 66006 (b) (1)requires that once each year, within 180 days of
the close of the fiscal year, the local agency must make available to the public the
following information for each separate account established to receive impact fee
revenues:
1.A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund;
2.The amount of the fee;
3.The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund;
4.The amount of the fees collected and interest earned;
5.Identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and
the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the
percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees;
6.Identification of the approximate date by which the construction of a public
improvement will commence, if the agency determines sufficient funds have
been collected to complete financing of an incomplete public improvement;
Page 109
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 4-6
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
7.A description of each inter -fund transfer or loan made from the account or
fund, including interest rates, repayment dates, and a description of the
improvement on which the transfer or loan will be expended;
8.The amount of any refunds or allocations made pursuant to Section 66001,
paragraphs (e) and (f).
The annual report must be reviewed by the governing at its next regularly scheduled
public meeting, but not less than 15 days after the statements are made public , per
Section 66006 (b) (2).
Fifth Year Reports on Unexpended Funds . Prior to 1996,the Mitigation Fee Act
required that a local agency collecting impact fees was required to ex pend or commit
impact fee revenue within five years or make findings to justify a continued need for the
money. Otherwise, those funds had to be refunded. SB 1693, adopted in 1996 as an
amendment to the Mitigation Fee Act,changed that requirement in material ways.
Now, Section 66001 (d)requires that, for the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit
of any impact fee revenue into an accou nt or fund as required by Section 66006 (b), and
every five years thereafter, the local agency shall make all of the following findings for
any fee revenue that remains unexpended, whether committed or uncommitted:
1.Identify the purpose to which the fee w ill be put;
2.Demonstrate the reasonable relationship between the fee and the
purpose for which it is charged;
3.Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete
financing of incomplete improvements for which impact fees are to b e
used;
4.Designate the approximate dates on which the funding necessary to
complete financing of those improvements will be deposited into the
appropriate account or fund.
Those findings are to be made in conjunction with the annual reports discussed above.
If such findings are not made as required by Section 66001, the local agency could be
required to refund the moneys in the account or fund , per Section 66001 (d).
Once the agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete
financing on incomplete improvements for which impact fee revenue is to be used, it
must, within 180 days of that determination, identify an approximate date by which
construction of the public improvement will be commenced (Section 66001 (e)).
Note: Because impact fees for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District must be adopted by
other agencies as discussed above, the District and those agencies should agree on
which agency will be responsible for annual reporting and the fifth year review required
by the Mitigation Fee Act,and should develop procedures to ensure that the
requirements of the Act are satisfied.
Page 110
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 4-7
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Annual Update of the Capital Improvement Plan . Section 66002 (b)of the Mitigation
Fee Act provides that if a local agency cites a capital improvement plan to identify the
use of impact fees, that plan must be adopted and annually updated by a resolution of
the governing body at a noticed public hearing. The alternative , per Section 66001 (a)
(2)is to identify improvements by applicable general or specific p lans or in other public
documents.
In most cases, the CIP identifies projects for a limited number of years and may not
include all improvements needed to serve future development covered by the impact
fee study.We recommend that this impact fee study be cited as the public document
identifying the use of the fees.
Indexing of Impact Fees. Where impact fees calculated in this report are based on
current costs, those costs should, if possible,be adjusted periodically to account for
changes in the cost of facilities or other capita l assets that will be funded by the impact
fees.That adjustment is intended to account for escalation in costs for land,
construction, vehicles and other relevant capital assets .
Recent Legislation
As discussed in Chapter 1 (pages 1-5 and 1-6), recently passed legislation imposes
additional requirements on agencies imposing impact fees on new development.
SB 330 prohibits the imposition of new approval requirements on a housing
development project once a preliminary application has been submitted.
AB 1483 requires that a city, county or special district must post on its website a
current schedule of its fees and exactions as well as associated nexus studies and
annual reports. Updates must be posted within 30 days.
SB 13 prohibits the imposition of impact fees on accessory dwelling units (ADUs)
smaller than 750 square feet and provides that impact fees for ADUs of 750
square feet or more must be proportional to the square footage of the primary
dwelling unit. The proportionality requirement means that impact fees for ADUs
of 750 square feet or more must be calculated on a case -by-case basis during the
approval process because the sizes of the ADU and the primary unit will be
different in each case. The calculation is qu ite simple, as shown in the following
formula:(ADU Square Feet / Primary Unit Square Feet) X Impact Fee for a
Single-Family Residential Unit . So, for example, if the ADU is 1,000 square feet
and the primary unit is 2,000 square feet, the impact fee for th e ADU would by
0.5 times the impact fee for a single-family residential unit.
This area of state law is evolving rapidly and It is likely that future legislation will place
additional requirements on the establishment and imposition of impact fees.
Page 111
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 4-8
Development Impact Fee Study
December 16, 2020
Training and Public Information
Effective administration of an impact fee program requires considerable preparation
and training. It is important that tho se responsible for collecting the fees, and for
explaining them to the public, understand both the de tails of the fee program and its
supporting rationale.
Before fees are imposed, a staff training workshop is highly desirable if more than a
handful of employees will be involved in collecting or accounting for fees.
It is also useful to pay close attention to handouts that provide information to the public
regarding impact fees. Impact fees should be clearly distinguished from other fees, such
as user fees for application processing, and the purpose and use of impact fees should
be made clear.
Finally,anyone responsible for accounting, capital budgeting, or project management
for projects involving impact fees must be fully aware of the restrictions placed on the
expenditure of impact fee revenues and should refer to this report for a list of the
facilities and on which the impact fee calculations are based.
Recovery of Administration and Study Costs
The fee calculations in Chapter 3 of this report include a 2% administrative charge to cover the
cost of administration of the impact fee program and periodic updates of the impact fee study.
Page 112
APPENDIX A
Comparative Fee Survey – Development Impact Fees
Prepared by NBS for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Page 113
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Appendix A
Development Impact Fee Study 2019
Fee Comparison
1 Fire Facilities
Single Family DU n/a $ 926
Citywide: $349
Temescal Valley: $627
High Fire Risk Area: $231 (acre)
$ 369 Citywide: $317
Ontario Ranch: $746 $ 893
Multi-Family DU n/a $ 704
Citywide: $466
Temescal Valley: $836
High Fire Risk Area: $231 (acre)
0-2 bdr: $350
3+ bdr: $369
Citywide: $265
Ontario Ranch: $627 $ 637
Assisted Living Facilities DU n/a $ 4,231 $4,032
High Fire Risk Area: $231 (acre) No Fee No Fee No Fee
Commercial/Retail KSF n/a $ 942
Citywide: $160
Temescal Valley: $290
High Fire Risk Area: $231 (acre)
$ 101 Citywide: $278
Ontario Ranch: $657
Office KSF n/a $ 490
Citywide: $160
Temescal Valley: $290
High Fire Risk Area: $231 (acre)
No Fee Citywide: $1,132
Ontario Ranch: $2,674
Industrial KSF n/a $ 12
Citywide: $20
Temescal Valley: $30
High Fire Risk Area: $231 (acre)
$ 29 Citywide: $13
Ontario Ranch: $30
Hotel/Motel ROOM n/a $ 184
Citywide: $314
Temescal Valley: $563
High Fire Risk Area: $231 (acre)
No Fee Citywide: $135
Ontario Ranch: $312
[Notes]
1 Commercial/Office/Industrial DIF fees are based on per sf. Multiplied by 1,000 for comparison.
No Fee
$ 340
City of Corona 1 Fee Type /
Unit
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Comparative Agencies
City of Ontario 1 City of Pomona City of West Covina 1Fee
No.Fee Description Current Fee City of Fontana 1 Proposed Fee
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 12/16/2020 Page 1 of 1Page114
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Lori E. Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services
Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director
SUBJECT:Consideration to Authorize the Purchase of Banking Services from MUFG
Union Bank, N.A. of Los Angeles, CA, the Most Responsive Bidder in
Accordance with the Request for Quote (“RFQ”) #21/22-01 in the Amount
of $267,210 for a Five-Year Term. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the purchase of Banking Services from MUFG
Union Bank, N.A. of Los Angeles, CA (Union Bank), the most responsive bidder in accordance
with the Request for Quote (“RFQ”) #21/22-01 in the amount of $267,210 for a five-year term.
BACKGROUND:
The City originally contracted with Union Bank on February 6, 2008 for a five-year term to provide
a range of banking services to the City after conducting a formal Request for Proposal (RFP)
process. The first contract extension was for two years through June 30, 2015. The second
contract extension was for eighteen months through December 31, 2016. For both of these
extensions, Union Bank and staff conducted a comparative analysis with two other cities to update
pricing.
In lieu of conducting another RFP at the end of the second contract extension term, staff worked
with Union Bank to extend the current contract with minor adjustments to pricing for a minimum
of three years, with options to extend for up to two more years. The term was extended another
three years at the same pricing through December 31, 2019, followed by three subsequent
extensions covering through September 30, 2021.
ANALYSIS:
As the City continues to have no customer service issues with Union Bank, it was determined that
with the expiration of the current contract, it would be in the City’s best interest to pursue a
Request for Quote (RFQ) process to ensure that the City’s current pricing was competitive. If,
after the results of the RFQ, it was determined that the pricing was not competitive, consideration
would be given to pursuing a formal RFP.
The Finance Department provided a specification and scope of services to the Procurement
Division for the purchase of the banking services. Procurement prepared and posted a formal
Request for Quote (“RFQ”) #21/22-01 for Banking Services to the City’s automated procurement
system. There were sixteen (16) notified vendors, twelve (12) prospective vendors that reviewed
Page 115
Page 2
1
0
4
0
and/or downloaded the quote documentation, and four (4) vendors that submitted a quote
response.
After analysis of the quote response by the Finance team and Procurement staff, it has been
determined to be in the City’s best interest that an award be authorized to MUFG Union Bank,
N.A. of Los Angeles, California, who is the most responsive, responsible bidder that meets the
specifications required by the Finance Department. All applicable documentation is on file in the
City’s automated bid system. A copy of the proposed Contract for Banking Services is on file in
the City Clerk’s Office. The term of the new agreement is for October 1, 2021 through September
30, 2026.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Based on the Proforma Account Analysis Statement provided by Union Bank, the value of the
contracted banking services over the five-year contract is estimated at $267,210. However, the
City will receive an earnings credit rate (ECR) of 0.34% (guaranteed for 12 months) which will
offset the majority of the banking services costs. Banking services include items such as currency
and check deposits, wire transfers, account reconciliations, ACH processing, direct deposit for
payroll, Federal and State tax payment, and positive pay for all accounts. Any remaining costs
after the application of the ECR will be allocated to all funds holding cash balances through the
quarterly interest allocation. Thus, no additional appropriation is required to fund the award of
this RFQ. In addition, Union Bank has offered a $25,000 loyalty credit as a result of the RFQ
process which the City may utilize for the setup of new services and/or to cover Account Analysis
Fees.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Ensuring the City’s receives high quality services at competitive pricing for its banking services
supports the City Council’s core value of providing and nurturing a high quality of life for all by
demonstrating the active, prudent fiscal management of its banking services to ensure that
financial resources are available to support the various services the City provides to all Rancho
Cucamonga stakeholders.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Page 116
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Elisa Cox, Deputy City Manager
Fabian Villenas, Principal Management Analyst
SUBJECT:Consideration of the Use of a County of San Bernardino Contract with
Systems Source for the Civic Center COVID and ADA Improvement
Project. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council approve the use of a County of San Bernardino contract with
Systems Source for the Civic Center COVID and ADA Improvement Project in the amount not to
exceed $275,000.
BACKGROUND:
At its August 4, 2021 meeting, the City Council authorized the execution of a contract to the lowest
responsive bidder, Golden Gate Construction, for the Civic Center COVID and ADA Improvement
Project. The scope of the work includes reconfiguring work areas at a few key areas in the Civic
Center to ensure COVID-19 safe workspace conditions and comply with current standards in the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
ANALYSIS:
As part of the overall project, the Civic Center requires the installation of a variety of furniture,
fixtures, and equipment (FF&E). A total of $275,000 is budgeted for these expenses; however, at
the time the City Council awarded the construction contract, the FF&E vendor had not been
selected. Staff intends to use Systems Source who is on the list of approved vendors included in
the piggyback contract awarded by the County of San Bernardino for the purchase and install of
furniture related items.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City Council has already appropriated all the funding for this capital project, including the
FF&E, for the Fiscal Year 2021/22 budget.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This project addresses the City Council Core Values of promoting and enhancing a safe and
healthy community for all and intentionally embracing and anticipating the future.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Page 117
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director
Ernest Ruiz, Streets, Storm Drains and Fleet Superintendent
Ruth Cain, CPPB, Procurement Manager
SUBJECT:Consideration of the Purchase of Traffic Signal Cabinets, Controllers and
Related Equipment from Econolite, in an Amount not to Exceed $165,000.
(CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the purchase of traffic signal cabinets, controllers
and related equipment from Econolite of Anaheim, California in an amount not to exceed
$165,000.
BACKGROUND:
Spare traffic signal cabinets and controllers are used by the Public Works Services Department
to replace cabinets and/or controllers damaged because of traffic collisions and/or equipment
failure. Public Works Services typically replaces two to four cabinets and controllers annually.
Traffic signal cabinets are now taking four to six months to manufacture and it is in the City’s best
interest to have spare cabinets available in the City’s inventory.
In the event the department does not have a cabinet in stock, we must install a temporary cabinet
provided by the City’s contractor to return the signalized intersection to normal operation. The
contractor must then return to remove and replace the cabinet a second time when the City
provides a new one. Having the traffic signal cabinets and controllers available in stock reduces
our maintenance costs and minimizes additional disruptions to the motoring public.
ANALYSIS:
Public Works Services staff provided a single source justification for traffic signal cabinets,
controllers, and related equipment to the Purchasing Division on September 2, 2020, in
accordance with the City’s Purchasing Policy and Procedures. The single source justification
documents were approved and are on file with Purchasing.
On September 16, 2020, City Council approved a single source purchase of traffic signal cabinets,
controllers and related equipment from Econolite of Anaheim, California. The Engineering
Services Department established the standards and specifications for traffic signals and
associated equipment which has been in place for 20 years. Standardization of equipment
improves the operation of the traffic signal system, it allows staff to operate the City’s Econolite
platform from a single management system, it minimizes the number of replacement parts needed
Page 118
Page 2
1
0
1
8
on-hand for maintenance, and this allows staff to gain an in-depth familiarity with the operation
and maintenance of the equipment. Additionally, the Econolite system ensures compatibility of
the traffic control equipment with the City's Advanced Traffic Management System.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Fiscal Year 2021/2022 Adopted Budget includes $140,000 for traffic signal cabinets and
$25,000 for traffic signal controllers in the Equipment/Vehicle Replacement Fund (712).
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the City Council’s core values of promoting and enhancing public safety and
continuous improvement of the City’s signalized intersections.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Page 119
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Trina Valdez, Utilities Operations Supervisor
SUBJECT:Consideration of the Purchase of Thirty-Five (35) Streetlight Poles and
Seventeen (17) Aluminum Pole Arms from Ameron Pole Products, LLC in
the amount of $76,150. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve and authorize the purchase of 35 streetlight poles
and 17 aluminum arms from Ameron Pole Products, LLC in the amount of $76,150.
BACKGROUND:
In 2017, the City took ownership of approximately 15,700 standard concrete streetlight poles and
95 decorative concrete streetlight poles from Southern California Edison. The poles and light
fixtures are managed by the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility. Staff identified the need to
have an inventory of poles, arms, and light fixtures on hand when a streetlight knockdown occurs
for installation of a replacement pole. The lead time for streetlight poles is at a minimum of eight
weeks and having poles available immediately allows for the replacement to be completed in an
efficient manner for public safety.
All the City’s streetlight poles are currently standardized as an Ameron Contemporary 1C123 and
1C128 octagonal pole standard with base. This meets the City’s Standard Drawing 410 and the
Ameron drawings specifically done for the City. The design of these poles also accounts for the
structural engineering calculations that were conducted to ensure the footings meet or exceed
the City’s structural standards. Any changes in the pole design would require the City to conduct
another study for structural footing which would add additional costs to the City.
ANALYSIS:
The purchase of these streetlight poles and arms is needed to ensure that the City has an
adequate inventory level available when a knockdown occurs. Ameron is the only manufacturer
providing the style of poles that can offer manufacturing, delivery, and erection from their facility
in Fillmore, CA and will be a sole source purchase. Staff obtained a quote from Ameron Pole
Products in the amount of $76,150 for the purchase of the equipment and determined the quote
to be deemed as reasonable.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The purchase of streetlight poles and arms are included in the approved FY 2021/22 budget in
Account 1150202-5200 Operations and Maintenance.
Page 120
Page 2
1
0
1
9
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the City Council’s vision for the City by ensuring the construction and
maintenance of high-quality public improvements that promote a world class community. This is
accomplished by guaranteeing the City has the proper equipment available to replace existing
infrastructure.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Page 121
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director
Jeff Benson, Parks and Landscape Maintenance Superintendent
Ruth Cain, CPPB, Procurement Manager
SUBJECT:Consideration of the Purchase of Fertilizer and Pesticides Supplies on an
as Needed Basis from Nutrien Ag Solutions and Wilbur-Ellis Co. in an
Amount Not to Exceed $125,000. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council award the purchase of fertilizer and pesticides supplies
on an as needed basis from Nutrien Ag Solutions and Wilbur-Ellis Co. in accordance with Request
for Bids (RFB) #21/22-108, in an amount not to exceed $125,000 during FY 2021/2022, to be
funded from various City and Special District accounts.
BACKGROUND:
The Public Works Services Department applies fertilizer and pesticides in the landscape areas
throughout the City. The use of general and specialized fertilizers helps to improve plant and turf
health. The properly scheduled distribution of these fertilizers will stimulate healthy root and plant
structure growth. The City’s urban forest also benefits from the availability of the appropriate
fertilizers and pesticides that help strengthen and stimulate proper growth. The application of
approved pesticides helps reduce and/or eliminate unwanted pests and weeds that can impact
landscape health and appearance, while reducing the public’s exposure to pest related injuries
such as Red Fire Ants or Goathead weeds in our parks, landscape areas, and paseos. Having
the capability to purchase on an “as needed basis” through a variety of vendors will help the
Department’s ability to respond rapidly and with the appropriate materials to achieve the
application goals throughout the year. Having two vendors providing the fertilizer and pesticides
helps maximize availability and accessibility to the materials used throughout the City and
eliminates the potential impacts associated with the storage of these materials.
ANALYSIS:
The Public Works Services Department provided the Purchasing Division with specifications for
review and to determine the best method of procurement. The Purchasing Division prepared and
posted a formal Request for Bid (RFB) #21/22-108 for “Fertilizer and Pesticides Supplies on an
As Needed Basis” for one (1) year firm fixed pricing to the City’s automated procurement system.
This bid was solicited as a split award in order to provide the greatest flexibility in staff’s ability
to find the materials needed at the best price. There was a total of thirty-six (36) vendors that
were notified and fifteen (15) prospective bidders that downloaded the solicitation documentation.
Three (3) bid responses were received. The lowest line items will be awarded to each vendor
Page 122
Page 2
based upon their bid responses. All applicable bid documentation is on file in the City’s electronic
bidding system and can be accessed through the City’s web page.
FISCAL IMPACT:
While the bid process provides the best pricing available, staff will continue to operate within the
limits set in the adopted General and Special Fund budgets.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the City Council’s Core Values of providing and nurturing a high quality of
life for all by promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy community.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Page 123
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director
Ernest Ruiz, Streets, Storm Drains and Fleet Superintendent
Kenneth Fung, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT:Consideration of a Contract with Yunex, LLC. for the Traffic Signal Battery
Backup System Replacement in the Amount of $248,424 plus a
Contingency in the Amount of $29,076. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve the specifications for the Traffic Signal Battery Backup System Replacement FY
2021/22 Project.
2. Accept the bids received for the Project.
3. Award and authorize the execution of a contract in the amount of $248,424 for the “Traffic
Signal Battery Backup System Replacement FY 2021/22 Project” to the lowest
responsive bidder, Yunex, LLC., of Riverside, California.
4. Authorize the expenditure of a contingency in the amount of $29,076.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of traffic signal battery backup systems (BBS) is to provide electrical power to traffic
signals during a power outage. This allows the traffic signal to operate in four-way red flash during
an outage. The Public Works Services Department is proactively replacing existing BBS that have
exceeded their ten-year life expectancy and are no longer supported by the manufacturer. Rather
than waiting for a BBS to fail and replacing it on an emergency basis, proactively replacing BBS
reduces the replacement cost and minimizes the time a signalized intersection will be blacked
out.
This project is the fourth phase of an anticipated six-phase project. To date, we have replaced
seventy (70) BBS. Phase Four will replace twenty-two (22) BBS, totaling ninety-two (92) BBS
completed in the first four phases. The remaining thirty-eight (38) BBS will need to be replaced in
the final two phases.
ANALYSIS:
Thirteen (13) contracting companies with the required C-10 Electrical Contractor License
downloaded the project documents. Seven (7) bids for this project were opened at 2:00 pm on
Tuesday, October 5, 2021, see Attachment 1 - Bid Summary. Staff has completed the required
background investigation and finds that the lowest responsive bidder, Yunex, LLC., of Riverside,
Page 124
Page 2
1
0
1
7
California has met the requirements of the bid documents. The project budget is sufficient to
award only the Base Bid along with Additive Bids 1 and 2 to the lowest responsive bidder. This
will replace the BBS for a total of twenty-two (22) signalized intersections, eighteen (18) as part
of the Base Bid plus two (2) for Additive Bid 1 and two (2) for Additive Bid 2.
The project is scheduled to be completed in forty-four (44) working days; thirty-six (36) working
days for the Base Bid items and eight (8) additional working days for each intersection listed in
awarded Additive Bids 1 and 2. Working days are defined as Monday through Thursday for this
project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Fiscal Year 2021/2022 Adopted Budget includes $277,500 for traffic signal battery backup
system replacements. The funding breakdown is shown in the following table:
Account Funding Source Amount
1174303-5650/1980174-0 State Gas Tax $127,500
1712001-5650/1980712-0 Equipment/Vehicle Replacement $150,000
Total $277,500
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This project addresses the City Council core value of promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy
community for all. Installing new battery backup systems ensures that, in the event of a power
outage, the City’s traffic signals will be able to provide limited traffic control at signalized
intersections until power is restored to the area.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Bid Summary
Attachment 2 - Project Contract
Page 125
item Description Qty Unit Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost
1 6th St. & Buffalo Ave.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
2 Archibald Ave. & Banyan St.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
3 Archibald Ave. & Church St.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
4 Arrow Rte. & Rochester Ave.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
5 Arrow Rte. & Vineyard Ave.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
6 Banyan St. & East Ave.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
7 Banyan St. & Etiwanda Ave.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
8 Banyan St. & Fredericksburg Ave.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
9 Base Line Rd. & Alta Cuesta 1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
10 Base Line Rd. & Beryl St.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
11 Base Line Rd. & Central Park 1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
12 Base Line Rd. & Day Creek Blvd.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
13 Base Line Rd. & Ellena West 1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
14 Base Line Rd. & Hermosa Ave.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
15 Base Line Rd. & Mountain View Dr.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
16 Base Line Rd. & Rochester Ave.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,793.71
17 Base Line Rd. & Shelby Pl.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,030.00 $12,030.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,796.29
18 Base Line Rd. & Victoria Park Ln.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,015.00 $12,015.00 $12,351.00 $12,351.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,700.00 $15,700.00 $12,794.14
BASE BID TOTAL =$203,256.00 $207,900.00 $216,237.00 $222,318.00 $237,834.00 $241,884.00 $282,600.00
Y/N Yes No No No No No No
Y/N Yes No No No No No No
item Description Qty Unit Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost
19
Carnelian Ave. & Highland Ave./Beryl
Park 1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $23,930.00 $23,930.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,250.00 $15,250.00 $14,383.57
20 Carnelian Ave. & La Vine/La Grande 1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $23,930.00 $23,930.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,250.00 $15,250.00 $14,383.57
ADDITIVE BID NO 1 TOTAL =$22,584.00 $23,100.00 $24,024.00 $47,860.00 $26,426.00 $26,876.00 $30,500.00
$225,840.00 $231,000.00 $240,261.00 $270,178.00 $264,260.00 $268,760.00 $313,100.00
item Description Qty Unit Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost
21 Carnelian Ave. & Vivero St.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $23,930.00 $23,930.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,250.00 $15,250.00 $14,383.57
22 East Ave. & Victoria Ave.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $23,930.00 $23,930.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,250.00 $15,250.00 $14,383.57
ADDITIVE BID NO 2 TOTAL =$22,584.00 $23,100.00 $24,024.00 $47,860.00 $26,426.00 $26,876.00 $30,500.00
$248,424.00 $254,100.00 $264,285.00 $318,038.00 $290,686.00 $295,636.00 $343,600.00
item Description Qty Unit Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost
23 Etiwanda Ave. & Pacific Electrical Trail 1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $23,930.00 $23,930.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,250.00 $15,250.00 $14,383.57
24 Foothill Blvd & Day Creek Blvd.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $23,930.00 $23,930.00 $13,213.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,250.00 $15,250.00 $14,383.57
ADDITIVE BID NO 3 TOTAL =$22,584.00 $23,100.00 $24,024.00 $47,860.00 $26,426.00 $26,876.00 $30,500.00
$271,008.00 $277,200.00 $288,309.00 $365,898.00 $317,112.00 $322,512.00 $374,100.00
item Description Qty Unit Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost
25 Rochester Ave. & Church St.1 LS $11,292.00 $11,292.00 $11,550.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $12,012.00 $11,943.00 $11,943.00 $12,800.00 $12,800.00 $13,438.00 $13,438.00 $15,250.00 $15,250.00 $12,612.14
ADDITIVE BID NO 4 TOTAL =$11,292.00 $11,550.00 $12,012.00 $11,943.00 $13,213.00 $13,438.00 $15,250.00
$282,300.00 $288,750.00 $300,321.00 $377,841.00 $330,325.00 $335,950.00 $389,350.00
$259,716.00 $265,650.00 $252,273.00 $329,981.00 $303,899.00 $309,074.00 $358,850.00
BASE BID + ADDITIVE BIDS NO 1, 2, 3 & 4 AMOUNT =
BASE BID + ADDITIVE BIDS NO 1, 2 & 4 AMOUNT =
Average of Unit
Prices
BASE BID + ADDITIVE BIDS NO 1,2 & 3 AMOUNT =
ADDITIVE BID NO 4
Average of Unit
Prices
BASE BID + ADDITIVE BIDS NO 1 & 2 AMOUNT =
ADDITIVE BID NO 3 Average of Unit
Prices
ADDITIVE BID NO 2
ATTACHMENT 1
Included copy of required T & M Cost Sheet?
Included copy of required IMSA Level III Tech?
BASE BID + ADDITIVE BID NO 1 AMOUNT =
BASE BID: Remove BBS at Below
Intersections and Replace with New Clary
Corporation BBS including Cabinet, Inverter,
Power Interface Module, Batteries, Etc. Per
Project Specifications Plus Other Related
Work
Yunex LLC
Average of Unit
Prices
Average of Unit
Prices
Alfaro Communications
Constructions, Inc.Select Electric, Inc.Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc.Bear Electrical Solutions, Inc.
OCTOBER 5, 2021 BID OPENING SUMMARY
TRAFFIC SIGNAL BATTERY BACKUP SYSTEM REPLACEMENT FY 21-22 PROJECT
ADDITIVE BID NO 1
Crosstown Electrical &
Data, Inc.
Ferreira Construction Co.,
Inc. dba Ferreira Coastal
Construction Co.
Note: if the above 2 items not included in bid package, then contractor's bid package are considered non-compliant. In other words, their bids are not accepted.
Page 126
Page 127
Page 128
Page 129
Page 130
Page 131
Page 132
Page 133
Page 134
Page 135
Page 136
Page 137
Page 138
Page 139
Page 140
Page 141
Page 142
Page 143
Page 144
Page 145
Page 146
Page 147
Page 148
Page 149
Page 150
Page 151
Page 152
Page 153
Page 154
Page 155
Page 156
Page 157
Page 158
Page 159
Page 160
Page 161
Page 162
Page 163
Page 164
Page 165
Page 166
Page 167
Page 168
Page 169
Page 170
Page 171
Page 172
Page 173
Page 174
Page 175
Page 176
Page 177
Page 178
Page 179
Page 180
Page 181
Page 182
Page 183
Page 184
Page 185
Page 186
Page 187
Page 188
Page 189
Page 190
Page 191
Page 192
Page 193
Page 194
Page 195
Page 196
Page 197
Page 198
Page 199
Page 200
Page 201
Page 202
Page 203
Page 204
Page 205
Page 206
Page 207
Page 208
Page 209
Page 210
Page 211
Page 212
Page 213
Page 214
Page 215
Page 216
Page 217
Page 218
Page 219
Page 220
Page 221
Page 222
Page 223
Page 224
Page 225
Page 226
Page 227
Page 228
Page 229
Page 230
Page 231
Page 232
Page 233
Page 234
Page 235
Page 236
Page 237
Page 238
Page 239
Page 240
Page 241
Page 242
Page 243
Page 244
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Mario Estrada, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT:Consideration to Approve Parcel Map 20101, Improvement Agreement,
Improvement Securities, and Resolutions Ordering the Annexation into
Landscape Maintenance District No.1, and Street Lighting Maintenance
Districts Nos.1 and 2, Located on the East Side of Vineyard Avenue,
South of Azurite Avenue, Related to Case No. SUBTPM20101.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021-126), (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-127), AND
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021-128) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve Parcel Map 20101;
2. Approve an Improvement Agreement for public improvements related to Case No.
SUBTPM20101 and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement;
3. Accept securities in the form of bonds and cash deposit to guarantee completion of the
related public improvements;
4. Approve the plans and specifications for the related public improvements on file with the
City Engineer; and
5. Adopt the attached resolutions ordering the annexation to Landscape Maintenance District
No.1, and Street Light Maintenance Districts No.1 and No. 2.
BACKGROUND:
On October 23, 2019, the Planning Commission approved Case No. SUBTPM20101 to subdivide
0.80 acres of land into three (3) separate parcels, located on the east side of Vineyard Avenue,
south of Azurite Avenue. Case No. SUBTPM20101 was approved subject to a condition that
certain public improvements be constructed including streetlights, sidewalk, curb and gutter,
street trees, and street improvements.
ANALYSIS:
The developer, Douglas B. Law has submitted an Improvement Agreement and Improvement
Securities to guarantee the construction of the public improvements in the following amounts:
Faithful Performance Bond No. 4446733: $ 41,500
Labor and Materials Bond No. 4446733: $ 41,500
Monumentation Cash Deposit: $ 3,063
Page 245
Page 2
1
0
2
1
The developer has also submitted Parcel Map 20101 for consideration of approval. This parcel
map has been reviewed by Staff and found to be in substantial conformity with the conditionally
approved tentative parcel map as well as with State and City subdivision regulations. Further,
Consent and Waiver forms required to annex the subject property into the above listed special
districts have been submitted and are on file in the City Clerk’s office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed annexations would satisfy the conditions of approval for the development and
supply additional annual revenue into the landscape and lighting maintenance districts in the
following amounts:
Landscape Maintenance District No.1: $ 276.63
Street Lighting Maintenance District No.1: $ 53.31
Street Lighting Maintenance District No.2: $ 119.91
The development includes the installation of one (1) LED streetlight and three (3) street trees that
will be maintained by the City.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The project meets the City Council core values by promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy
community for all, and by providing continuous improvement through the construction of high-
quality public improvements.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Resolution LMD 1
Attachment 3 - Resolution SLD 1
Attachment 4 - Resolution SLD 2
Page 246
ATTACHMENT 1
SUBTPM20101
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
Page 247
ATTACHMENT #2
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 1 of 5
RESOLUTION NO. XX - XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (GENERAL CITY) FOR
PROJECT CASE NO. SUBTPM20101
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has
previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the “Landscape and
Lighting Act of 1972”, being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of
California (the “Act”, said special maintenance district known and designated as Landscape
Maintenance District No. 1 (General City) (the “District”); and
WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the Act authorize the annexation
of additional territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation of
resolutions, and assessment engineer’s report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority
protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within
the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the Act related to the annexation of
territory to the District, Article XIII D of the Constitution of the State of California (“Article XIII D”)
establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy assessments which
apply to the levy of annual assessments for the District on the territory proposed to be annexed
to such District; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference, have requested that such property (collectively, the
“Territory”) be annexed to the District in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to
finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto (the
“Improvements”); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed
forms entitled “Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance
District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property” (the “Consent and
Waiver”); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act to the
annexation of the Territory to the District and have expressly consented to the annexation of the
Territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act and/or
Article XIII D applicable to the authorization to levy the proposed annual assessment against the
Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and
have declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization to levy such proposed
annual assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
Page 248
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 2 of 5
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly agreed for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns that:
(1) The proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory
from the District Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the
maintenance and operation expenses of the Improvements;
(2) The proposed annual assessment does not exceed the reasonable cost
of the proportional special benefit from the Improvements conferred on each parcel in the
Territory.
(3) Only the special benefits derived or to be derived by each parcel in the
Territory from the Improvements have been included in the proposed annual assessment.
WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory
to the District and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts
not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the above recitals are true and correct.
SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in
the Territory do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional
special benefit conferred on each such parcel from the
Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the
Territory from the Improvements has been determined in
relationship to the entirety of the cost of the maintenance of the
Improvement.
c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of
the proposed annual assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation the Territory to
the District, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the proceeds
of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the levy of
annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in
Exhibit C.
SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the District, including the levy of all
assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2021.
Page 249
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 3 of 5
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property to be Annexed
The Owner of the Property is:
Douglas B. Law
2105 Foothill Blvd. (Suite B-111)
La Verne, CA 91750
The legal description of the Property is:
Being a portion of lot 6, subdivision “C” Cucamonga Vineyard Tract, as shown on a Map Filed in
Book 21, Page 67 of Maps, in the Office of the Recorder, in the County of San Bernardino, State
of California.
Assessor’s Parcels Numbers of the Property:
0208-091-44
Page 250
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 4 of 5
Exhibit B
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2021/22
Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City):
Landscape Maintenance District No. 1(General City) (the “Maintenance District”) represents
various landscaped areas, parks and community trails located at various sites throughout the
City. These sites consist of several non-contiguous areas throughout the City. As such, the
parcels within this District do not represent a distinct district area as do the other LMD’s within
the City. Typically, new parcels within this District have been annexed upon development.
The various sites maintained by the District consist of parkways, median islands, paseos, street
trees, entry monuments, community trails and parks. The parks consist of Bear Gulch Park,
East and West Beryl Park, Old Town Park, Church Street Park, Golden Oaks Park, Hermosa
Park, and the undeveloped Don Tiburcio Tapia Park.
Proposed additions to the Improvements for Project Case No. SUBTPM20101:
Three (3) Street Trees.
Page 251
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 5 of 5
Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2021/22
Landscape Maintenance District No.1 (General City):
The rate per Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) is $92.21 for the fiscal year 2021/22. The following
table summarizes the assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City)
for SUBTPM20101:
Land Use Basis
EBU*
Factor
Rate per
EBU*
Single Family Residential Parcel 1.00 $92.21
Multi-Family Residential Unit 0.50 92.21
Non-Residential Acre 2.00 92.21
The proposed annual assessment for the property described in Exhibit A is as follows:
__3__ Parcels x _1__ EBU Factor x $92.21 Rate per EBU = $_276.63__ Annual Assessment
Page 252
ATTACHMENT #3
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 1 of 5
RESOLUTION NO. XX - XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO STREET LIGHT
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS) FOR
CASE NO. SUBTPM20101
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously
formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the “Landscape and Lighting Act
of 1972”, being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California
(the “Act”, said special maintenance district known and designated as Street Light Maintenance
District No. 1 (Arterial Streets) (the “District”); and
WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the Act authorize the annexation of
additional territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation of
resolutions, and assessment engineer’s report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority
protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within
the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the Act related to the annexation of
territory to the District, Article XIII D of the Constitution of the State of California (“Article XIII D”)
establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy assessments which apply
to the levy of annual assessments for the District on the territory proposed to be annexed to such
District; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference, have requested that such property (collectively, the
“Territory”) be annexed to the District in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to
finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto (the
“Improvements”); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed
forms entitled “Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance
District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property” (the “Consent and
Waiver”); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have expressly
waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act to the annexation of
the Territory to the District and have expressly consented to the annexation of the Territory to the
District; and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act and/or Article
XIII D applicable to the authorization to levy the proposed annual assessment against the Territory
set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and have declared
support for, consent to and approval of the authorization to levy such proposed annual
assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
Page 253
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 2 of 5
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly agreed for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns that:
(1) The proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory
from the District Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the
maintenance and operation expenses of the Improvements;
(2) The proposed annual assessment does not exceed the reasonable cost of
the proportional special benefit from the Improvements conferred on each parcel in the Territory.
(3) Only the special benefits derived or to be derived by each parcel in the
Territory from the Improvements have been included in the proposed annual assessment.
WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory
to the District and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts
not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the above recitals are true and correct.
SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the
Territory do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional
special benefit conferred on each such parcel from the
Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the
Territory from the Improvements has been determined in relationship
to the entirety of the cost of the maintenance of the Improvement.
c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of
the proposed annual assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation the Territory to
the District, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the proceeds
of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the levy of
annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in
Exhibit C.
SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the District, including the levy of all
assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2021.
Page 254
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 3 of 5
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property to be Annexed
The Owner of the Property is:
Douglas B. Law
2105 Foothill Blvd. (Suite B-111)
La Verne, CA 91750
The legal description of the Property is:
Being a portion of lot 6, subdivision “C” Cucamonga Vineyard Tract, as shown on a Map Filed in
Book 21, Page 67 of Maps, in the Office of the Recorder, in the County of San Bernardino, State
of California.
Assessor’s Parcels Numbers of the Property:
0208-091-44
Page 255
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 4 of 5
Exhibit B
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2021/22
Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial Streets):
Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial Streets) (the “Maintenance District”) is used to
fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on arterial
streets throughout the City. These sites consist of several non-contiguous areas throughout the
City.
The sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on arterial streets and traffic signals on
arterial streets within the rights-of-way or designated easements of streets dedicated to the City.
Proposed additions to the Improvements for Project Case No. SUBTPM20101:
None.
Page 256
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 5 of 5
Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2021/22
Street Light Maintenance District No.1 (Arterial Streets):
The rate per Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) is $17.77 for the fiscal year 2021/22. The following
table summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No.1 (Arterial Streets)
for SUBTPM20101:
Land Use Basis
EBU
Factor*
Rate per
EBU*
Single Family Residential Parcel 1.00 $17.77
Multi-Family Residential Parcel 1.00 17.77
Non-Residential Acre 2.00 17.77
The proposed annual assessment for the property described in Exhibit A is as follows:
__3__ Parcels x __1__ EBU Factor x $17.77 Rate per EBU = $_53.31__ Annual Assessment
Page 257
ATTACHMENT #4
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 1 of 5
RESOLUTION NO. XX - XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO STREET LIGHT
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 (LOCAL STREETS) FOR CASE
NO. SUBTPM20101
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously
formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the “Landscape and Lighting Act
of 1972”, being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California
(the “Act”, said special maintenance district known and designated as Street Light Maintenance
District No. 2 (Local Streets) (the “District”); and
WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the Act authorize the annexation of
additional territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation of
resolutions, and assessment engineer’s report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority
protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within
the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the Act related to the annexation of
territory to the District, Article XIII D of the Constitution of the State of California (“Article XIII D”)
establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy assessments which apply
to the levy of annual assessments for the District on the territory proposed to be annexed to such
District; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference, have requested that such property (collectively, the
“Territory”) be annexed to the District in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to
finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto (the
“Improvements”); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed
forms entitled “Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance
District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property” (the “Consent and
Waiver”); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have expressly
waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act to the annexation of
the Territory to the District and have expressly consented to the annexation of the Territory to the
District; and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act and/or Article
XIII D applicable to the authorization to levy the proposed annual assessment against the Territory
set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and have declared
support for, consent to and approval of the authorization to levy such proposed annual
assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
Page 258
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 2 of 5
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly agreed for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns that:
(1) The proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory
from the District Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the
maintenance and operation expenses of the Improvements;
(2) The proposed annual assessment does not exceed the reasonable cost of
the proportional special benefit from the Improvements conferred on each parcel in the Territory.
(3) Only the special benefits derived or to be derived by each parcel in the
Territory from the Improvements have been included in the proposed annual assessment.
WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory
to the District and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts
not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the above recitals are true and correct.
SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the
Territory do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional
special benefit conferred on each such parcel from the
Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the
Territory from the Improvements has been determined in relationship
to the entirety of the cost of the maintenance of the Improvement.
c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of
the proposed annual assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation the Territory to
the District, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the proceeds
of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the levy of
annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in
Exhibit C.
SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the District, including the levy of all
assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2021.
Page 259
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 3 of 5
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property to be Annexed
The Owner of the Property is:
Douglas B. Law
2105 Foothill Blvd. (Suite B-111)
La Verne, CA 91750
The legal description of the Property is:
Being a portion of lot 6, subdivision “C” Cucamonga Vineyard Tract, as shown on a Map Filed in
Book 21, Page 67 of Maps, in the Office of the Recorder, in the County of San Bernardino, State
of California.
Assessor’s Parcels Numbers of the Property:
0208-091-44
Page 260
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 4 of 5
Exhibit B
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2021/22
Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets):
Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets) (the “Maintenance District”) is used to fund
the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on local streets
throughout the City but excluding those areas already in another local maintenance district.
Generally, this area encompasses the residential area of the City west of Haven Avenue.
The sites maintained by the District consist of street lights on local streets and traffic signals (or
a portion thereof) on local streets generally west of Haven Avenue.
Proposed additions to the Improvements for Project Case No. SUBTPM20101:
One (1) LED Street Light.
Page 261
Resolution No. XX-XXX – Page 5 of 5
Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2021/22
Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets):
The rate per Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) is $39.97 for the fiscal year 2021/22. The following
table summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets)
for SUBTPM20101:
Land Use Basis
EBU
Factor*
Rate per
EBU*
Single Family Residential Parcel 1.00 $39.97
Multi-Family Residential Unit 1.00 39.97
Non-Residential Acre 2.00 39.97
The proposed annual assessment for the property described in Exhibit A is as follows:
__3__ Parcels x _ 1 _ EBU Factor x $39.97 Rate per EBU = $_119.91 _ Annual Assessment
Page 262
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning Director
Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst II
SUBJECT:Consideration of Second Reading and Adoption of the Following:
Ordinance No. 988
An Ordinance of the City Of Rancho Cucamonga, Amending Title 17 of the
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Permit Utility Companies to Store
Materials and Equipment Associated with Utility Facilities and Infrastructure and
to Correct Errors and Omissions in the Allowed Land Use Table and Industrial
Development Standards Table and to Adopt an Uncodified Amendment to
Ordinance No. 982 to Exempt Certain Buildings Currently Under Construction
from the Amended Use Table, Making Findings in Support Thereof, and Making
a Determination that the Ordinance is Exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council waive full reading and adopt Ordinance No. 988.
BACKGROUND:
The introduction and first reading of the above-entitled Ordinances was conducted at the Regular
Council meeting of November 3, 2021. Votes at first reading: AYES: Scott, Hutchison, Kennedy,
Michael, Spagnolo. ABSENT: None
ANALYSIS:
Please refer to the November 3, 2021 City Council Staff Report.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Please refer to the November 3, 2021 City Council Staff Report.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Please refer to the November 3, 2021 City Council Staff Report.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Ordinance No. 988
Page 263
Ordinance No. 988 – Page 1 of 6
ORDINANCE NO. 988
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO PERMIT UTILITY COMPANIES TO
STORE MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH
UTILITY FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE AND TO
CORRECT ERRORS AND OMISSIONS IN THE ALLOWED LAND
USE TABLE AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
TABLE AND TO ADOPT AN UNCODIFIED AMENDMENT TO
ORDINANCE NO. 982 TO EXEMPT CERTAIN BUILDINGS
CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION FROM THE AMENDED
USE TABLE, MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF, AND
MAKING A DETERMINATION THAT THE ORDINANCE IS
EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT
I.Recitals.
A.On July 21, 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 982 to amend the land
use regulations applicable to industrial uses, including new regulations applicable to the storage
of materials and equipment on industrial-zoned properties and amendments to the Development
Code’s land use table to require discretionary use permits for certain types of industrial uses. The
primary purpose of Ordinance No. 982 was to prohibit or further regulate industrial uses that often
pose significant air quality, traffic, and aesthetic impacts. Ordinance No. 982 took effect on August
20, 2021.
B.Given the extensive and innovative new land use regulations included in
Ordinance No. 982, the City Council understood that certain refinements would be necessary as
the regulations were applied to certain types of industrial uses and properties in order to avoid
unintended consequences. The purpose of this Ordinance is to provide clarity to public utilities
and industrial developers with buildings that were under construction when Ordinance No. 982
took effect. In addition, two errors were discovered after the implementation of Ordinance No.
982: 1) A land use definition was added for “Food Processing/Manufacturing”, however the use
was not added to the land use table defining where this use is allowed and 2) an extraneous line
was included in Table 17.36.040-1 with no reference to any specific development standard.
C.On October 13, 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a noticed public hearing with respect to the Ordinance and, following the conclusion
thereof, adopted Resolution No. 21-69, recommending that the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga adopt this Ordinance.
D.On November 3, 2021, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a noticed public hearing on this Ordinance and concluded said hearing on that date.
E.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
II.Findings.
A.Based upon all available evidence presented to the City Council during the above-
referenced public hearing, this City Council hereby finds and concludes that the changes
Attachment 1Page264
Ordinance No. 988 – Page 2 of 6
proposed to Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code by this
Ordinance and the uncodified amendment to Ordinance No. 982 are consistent with the General
Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs. General Plan Resource Conservation Policy
Goals 4 through 6 encourage the City to work with public utility providers to promote adequate
and efficient utility services within the City. Ensuring that public utilities, including Southern
California Edison, have sufficient laydown areas to store equipment and materials, will ensure
that the City does not unduly restrict such utility development within the City. In addition, providing
a limited exemption from the use table amended by Ordinance No. 982 will be consistent with the
General Plan’s characterization of the City as business-friendly and committed to fairness in the
development process. (General Plan, pg. I-8). The proposed changes to the land use and
development standards tables correct clerical errors further promote fairness in the development
process by providing clarity in the development code for the standards and regulations for existing
and new development.
B. The Planning Department has determined that this Ordinance is exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA
Guidelines. The Ordinance qualifies under the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects,
which have the potential for causing significant effects on the environment. Pursuant to State
CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(B)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no
possibility that the activity in question may have significant effect on the environment, the activity
is not subject to CEQA. The Ordinance does not propose any physical change to the environment
itself. Public utilities are generally exempt from the City’s zoning and building regulations, such
that the proposed amendment to the storage regulations applicable to public utilities will not cause
a change to the baseline environmental and regulatory setting. Furthermore, any industrial
warehouse building currently under construction as of the effective date of Ordinance No. 982
underwent environmental review at the time the building’s discretionary entitlements were
approved. Such environmental review would have considered the effects of warehouse uses
within the industrial warehouse buildings. No changes to the baseline environmental setting is
caused by confirming that warehouse uses are permitted in buildings that were currently under
construction when Ordinance No. 982 took effect. In addition, updates to the land use table and
development standards table to correct errors and omissions do not create any relaxation of the
development standards that were implemented prior to when Ordinance No. 982 became effective
or have been applied since the effective date of Ordinance No. 982. Based on this evidence and
all of the evidence in the record, the City Council concurs with the Planning Department’s
determination that this Ordinance will not have a significant effect on the environment and is
therefore exempt from further environmental review under CEQA.
III. Ordinance.
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Subsection E (“Industrial Zoning Districts”) of Section 17.48.050
(“Requirements by Land Use Type”) of Chapter 17.48 (Fences, Walls, and Screening) of Article
IV (Site Development Provisions) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
E. Industrial zoning districts.
1. Storage area/screening. The purpose of storage area/screening regulations is to
allow for on-site storage, which is screened from view from the public right-of-way or from
adjacent properties accessible to the public and is architecturally compatible with the
Page 265
Ordinance No. 988 – Page 3 of 6
surrounding environment. The following standards shall apply according to land use
category:
a. Standards for storage area/screen wall height in all industrial zoning
districts. The height of all storage area/screening walls shall not exceed eight feet,
measured from the finished grade immediately adjacent to the wall and the top of
the wall.
b. Industrial Park (IP) Zoning District. No outdoor storage shall be permitted
except for fleet vehicles and light trucks (not exceeding 6,000 pounds). Outdoor
storage tanks may be permitted at a height not to exceed eight feet from highest
finished grade when screened from public view by walls constructed of concrete,
masonry, or other similar materials.
c. Neo-Industrial (NI) Zoning District. All materials, supplies, equipment,
loading docks, and trucks and trailers shall be stored within an enclosed building
or an area screened from public view.
d. Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning District. All materials, supplies,
equipment, and operating trucks shall be stored within an enclosed building or
storage area. Such storage areas within 120 feet of a street frontage shall be
screened.
e. Within 600 feet of the I-15 right-of-way, all outdoor storage shall be
screened from public view from the freeway. Screening may include the use or
combination of block or masonry walls, 36-inch box trees planted a maximum of
30 feet apart, or the building mass.
f. Within all industrial land use categories, all storage area screening shall be
architecturally integrated with surrounding buildings utilizing concrete, masonry, or
other similar materials. For walls comprised of the combination of a screen wall on
top of a retaining wall, the overall height of the combined wall may exceed eight
feet provided that the part of the wall that faces the public right-of-way (street,
sidewalk, etc.), does not exceed the maximum height established in section
17.48.050.E.1.a.
g. Within the Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning District, storage area
screening may include masonry or concrete walls and, metal, or wood fences. The
front and exterior side area shall be screened with non-opaque fencing, when
loading areas or storage areas are not present.
h. Storage of materials or equipment shall not exceed screen height within
100 feet of street-fronting screens.
i. The planning director may waive screening requirements where future
building expansion would screen an abutting storage area.
j. The planning director may waive screening requirements along the front
and exterior side of the building if there are no loading docks or storage areas
present.
h. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a public utility company may store materials
or equipment associated with the construction or operation of utility facilities and
infrastructure on real property owned or controlled by the public utility company.
SECTION 2. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Ordinance No. 982, Section
17.30.030 (“Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements”), including Table 17.30-030-1
(“Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements by Base Zoning District”), Section 17.32.020
Page 266
Ordinance No. 988 – Page 4 of 6
(“Allowed Use Descriptions”), and Article II (“Land Use and Development Procedures”) of the
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code (the “Use Provisions”), as amended by Ordinance No. 982,
shall not apply to any industrial warehouse building that had received all required discretionary
entitlements and building permits and was under construction as of Ordinance No. 982’s effective
date (an “Exempt Building”). Instead, the Use Provisions in effect on August 19, 2021, shall
continue to apply to an Exempt Building unless and until the building is significantly altered or
reconstructed, in which case the Exempt Building and the uses contained therein shall be subject
to the provisions of Chapter 17.62 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code (“Nonconforming
Uses and Structures”). The City Council finds that the only industrial warehouse building
qualifying as an Exempt Building is located at 8738, 8768, 8798 E. 9th Street, which is currently
owned by 9th&Vineyard LLC. In the event that any other property owner claims to own an Exempt
Building, then the Planning Director shall verify in writing that the building qualifies as such.
SECTION 3. Table 17.30.030-1 (“Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements By
Base Zoning District”) of Section 17.30.030 (“Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements”) of
Chapter 17.30 (“Allowed Land Use By Base Zoning District”) of Article III (“Zoning Districts,
Allowed Uses, and Development Standards”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to insert in the appropriate place a row for “Food
Processing/Manufacturing,” as defined allowed land use descriptions (section 17.32.020), to read
as follows:
TABLE 17.30.030-1: ALLOWED LAND USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
BY BASE ZONING DISTRICT
Land
Use/Zoning
District
VL L LM M MH H MU MU-
GU
MU-
UCR
MU-
UCT OP NC GC CC SC RRC CO IP NI IE OS HR FC UC
Industrial, Manufacturing, and Processing Uses (17)
Food Processing/
Manufacturing N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M P P N N N N
SECTION 4. Table 17.36.040-1 (“Development Standards for Industrial Zoning
Districts”) of Section 17.36.040 (“Development Standards for Industrial Zoning Districts”) of
Chapter 17.36 (“Development Standards By Base Zoning District”) of Article III (“Zoning Districts,
Allowed Uses, and Development Standards”) of Title 17 (“Development Code”) of the Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
TABLE 17.36.040-1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
Development Standard/Zoning
District IP NI IE
Lot area (minimum) (1) 0.5 ac 0.5 ac 5 ac or 2 ac
(2)
Lot width (minimum) (3) 100 ft 100 ft 100 ft
Min. Setback (ft.) (4)
Front yard (and Street Side Yard) See Table 17.36.040-2
Major Arterial and Special
Boulevard 45 ft 45 ft 45 ft
Page 267
Ordinance No. 988 – Page 5 of 6
Secondary 35 ft 35 ft 35 ft
Local/Collector 25 ft 25 ft 25 ft
Interior Side yard 5 ft (5) 5 ft (5) 5 ft (5)
Rear yard 0 ft (5) 0 ft (5) 0 ft (5)
Distance Between Buildings
Primary buildings Must meet current building code
requirements
Accessory buildings Must meet current building code
requirements
Max. Building Height (ft.)
Primary buildings (7) 35 feet at the front setback line (6)
45 ft 45 ft 65 ft
Accessory buildings - Detached 25 ft 25 ft 25 ft
Accessory buildings – Attached
Maker Space -- 35 ft 35 ft
Floor Area Ratio (Ratio of building floor area to lot square footage)
Floor area ratio 0.4-0.6 (8) 0.4-0.6 (9) 0.4-0.6 (9)
Max. Building Footprint (sq. ft.)
Primary Building (10) -- 200,000 450,000
Accessory Building - Detached -- 5,000 10,000
Accessory Building – Attached Maker
Space -- 30,000 30,000
Min. Open Space (minimum percentage of open space per parcel or project)
Open space/landscape area 15% 10% 10% (2) /5%
Performance standards (see chapter
17.66) A A C/B (2)
Table notes:
(1) Condominium lots. Condominium lots and lots within an approved master planned development are exempt from required
minimum parcel size and dimension requirements.
(2) The following applies within 1,000 feet of Arrow Route: minimum 2-acre lot area; 10% minimum landscape area; and the “B” level
performance standards (chapter 17.66).
(3) Setbacks shall be the minimum required under the city’s currently adopted building code.
(4) Setback shall be increased to 45 feet when abutting a residential property line or adjacent to Interstate 15.
(5) See Table 17.36.040-2 for parcels abutting special boulevards as indicated in Figure 17.36.040-1 (Special Streetscape
Requirements).
(6) Buildings used for industrial uses that exceed 35 feet in height shall be set back an additional one foot from the front setback line
for each one foot of building height up to a maximum setback of 70 feet. The portion of the building used for offices are not subject
to this requirement.
(7) Heights over 75 feet may be permitted with a conditional use permit.
(8) For hotels and motels, the maximum floor area ratio is 1.0 (100 percent).
(9) Parking structures in the Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning Districts are exempt from floor area ratio
requirements.
(10) Conditional use permit approval by the city council is required for all industrial buildings larger than 75,000 square feet in gross
floor area. See Section 17.20.060 (Conditional use permit). A master plan is required for all industrial buildings larger than 450,000
square feet in gross floor area.
Page 268
Ordinance No. 988 – Page 6 of 6
SECTION 5. The City Council declares that, should any section, subsection,
subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance for any reason be held invalid
or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares
that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence,
clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections,
subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall
cause it to be published in the manner required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ______________, 2021.
_____________________________________
L. Dennis Michael
Mayor
I, JANICE REYNOLDS, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga held on the _____ day of _______________, 2021, and was finally
passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the
______ day of ______________, 2021, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ATTEST:______________________________
City Clerk
Page 269
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Linda C. Ceballos, Environmental Programs Manager
SUBJECT:Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 989, to be Read by Title
Only and Waive Further Reading Adding Chapter 8.15 (Mandatory
Organics Waste Disposal Reduction) To Title 8 Health and Safety of the
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, a Determination of Exemption
Under CEQA. (ORDINANCE NO. 989) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council consider first reading of Ordinance No. 989, adding
Chapter 8.15 (Mandatory Organics Waste Disposal Reduction) by title only and waive further
reading and make a determination of exemption under CEQA.
BACKGROUND:
Senate Bill 1383 (SB1383) was signed into law in September 2016 to help reduce short-lived
climate pollutants to address climate change. California Department of Resources Recycling and
Recovery (CalRecycle) has found that 50% of the waste California disposes in landfills is organic
waste. According to CalRecycle, twenty (20) percent of California’s methane emissions comes
from landfills and organics such as food scraps, yard trimmings, paper and cardboard. SB 1383
provides the opportunity for implementing widespread change and reduction in short-lived climate
pollutants.
SB1383 establishes a statewide target to reduce organic waste disposal by 50% by 2020, and
75% by 2025 along with a statewide target to redirect at least 20% of currently disposed edible
food to people in need. To meet these goals, CalRecycle developed prescriptive regulations
requiring local jurisdictions to adopt a mandatory and enforceable organics waste recycling
ordinance by January 1, 2022. In addition, local jurisdictions are required to:
Provide organic waste recycling services to all residents and businesses;
Implement an edible food recovery program that recovers edible food from the waste
stream;
Conduct outreach and education to all affected parties, including generators, haulers,
facilities, and edible food recovery organizations;
Procure recycled organic waste products like compost, mulch, and renewable natural
gas; and,
Maintain accurate and timely records of SB 1383 compliance for annual reporting
requirements; Monitor compliance and conduct enforcement of the City’s enforcement
ordinance.
Page 270
Page 2
1
0
3
9
CalRecycle’s regulations go into effect on January 1, 2022. However, SB1383 allows cities to take
an educational and non-punitive approach to enforcement for the first two years of the City’s
ordinance being in effect (2022 and 2023).
ANALYSIS:
The proposed ordinance is a critical element of the City’s efforts to comply with SB 1383 and the
corresponding CalRecycle regulations. The proposed ordinance addresses key elements of SB
1383 compliance, including the following:
Collection Services: All residences and commercial businesses, including multi-family
residential dwellings will be automatically enrolled in the City’s collection services for
trash, recycling, and green waste. Food waste generated by residents and businesses
will be collected in the black or gray trash container. Commercial businesses may apply
for de minimis and physical space waivers if their organic waste collected in the blue or
green containers is below a certain amount or the business does not have adequate
space for all the collection containers.
Commercial Edible Food Generators: These generators are required to recover the
maximum amount of edible food that would otherwise be disposed in the waste stream
and implement related programs. These generators are also required to maintain and
provide records to City staff regarding their edible food recovery efforts.
Food Recovery Organizations: These entities are required to maintain certain records
related to their food recovery efforts, report amounts of edible food recovered to the City
and provide information upon request to support the City’s food recovery capacity.
Haulers and Self Haulers: Haulers and Self-Haulers are required to transport trash,
recycling, and organic waste to the appropriate facility that will accept and process such
waste and to keep records of what they haul subject to inspection by the City.
Procurement Requirements for Direct Service Providers and Vendors: Direct services
providers and vendors of the City are required under the ordinance to comply with the
City’s procurement policy for organics.
Inspections and Investigations: The City or the City’s designee is authorized to conduct
investigations to confirm compliance. Regulated entities are required to provide access
and cooperate with City staff or the City designee during the process.
Enforcement: Violation of any provision of the chapter shall constitute grounds for
issuance of a penalty. Furthermore, fees may be assessed for container contamination.
Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) Compliance: Entities subject to
MWELO are required under the ordinance to, at a minimum, comply with certain
provisions of MWELO, in effect on September 15, 2015, including those related to
compost and mulch.
California Green Building Standards (CalGreen): Entities subject to CalGreen are
required under the ordinance to at a minimum comply with certain provisions of
CalGreen, as in effect on January 1, 2020, related to accommodating collection
containers and treatment of organics commingled with construction and demolition
debris.
If approved by City Council, the ordinance will go into effect thirty (30) days after its second
reading and passage.
On June 15, 2016 the City Council approved a new collection services franchise agreement
between the City and Burrtec Waste Industries. This franchise agreement became effective on
July 1, 2016 and addressed any current or future diversion programs such as SB1383 and the
Page 271
Page 3
1
0
3
9
corresponding CalRecycle regulations. Attached as “Attachment 2” is the SB1383 Short Lived
Climate Pollutants Program Overview prepared by Burrtec.
The City is also working to update its procurement policies to be consistent with the new organics
procurement requirements.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The passage of the ordinance alone will have no direct impact on solid waste service rates. As
mentioned above, compliance with SB1383 is mandated and monitored by the State of California.
Failure to meet implement SB1383 requirements could result in the assessment of fines on the
City. The proposed ordinance of the municipal code sets the framework and procedures identified
by staff to meet SB1383 requirements.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This ordinance intentionally embraces and anticipates the future and seeks to promote and
enhance a safe and healthy community for all by implementing SB1383 which seeks to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and address climate change through the diversion of organic waste
from landfills.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 Ordinance No. 989
Attachment 2 - Burrtec Waste Industries SB 1383 Short Lived Climate Pollutants Program
Page 272
Ordinance No. 989 – Page 1 of 26
ATTACHMENT #1
ORDINANCE NO. 989
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 8.15
(MANDATORY ORGANIC WASTE DISPOSAL
REDUCTION) TO TITLE 8 HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE, AND
MAKING A DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION UNDER
CEQA
SECTION 1. FINDINGS.
A. The City of RANCHO CUCAMONGA, California (“City”) is a municipal
corporation, duly organized under the constitution and laws of the State of California.
B. Assembly Bill (“AB”) 939 of 1989, the California Integrated Waste
Management Act of 1989 (Public Resources Code Section 40000, et seq., as amended,
supplemented, superseded and replaced from time to time and as implemented by
regulations of the California Department of Resources, Recycling and Recovery
(“CalRecycle”)), requires the City to reduce, reuse, and recycle (including composting),
solid waste generated in the City to the maximum extent feasible before any incineration
or landfill disposal of waste, to conserve water, energy, and other natural resources, and
to protect the environment.
C. AB 341 of 2011 places requirements on businesses, including multi-family
property owners with five or more dwelling units, that generate a specified threshold
amount of solid waste to arrange for recycling services and requires the City to implement
a mandatory commercial recycling program.
D. AB 1826 of 2014 requires businesses, including multi-family property
owners with five or more dwelling units, that generate a specified threshold amount of
solid waste, recycling, and organic waste per week to arrange for recycling services for
that waste, and requires the City to implement a mandatory commercial organics
recycling program for designated businesses and multi-family property owners.
E. AB 827 of 2019, with respect to certain businesses that offer products for
immediate consumption, imposes requirements for on-site recycling and organic waste
containers, including that these containers be placed adjacent to trash containers, be
visible, easily accessible, and clearly marked. AB 827 further provides that certain
businesses that arrange for gardening or landscaping services shall require the contract
or work agreement between the business and the gardening or landscaping service
require that the organic waste generated by those services be managed in compliance
with Chapter 12.8 of Part 3 of Division 30 of the California Public Resources Code.
Page 273
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 2 of 26
1
8
6
7
F. Senate Bill (“SB”) 1383 of 2016, the Short-lived Climate Pollutant Reduction
Act of 2016, requires CalRecycle to develop regulations to reduce organics in landfills as
a source of methane. These regulations, adopted in 2020 (“SB 1383 Regulations”), place
requirements on multiple entities including the City; single-family residential households;
commercial businesses, including multi-family property owners with five or more dwelling
units; commercial edible food generators; haulers, including self-haulers; food recovery
organizations; and food recovery services to support achievement of statewide organic
waste disposal reduction targets.
G. The SB 1383 Regulations require the City to adopt and enforce an
ordinance or other enforceable mechanism to implement relevant provisions of the SB
1383 Regulations.
H. This Ordinance implements the requirements of the SB 1383 Regulations.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 2. ORDINANCE.
Title 8 (Health and Safety) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended
to add Chapter 8.15 (Mandatory Organic Waste Disposal Reduction) to read as follows:
“8.15 – Mandatory Organic Waste Disposal Reduction
8.15.010 Definitions
For the purposes of this chapter, the following words, terms, phrases, and their
derivations have the meanings given herein. Terms not defined in this section and
defined elsewhere in this Code shall have the same meanings herein unless the context
otherwise requires. When consistent with the context, words used in the present tense
include the future tense, and words in the singular number include the plural number. In
the event of a conflict between a definition in this Code and a definition in 14 CCR Section
18982, the definitions in Section 18982 shall control for the purposes of this chapter.
Additionally, for the purposes of this chapter, the definitions in 14 CCR Section 18982
shall control for terms used in this chapter and not defined in this Code. Unless otherwise
specified herein, references to a statute or regulation means the statute or regulation, as
amended, supplemented, superseded, and replaced from time to time.
“Back-Haul” means generating and transporting Organic Waste to a destination owned
and operated by the Generator using the Generator’s own employees and equipment; or,
as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(66)(A).
“Blue Container” has the same meaning as in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(5) and shall be
used only for the purpose of storage and collection of Source Separated Recyclable
Materials. Notwithstanding the foregoing, functional containers purchased prior to
January 1, 2022 that are used for the storage and collection of Source Separated
Recyclable Materials and that do not comply with the color requirements of 14 CCR
Page 274
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 3 of 26
1
8
6
7
Section 18982(a)(5) shall be deemed to be Blue Containers and are not required to be
replaced until the end of the useful life of those containers or January 1, 2036, whichever
is earlier.
“Black Container” has the same meaning as in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(28) and shall
be used only for the purpose of storage and collection of Black Container Waste.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, functional containers purchased prior to January 1, 2022
that are used for the storage and collection of Black Container Waste and that do not
comply with the color requirements of 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(28) shall be deemed to
be Black Containers and are not required to be replaced until the end of the useful life of
those containers or January 1, 2036, whichever is earlier.
“Black Container Waste” means Solid Waste that is collected in a Black Container that is
part of the City’s three-container Organic Waste collection service that prohibits the
placement of Organic Waste in the Black Container as specified in 14 CCR Sections
18984.1(a) and (b); or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 17402(a)(6.5).
Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, Black Container Waste includes carpets and
textiles.
“Brown Container” has the same meaning as in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(5.5) and shall
be used only for the purpose of storage and collection of Source Separated Food Waste.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, functional containers purchased prior to January 1, 2022
that are used for the storage and collection of Source Separated Food Waste and that do
not comply with the color requirements of 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(5.5) shall be deemed
to be Brown Containers and are not required to be replaced until the end of the useful life
of those containers or January 1, 2036, whichever is earlier.
“CalRecycle” means the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery,
which is the Department designated with responsibility for developing, implementing, and
enforcing SB 1383 Regulations on the City (and others).
“California Code of Regulations” or “CCR” means the State of California Code of
Regulations. CCR references in this chapter are preceded with a number that refers to
the relevant title of the CCR (e.g., “14 CCR” refers to Title 14 of the CCR).
“City” means the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
“City Manager” means the City Manager of the City or his/her designee.
“Collection Agreement” means an agreement approved by the city council pursuant to
section 8.17.040 of this Code, authorizing a solid waste enterprise to provide solid waste
and recyclables collection services within all or any part of the territory of the city.
“Commercial Business” or “Commercial” means a firm, partnership, proprietorship, joint-
stock company, corporation, or association, whether for-profit or nonprofit, strip mall,
industrial facility, or a Multi-Family Residential Dwelling; or, as otherwise defined in 14
CCR Section 18982(a)(6). A multi-family residential dwelling that consists of fewer than
Page 275
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 4 of 26
1
8
6
7
five (5) dwelling units is not a Commercial Business for purposes of implementing this
chapter.
“Commercial Edible Food Generator” includes a Tier One or a Tier Two Commercial
Edible Food Generator as defined herein. For the purposes of this definition, Food
Recovery Organizations and Food Recovery Services are not Commercial Edible Food
Generators pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(7).
“Community Composting” means any activity that composts green material, agricultural
material, food material, and vegetative food material, alone or in combination, and the
total amount of feedstock and Compost on-site at any one time does not exceed 100
cubic yards and 750 square feet, as specified in 14 CCR Section 17855(a)(4); or, as
otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(8).
“Compost” means the product resulting from the controlled biological decomposition of
organic Solid Wastes that are Source Separated from the municipal solid waste stream,
as specified in 14 CCR Section 17896.2(a)(4).
“Container Contamination” or “Contaminated Container” means a container, regardless
of color, that contains Prohibited Container Contaminants; or, as otherwise defined in 14
CCR Section 18982(a)(55).
“County” means the County of San Bernardino.
“C&D” means discarded or used materials removed from construction, remodeling, repair,
demolition, or renovation operations on any pavement, house, commercial building, or
other structure, or from landscaping; or, as otherwise defined in Section 8.19.020 of this
code.
“Designee” means an entity that the City contracts with or otherwise arranges to carry out
any of the City’s responsibilities of this chapter as authorized in 14 CCR Section 18981.2;
or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(15). A Designee may be a
government entity, a hauler, a private entity, or a combination of those entities.
“Edible Food” means food intended for human consumption; or, as otherwise defined in
14 CCR Section 18982(a)(18). For the purposes of this chapter or as otherwise defined
in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(18), “Edible Food” is not Solid Waste if it is recovered and
not discarded. Nothing in this chapter or in 14 CCR, Division 7, Chapter 12 requires or
authorizes the Recovery of Edible Food that does not meet the food safety requirements
of the State Retail Food Code.
“Enforcement Action" means an action of the City to address non-compliance with this
chapter including, but not limited to, issuing administrative citations, fines, penalties, or
using other remedies; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(19).
“Enforcement Official” means the City Manager or the City’s authorized Designee(s) who
is/are partially or wholly responsible for enforcing this chapter.
Page 276
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 5 of 26
1
8
6
7
“Excluded Waste” means hazardous substance, hazardous waste, infectious waste,
designated waste, volatile, corrosive, medical waste, infectious, regulated radioactive
waste, and toxic substances or material that facility operator(s), which receive materials
from the City and its Generators, reasonably believe(s) would, as a result of or upon
acceptance, transfer, processing, or disposal, be a violation of local, State, or Federal
law, regulation, or ordinance, including: land use restrictions or conditions, waste that
cannot be disposed of in Class III landfills or accepted at the facility by permit conditions,
waste that in the City’s Enforcement Official’s or its Designee’s, reasonable opinion would
present a significant risk to human health or the environment, cause a nuisance or
otherwise create or expose the City, or its Designee, to potential liability; but not including
de minimis volumes or concentrations of waste of a type and amount normally found in
Single-Family or Multi-Family Solid Waste after implementation of programs for the safe
collection, processing, recycling, treatment, and disposal of batteries and paint in
compliance with Sections 41500 and 41802 of the State Public Resources Code.
“Food Distributor” means a company that distributes food to entities including, but not
limited to, Supermarkets and Grocery Stores; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section
18982(a)(22).
“Food Facility” has the same meaning as in Section 113789 of the State Health and Safety
Code.
“Food Recovery” means actions to collect and distribute food for human consumption that
otherwise would be disposed; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(24).
“Food Recovery Organization,” unless otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section
18982(a)(25), means an entity that engages in the collection or receipt of Edible Food
from Commercial Edible Food Generators and distributes that Edible Food to the public
for Food Recovery either directly or through other entities, including, but not limited to:
1. A food bank as defined in Section 113783 of the State Health and Safety
Code;
2. A nonprofit charitable organization as defined in Section 113841 of the State
Health and Safety code; and
3. A nonprofit charitable temporary food facility as defined in Section 113842
of the State Health and Safety Code.
A Food Recovery Organization is not a Commercial Edible Food Generator for the
purposes of this chapter and implementation of 14 CCR, Division 7, Chapter 12 pursuant
to 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(7).
“Food Recovery Service” means a person or entity that collects and transports Edible
Food from a Commercial Edible Food Generator to a Food Recovery Organization or
other entities for Food Recovery; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section
18982(a)(26). A Food Recovery Service is not a Commercial Edible Food Generator for
Page 277
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 6 of 26
1
8
6
7
the purposes of this chapter and implementation of 14 CCR, Division 7, Chapter 12
pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(7).
“Food Scraps” means all food such as, but not limited to, fruits, vegetables, meat, poultry,
seafood, shellfish, bones, rice, beans, pasta, bread, cheese, and eggshells. Food Scraps
excludes fats, oils, grease, and liquids, including, but not limited to broth and beverages,
when such materials are Source Separated from other Food Scraps.
“Food Service Provider” means an entity primarily engaged in providing food services to
institutional, governmental, Commercial, or industrial locations of others based on
contractual arrangements with these types of organizations; or, as otherwise defined in
14 CCR Section 18982(a)(27).
“Food-Soiled Paper” means compostable paper material that has come in contact with
food or liquid, such as, but not limited to, compostable paper plates, paper coffee cups,
napkins, pizza boxes, and milk cartons.
“Food Waste” means Food Scraps but does not include Food Soiled Paper or
Compostable Plastics unless otherwise specified by the City.
“Generator” means a person or entity that is responsible for the initial creation of Solid
Waste, and with respect to Organic Waste, means a person or entity that is responsible
for the initial creation of Organic Waste; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section
18982(a)(48).
“Green Container” has the same meaning as in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(29) and shall
be used only for the purpose of storage and collection of Source Separated Green
Container Organic Waste. Notwithstanding the foregoing, functional containers
purchased prior to January 1, 2022 that are used for the storage and collection of Source
Separated Green Container Organic Waste and that do not comply with the color
requirements of 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(29) shall be deemed to be Green Containers
and are not required to be replaced until the end of the useful life of those containers or
January 1, 2036, whichever is earlier.
“Grocery Store” means a store primarily engaged in the retail sale of canned food; dry
goods; fresh fruits and vegetables; fresh meats, fish, and poultry; and any area that is not
separately owned within the store where the food is prepared and served, including a
bakery, deli, and meat and seafood departments; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR
Section 18982(a)(30).
“Hauler Route” means the designated itinerary or sequence of stops for each segment of
the City’s collection service area; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section
18982(a)(31.5).
“High Diversion Organic Waste Processing Facility” means a facility that is in compliance
with the reporting requirements of 14 CCR Section 18815.5(d) and meets or exceeds an
annual average mixed waste organic content recovery rate of 50 percent between
Page 278
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 7 of 26
1
8
6
7
January 1, 2022 and December 31, 2024, and 75 percent after January 1, 2025, as
calculated pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18815.5(e) for Organic Waste received from the
“Mixed Waste Organic Collection Stream” as defined in 14 CCR Section 17402(a)(11.5);
or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(33).
“Inspection” means a site visit where the City or its Designee reviews records, containers,
and an entity’s collection, handling, recycling, or landfill disposal of Organic Waste or
Edible Food handling to determine if the entity is complying with requirements set forth in
this chapter; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(35).
“Landscape Waste” means tree and shrubbery trimmings, vegetation from land clearing,
grass cuttings, leaves, garden organic materials, sawdust, straw, wood chips, and other
discarded plant or vegetation material.
“Large Event” means an event, including, but not limited to, a sporting event or a flea
market, that charges an admission price, or is operated by a local agency, and serves an
average of more than 2,000 individuals per day of operation of the event, at a location
that includes, but is not limited to, a public, nonprofit, or privately owned park, parking lot,
golf course, street system, or other open space when being used for an event; or, as
otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(38).
“Large Venue,” unless otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(39), means a
permanent venue facility that annually seats or serves an average of more than 2,000
individuals within the grounds of the facility per day of operation of the venue facility. For
purposes of this chapter and implementation of 14 CCR, Division 7, Chapter 12, a venue
facility includes, but is not limited to, a public, nonprofit, or privately owned or operated
stadium, amphitheater, arena, hall, amusement park, conference or civic center, zoo,
aquarium, airport, racetrack, horse track, performing arts center, fairground, museum,
theater, or other public attraction facility. For purposes of this chapter and implementation
of 14 CCR, Division 7, Chapter 12, a site under common ownership or control that
includes more than one Large Venue that is contiguous with other Large Venues in the
site, is a single Large Venue.
“Local Education Agency” means a school district, charter school, or county office of
education that is not subject to the control of the City’s regulations related to Solid Waste;
or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(40).
“Multi-Family Residential Dwelling(s)” or “Multi-Family” means of, from, or pertaining to
residential premises with five (5) or more dwelling units. Multi-Family premises do not
include hotels, motels, or other transient occupancy facilities, which are considered
Commercial Businesses.
“MWELO” refers to the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, 23 CCR, Division 2,
Chapter 2.7.
Page 279
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 8 of 26
1
8
6
7
“Non-Compostable Paper” includes, but is not limited to, paper that is coated in a plastic
material that will not breakdown in the composting process; or, as otherwise defined in
14 CCR Section 18982(a)(41).
“Non-Local Entity” means the following entities that are not subject to the City’s
enforcement authority; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(42):
1. Special district(s) located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City;
2. Federal facilities, including military installations, located within the
jurisdictional boundaries of the City;
3. Prison(s) located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City;
4. Facilities operated by the State park system located within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the City;
5. Public universities (including community colleges) located within the
jurisdictional boundaries of the City;
6. County fairgrounds located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City;
and
7. State agencies located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City.
“Non-Organic Recyclables” means non-putrescible and non-hazardous recyclable wastes
including, but not limited to, bottles, cans, metals, plastics and glass; or, as otherwise
defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(43).
“Notice of Violation” or “NOV” means a notice that a violation has occurred that includes
a compliance date to avoid an action to seek penalties; or, as otherwise defined in 14
CCR Section 18982(a)(45) or further explained in 14 CCR Section 18995.4.
“Organic Waste” means Solid Waste containing material originated from living organisms
and their metabolic waste products, including, but not limited to, food, green material,
landscape and pruning waste, organic textiles and carpets, lumber, wood, Paper
Products, Printing and Writing Paper, manure, biosolids, digestate, and sludges; or, as
otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(46). Biosolids and digestate are as
defined by 14 CCR Section 18982(a).
“Paper Products” include, but are not limited to, paper janitorial supplies, cartons,
wrapping, packaging, file folders, hanging files, corrugated boxes, tissue, and toweling;
or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(51).
“Printing and Writing Papers” include, but are not limited to, copy, xerographic,
watermark, cotton fiber, offset, forms, computer printout paper, white wove envelopes,
manila envelopes, book paper, note pads, writing tablets, newsprint, and other uncoated
Page 280
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 9 of 26
1
8
6
7
writing papers, posters, index cards, calendars, brochures, reports, magazines, and
publications; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(54).
“Prohibited Container Contaminants,” unless otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section
18982(a)(55), means the following:
1. Discarded materials placed in the Blue Container that are not identified by
the City as acceptable Source Separated Recyclable Materials for the Blue
Container;
2. Discarded materials placed in the Brown Container that are not identified as
acceptable Food Waste for the City’s Brown Container;
3. Discarded materials placed in the Green Container that are not identified by
the City as acceptable Source Separated Green Container Organic Waste
for the Green Container, including carpet, hazardous wood waste and Non-
Compostable Paper;
4. Discarded materials placed in the Black Container that are identified by the
City as acceptable Source Separated Recyclable Materials to be placed in
the Blue Container or Source Separated Green Container Organic Waste
to be placed in the City’s Green Container; and,
5. Excluded Waste placed in any container.
“Recovery” means any activity or process described in 14 CCR Section 18983.1(b); or,
as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(49).
“Recycled-Content Paper” means Paper Products and Printing and Writing Papers that
consist of at least 30 percent, by fiber weight, postconsumer fiber; or, as otherwise defined
in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(61).
“Restaurant” means an establishment primarily engaged in the retail sale of food and
drinks for on-premises or immediate consumption; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR
Section 18982(a)(64).
“SB 1383” means Senate Bill 1383 of 2016 approved by the Governor of the State on
September 19, 2016, which added Sections 39730.5, 39730.6, 39730.7, and 39730.8 to
the State Health and Safety Code, and added Chapter 13.1 (commencing with Section
42652) to Part 3 of Division 30 of the State Public Resources Code, establishing methane
emissions reduction targets in a Statewide effort to reduce emissions of short-lived
climate pollutants.
“SB 1383 Regulations” means the Short-Lived Climate Pollutants: Organic Waste
Reduction regulations developed by CalRecycle and adopted in 2020 that created 14
CCR, Division 7, Chapter 12 and amended portions of 14 CCR and 27 CCR.
Page 281
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 10 of 26
1
8
6
7
“Self-Hauler” means a person or entity, who, in compliance with all applicable
requirements of this Code, hauls Solid Waste, Organic Waste or recyclable materials he
or she has generated to another person or entity; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR
Section 18982(a)(66). Self-Hauler also includes a person or entity who Back-Hauls
waste.
“Single-Family” means of, from, or pertaining to any residential premises with fewer than
five (5) units.
“Solid Waste” unless otherwise defined in State Public Resources Code Section 40191,
means all putrescible and nonputrescible solid, semisolid, and liquid wastes, including
garbage, trash, refuse, paper, rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes, demolition and
construction wastes, abandoned vehicles and parts thereof, discarded home and
industrial appliances, dewatered, treated, or chemically fixed sewage sludge which is not
hazardous waste, manure, vegetable or animal solid and semi-solid wastes, and other
discarded solid and semisolid wastes, with the exception that Solid Waste does not
include any of the following wastes:
1. Hazardous waste, as defined in the State Public Resources Code Section
40141;
2. Radioactive waste regulated pursuant to the Radiation Control Law
(Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 114960) of Part 9 of Division 104 of
the State Health and Safety Code); and,
3. Medical waste regulated pursuant to the Medical Waste Management Act
(Part 14 (commencing with Section 117600) of Division 104 of the State
Health and Safety Code). Untreated medical waste shall not be disposed
of in a Solid Waste landfill, as defined in State Public Resources Code
Section 40195.1. Medical waste that has been treated and deemed to be
Solid Waste shall be regulated pursuant to Division 30 of the State Public
Resources Code.
“Source Separated” means materials, including commingled recyclable materials, that
have been separated or kept separate from the Solid Waste stream, at the point of
generation, for the purpose of additional sorting or processing those materials for
recycling or reuse in order to return them to the economic mainstream in the form of raw
material for new, reused, or reconstituted products, which meet the quality standards
necessary to be used in the marketplace; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section
17402.5(b)(4). For the purposes of this chapter, Source Separated shall include
separation of materials, at the point of generation, by the Generator, property owner,
property owner’s employee, property manager, or property manager’s employee into
different containers for the purpose of collection such that Source Separated materials
are separated from Black Container Waste or other Solid Waste for the purposes of
collection and processing of those materials.
Page 282
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 11 of 26
1
8
6
7
“Source Separated Blue Container Organic Waste” means Source Separated Organic
Waste that can be placed in a Blue Container that is limited to the collection of that
Organic Waste and Non-Organic Recyclables. Source Separated Blue Container
Organic Waste includes Paper Products, Printing and Writing Papers, unless otherwise
specified by the City, but excludes Source Separated Green Container Organic Waste
and Food Waste.
“Source Separated Green Container Organic Waste” means Source Separated Organic
Waste that can be placed in a Green Container that is limited to the collection of that
Organic Waste; or as otherwise specified in 14 CCR 18984.1 (a) and (b), excluding
Source Separated Blue Container Organic Waste, carpets, Non-Compostable Paper, and
textiles. For purposes of Single-Family Generators, Source Separated Green Container
Organic Waste includes Food Waste. For purposes of Commercial Businesses, including
Multi-Family Residential Dwellings, Source Separated Green Container Organic Waste
excludes Food Waste.
“Source Separated Recyclable Materials” means Source Separated Non-Organic
Recyclables and Source Separated Blue Container Organic Waste.
“State” means the State of California.
“Supermarket” means a full-line, self-service retail store with gross annual sales of two
million dollars ($2,000,000), or more, and which sells a line of dry grocery, canned goods,
or nonfood items and some perishable items; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section
18982(a)(71).
“Tier One Commercial Edible Food Generator” means a Commercial Edible Food
Generator that is one of the following; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section
18982(a)(73):
1. Supermarket;
2. Grocery Store with a total facility size equal to or greater than 10,000 square
feet;
3. Food Service Provider;
4. Food Distributor; or,
5. Wholesale Food Vendor.
“Tier Two Commercial Edible Food Generator” means a Commercial Edible Food
Generator that is one of the following; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section
18982(a)(73):
1. Restaurant with 250 or more seats, or a total facility size equal to or greater
than 5,000 square feet;
Page 283
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 12 of 26
1
8
6
7
2. Hotel with an on-site Food Facility and 200 or more rooms;
3. Health facility with an on-site Food Facility and 100 or more beds;
4. Large Venue;
5. Large Event;
6. A State agency with a cafeteria with 250 or more seats or total cafeteria
facility size equal to or greater than 5,000 square feet; or
7. A Local Education Agency facility with an on-site Food Facility.
“Uncontainerized Service” means the seasonal collection of Landscape Waste that is
bundled for collection on the street in front of a Generator’s house for collection and
transport by a permitted hauler to a facility that recovers Source Separated Organic
Waste; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 189852(a)(75).
“Wholesale Food Vendor” means a business or establishment engaged in the merchant
wholesale distribution of food, where food (including fruits and vegetables) is received,
shipped, stored, prepared for distribution to a retailer, warehouse, distributor, or other
destination; or, as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 189852(a)(76).
8.15.020. Organic Waste Generators, haulers and other entities that are subject to the
requirements of SB 1383 and the SB 1383 Regulations and the City’s authority shall fully
comply with all applicable requirements of SB 1383, the SB 1383 Regulations, this
chapter, and the provisions of any Collection Agreement between the City and a
franchised hauler in effect. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of this chapter
and other provisions of this Code, the provisions of this chapter shall control. In the event
of a conflict between the provisions of the SB 1383 Regulations and the provisions of this
chapter, the SB 1383 Regulations shall control.
8.15.030 Requirements for Single-Family Organic Waste Generators
Single-Family Organic Waste Generators shall comply with the following requirements,
except Single-Family Generators that meet the Self-Hauler requirements of this Code,
including Section 8.17.050 and Section 8.15.090:
A. Subscribe to the City’s three-container Organic Waste collection service(s) for all
Organic Waste generated as described in subsection B. of this section. The City
shall have the right to review the number and size of a Generator’s containers to
evaluate adequacy of capacity provided for each type of collection service for
proper separation of materials and containment of materials; and Single-Family
Generators shall adjust their service level for their collection services as requested
by the City. Nothing in this section prohibits Generators from additionally managing
their Organic Waste by preventing or reducing their Organic Waste, managing
Page 284
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 13 of 26
1
8
6
7
Organic Waste on site, using the City’s Uncontainerized Service, and/or using a
Community Composting site pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18984.9(c).
B. Participate in the City’s Organic Waste collection service(s) by placing designated
materials in designated containers as described in this subsection, and not placing
Prohibited Container Contaminants in collection containers. Generators shall place
Source Separated Green Container Organic Waste, including Food Waste, in the
Green Container; Source Separated Recyclable Materials (which includes Source
Separated Non-Organic Recyclables and Source Separated Blue Container
Waste) in the Blue Container; and Black Container Waste in the Black Container.
Generators shall not place materials designated for the Black Container into the
Green Container or Blue Container.
8.15.040 Requirements for Commercial Organic Waste Generators and Commercial
Businesses
Commercial Organic Waste Generators and Commercial Businesses shall comply with
the following requirements:
A. Except for Commercial Organic Waste Generators that meet the Self-Hauler
requirements of Section 8.17.050 and Section 8.15.090, Commercial Organic
Waste Generators, including Multi-Family Residential Dwellings, shall subscribe to
the City’s four-container Organic Waste collection service(s) and comply with
requirements of those service(s) as described below in subsection B. of this
section. The City shall have the right to review the number and size of a
Generator’s containers and frequency of collection to evaluate adequacy of
capacity provided for each type of collection service for proper separation of
materials and containment of materials; and Commercial Businesses shall adjust
their service level for their collection services as requested by the City. Nothing in
this section prohibits Generators from additionally managing their Organic Waste
by preventing or reducing their Organic Waste, managing Organic Waste on site,
and/or using a Community Composting site pursuant to 14 CCR Section
18984.9(c).
B. Except for Commercial Organic Waste Generators that meet the Self-Hauler
requirements of this Code, Commercial Organic Waste Generators, including
Multi-Family Residential Dwellings, shall participate in the City’s Organic Waste
collection service(s) by placing designated materials in designated containers as
described in this subsection, and not placing Prohibited Container Contaminants
in containers. Generators shall place Food Waste in Brown Container; Source
Separated Green Container Organic Waste, which excludes Food Waste, in the
Green Container; Source Separated Recyclable Materials (which includes Source
Separated Non-Organic Recyclables and Source Separated Blue Container
Waste) in the Blue Container; and Black Container Waste in the Black Container.
Generators shall not place materials designated for the Black Container into the
Brown Container, Green Container, or Blue Container.
Page 285
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 14 of 26
1
8
6
7
C. Commercial Organic Waste Generators, except for Multi-Family Residential
Dwellings, shall provide containers for the collection of Organic Waste and Non-
Organic Recyclables in all indoor and outdoor areas where disposal containers are
provided for customers. Such containers shall be visible and easily accessible.
Such containers do not need to be provided in restrooms. If a Commercial
Business does not generate any of the materials that would be collected in one
type of container, then the business does not have to provide that particular
container in all areas where disposal containers are provided for customers.
Pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18984.9(b), the containers provided by the business
shall have either:
1. A body or lid that conforms with the container colors provided through the
Organic Waste collection service provided by the City. A Commercial
Business is not required to replace functional containers, including
containers purchased prior to January 1, 2022, that do not comply with the
requirements of this subsection prior to the end of the useful life of those
containers, or prior to January 1, 2036, whichever comes first.
2. Container labels that include language or graphic images, or both, indicating
the primary material accepted and the primary materials prohibited in that
container, or containers with imprinted text or graphic images that indicate
the primary materials accepted and primary materials prohibited in the
container; or as otherwise provided in 14 CCR Section 18984.8.
D. Commercial Organic Waste Generators, including Multi-Family Residential
Dwellings, shall supply and allow access to adequate number, size and location of
collection containers with sufficient labels or colors (conforming to subsections C.1
and C.2 above) for employees, contractors, tenants, and customers, consistent
with the City’s collection service and Article 3 of Chapter 12 of Division 7 of Title
14 of the CCR.
E. Commercial Organic Waste Generators, except for Multi-Family Residential
Dwellings, shall prohibit employees from placing materials in a container not
designated for those materials per the City’s Blue Container, Brown Container,
Green Container, and Black Container collection service.
F. Commercial Organic Waste Generators, except for Multi-Family Residential
Dwellings, shall periodically inspect Blue Containers, Brown Containers, Green
Containers, and Black Containers for contamination and inform employees if
containers are contaminated and of the requirements to keep contaminants out of
those containers pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18984.9(b)(3).
G. Commercial Businesses, including Multi-Family Residential Dwellings, shall
annually provide information to employees, contractors, tenants, and customers
about Organic Waste Recovery requirements and about proper sorting of Food
Waste, Source Separated Green Container Organic Waste and Source Separated
Recyclable Materials.
Page 286
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 15 of 26
1
8
6
7
H. Commercial Businesses, including Multi-Family Residential Dwellings, shall
provide information as described in subsection G. in this Section before or within
fourteen (14) days of occupation of the premises to new tenants.
i. Commercial Businesses, including Multi-Family Residential Dwellings, shall
provide or arrange access for the City or its agent to their properties during all
Inspections conducted in accordance with Section 8.15.130 to confirm compliance
with the requirements of this Section.
J. If a Commercial Business wants to self-haul, meet the Self-Hauler requirements of
this Code, including Section 8.17.050, and Section 8.15.090.
K. Commercial Organic Waste Generators, including Multi-Family Residential
Dwellings, if generating two (2) cubic yards or more of total Solid Waste per week
(or other threshold defined by the State), shall require that any contract or work
agreement between the owner, occupant, or operator of the Commercial Business
and a gardening, landscaping, or tree trimming service specify that the Organic
Waste generated by those services be managed in compliance with Chapter 12,
Part 3, Division 30 of the Public Resources Code.
L. Commercial Businesses that are Tier One or Tier Two Commercial Edible Food
Generators shall comply with Food Recovery requirements, pursuant to Section
8.15.060.
M. Nothing in this Section shall be construed as classifying customers as commercial,
residential, single family dwellings, or multi-family dwellings, for purposes of
implementing a Collection Agreement between the City and a franchised hauler.
8.15.050. Waivers for Generators
The City, at its discretion and in accordance with 14 CCR Section 18984.11, or as
otherwise authorized by CalRecycle, may grant one or more of the following types of
waivers to a Generator of Organic Waste:
A. De Minimis Waivers. The City may waive a Commercial Business’ (including Multi-
Family Residential Dwellings) obligations to comply with some or all of the Organic
Waste requirements of this chapter if the Commercial Business provides
documentation, or the City has evidence demonstrating, that the Commercial
Business generates below a certain amount of Organic Waste material as
described below in subsection A.2. Commercial Businesses requesting a de
minimis waiver shall:
1. Submit an application specifying the services that they are requesting a
waiver from and provide documentation as noted in subsection A.2. below.
2. Provide documentation that either:
Page 287
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 16 of 26
1
8
6
7
a. The Commercial Business’ total Solid Waste collection service is two
cubic yards or more per week and Organic Waste subject to
collection in a Blue Container, Brown Container or Green Container
comprises less than 20 gallons per week per applicable container of
the business’ total waste; or,
b. The Commercial Business’ total Solid Waste collection service is less
than two cubic yards per week and Organic Waste subject to
collection in a Blue Container, Brown Container or Green Container
comprises less than 10 gallons per week per applicable container of
the business’ total waste.
3. Notify the City if circumstances change such that the Commercial Business’
Organic Waste exceeds the threshold required for waiver, in which case the
waiver will be rescinded. In addition, if the City determines at any time that
a Commercial Business that has received a waiver is exceeding the Organic
Waste thresholds set forth in subsection A.2. above, the City shall rescind
the waiver.
4. Provide written verification of eligibility for a de minimis waiver every 5
years, if the City has approved a de minimis waiver.
B. Physical Space Waivers. The City may waive a Commercial Business’ (including
Multi-Family Residential Dwellings) or property owner’s obligations to comply with
some or all of the Organic Waste collection service requirements of this chapter if
the City has evidence from its own staff, a hauler, licensed architect, or licensed
engineer demonstrating that the premises lacks adequate space for the collection
containers required for compliance with the Organic Waste collection requirements
of this chapter.
Commercial Businesses or property owners requesting a physical space waiver
shall:
1. Submit an application form specifying the type(s) of collection services for
which they are requesting a compliance waiver and provide documentation
as noted below.
2. Provide documentation that the premises lack adequate space for Blue
Containers, Brown, and/or Green Containers including documentation from
its hauler, licensed architect, or licensed engineer.
3. Notify the City if circumstances change such that Commercial Business has
adequate space for the collection containers required for compliance with
the Organic Waste collection requirements of Section 8.15.040, in which
case the waiver will be rescinded. In addition, if the City determines at any
time that a Commercial Business that has adequate space for the collection
Page 288
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 17 of 26
1
8
6
7
containers required for compliance with the Organic Waste collection
requirements of Section 8.15.040, the City shall rescind the waiver.
4. Provide written verification to the City that it is still eligible for a physical
space waiver every five years, if the City has approved an application for a
physical space waiver.
D. The Enforcement Official will be responsible for review and approval of waivers.
8.15.060. Requirements for Commercial Edible Food Generators
A. Tier One Commercial Edible Food Generators must comply with the requirements
of this Section, and Tier Two Commercial Edible Food Generators must comply
with the requirements of this Section commencing January 1, 2024, pursuant to 14
CCR Section 18991.3.
B. Large Venue or Large Event operators, not providing food services, but allowing
for food to be provided by others, shall require Food Facilities operating at the
Large Venue or Large Event to comply with the requirements of this Section,
commencing January 1, 2024.
C. Commercial Edible Food Generators shall comply with the following requirements:
1. Arrange to recover the maximum amount of Edible Food that would
otherwise be disposed.
2. Contract with or enter into a written agreement with Food Recovery
Organizations or Food Recovery Services for:
a. The collection of Edible Food for Food Recovery; or,
b. Acceptance of the Edible Food that the Commercial Edible Food
Generator self-hauls to the Food Recovery Organization for Food
Recovery.
3. Shall not intentionally spoil Edible Food that is capable of being recovered
by a Food Recovery Organization or a Food Recovery Service.
4. Allow the City’s designated enforcement entity or designated third party
enforcement entity to access the premises and review records kept
pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18991.4.
5. Keep records that include the following information, or as otherwise
specified in 14 CCR Section 18991.4:
a. A list of each Food Recovery Service or Food Recovery Organization
that collects or receives its Edible Food pursuant to a contract or
written agreement established under 14 CCR Section 18991.3(b).
Page 289
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 18 of 26
1
8
6
7
b. A copy of all contracts or written agreements established under 14
CCR Section 18991.3(b).
c. A record of the following information for each of those Food Recovery
Services or Food Recovery Organizations:
1. The name, address and contact information of the Food
Recovery Service or Food Recovery Organization.
ii. The types of food that will be collected by or self-hauled to the
Food Recovery Service or Food Recovery Organization.
iii. The established frequency that food will be collected or self-
hauled.
iv. The quantity of food, measured in pounds recovered per
month, collected or self-hauled to a Food Recovery Service or
Food Recovery Organization for Food Recovery.
D. If the Enforcement Official makes a request, then within 30 days of the request,
Tier One Commercial Edible Foods Generators and Tier Two Commercial Edible
Food Generators shall provide a Food Recovery report to the City that includes the
following information:
1. A copy of all contracts or written agreements established under 14
CCR Section 18991.3(b).
2. The quantity of food, measured in annual pounds recovered,
collected or self-hauled to a Food Recovery Service or Food
Recovery Organization for Food Recovery.
3. The name, address and contact information of the Food Recovery
Service or Food Recovery Organization.
4. Any additional information required by the City or the City’s
Designee.
E. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to limit or conflict with the protections
provided by the California Good Samaritan Food Donation Act of 2017, the Federal
Good Samaritan Act, or share table and school food donation guidance pursuant
to Senate Bill 557 of 2017 (approved by the Governor of the State on September
25, 2017, which added Article 13 (commencing with Section 49580) to Chapter 9
of Part 27 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the State Education Code, and amended
Section 114079 of the State Health and Safety Code, relating to food safety, as
amended, supplemented, superseded and replaced from time to time.)
8.15.070. Requirements for Food Recovery Organizations and Services
Page 290
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 19 of 26
1
8
6
7
A. Food Recovery Services collecting or receiving Edible Food directly from
Commercial Edible Food Generators, via a contract or written agreement
established under 14 CCR Section 18991.3(b), shall maintain the following
records, or as otherwise specified by 14 CCR Section 18991.5(a)(1):
1. The name, address, and contact information for each Commercial Edible
Food Generator from which the service collects Edible Food.
2. The quantity in pounds of Edible Food collected from each Commercial
Edible Food Generator per month.
3. The quantity in pounds of Edible Food transported to each Food Recovery
Organization per month.
4. The name, address, and contact information for each Food Recovery
Organization that the Food Recovery Service transports Edible Food to for
Food Recovery.
B. Food Recovery Organizations collecting or receiving Edible Food directly from
Commercial Edible Food Generators, via a contract or written agreement
established under 14 CCR Section 18991.3(b), shall maintain the following
records, or as otherwise specified by 14 CCR Section 18991.5(a)(2):
1. The name, address, and contact information for each Commercial Edible
Food Generator from which the organization receives Edible Food.
2. The quantity in pounds of Edible Food received from each Commercial
Edible Food Generator per month.
3. The name, address, and contact information for each Food Recovery
Service that the organization receives Edible Food from for Food Recovery.
C. If the Enforcement Official makes a request, then within 30 days of the request,
Food Recovery Organizations and Food Recovery Services that have their primary
address physically located in the City and contract with or have written agreements
with one or more Commercial Edible Food Generators pursuant to 14 CCR Section
18991.3(b) shall report to the City the total pounds of Edible Food recovered in the
previous calendar year from the Tier One and Tier Two Commercial Edible Food
Generators they have established a contract or written agreement with pursuant
to 14 CCR Section 18991.3(b).
D. Food Recovery Organizations and Food Recovery Services shall inform
Generators about State and Federal Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
protection in written communications, such as in their contract or agreement
established under 14 CCR Section 18991.3(b).
E. Food Recovery Capacity Planning--Food Recovery Services and Food Recovery
Organizations.
Page 291
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 20 of 26
1
8
6
7
In order to support the City’s cooperation with the County of San Bernardino in its
conduct of Edible Food Recovery capacity planning assessments or other studies,
Food Recovery Services and Food Recovery Organizations operating in the City
shall provide information and consultation to the City, upon request, regarding
existing, or proposed new or expanded, Food Recovery capacity that could be
accessed by the City and its Commercial Edible Food Generators. A Food
Recovery Service or Food Recovery Organization contacted by the City shall
respond to such request for information within 60 days, unless a shorter timeframe
is otherwise specified by the City.
8.15.080. Requirements for Haulers, Facility Operators and Community
Composting Operations
A. Requirements for Haulers. Haulers providing residential, Commercial, or industrial
Organic Waste collection services to Generators within the City’s boundaries shall
meet the requirements and standards of 14 CCR, Division 7, Chapter 12 and the
following requirements as conditions of approval of contract, agreement, or other
authorization to collect Organic Waste:
1. Through written notice to the City, identify the facilities to which they will
transport Organic Waste.
2. Comply with the applicable requirements of 14 CCR, Division 7, Chapter
12, Article 3.
3. Transport Organic Waste to a facility, operation, activity, or property that
recovers Organic Waste as defined in 14 CCR, Division 7, Chapter 12,
Article 2.
4. Obtain applicable approval of the City pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18988.1
and keep a record of the documentation of its approval by the City.
B. Subsection A. of this section is not applicable to a hauler that, consistent with
Article 1, Chapter 9, Part 2, Division 30, commencing with Section 41950 of the
State Public Resources Code, is transporting Source Separated Organic Waste to
a Community Composting site or to a hauler that is lawfully transporting C&D in a
manner that complies with 14 CCR Section 18989.1, chapter 8.19 of this code and
other applicable requirements of this Code.
C. Requirements for Facility Operators and Community Composting Operations
1. Owners of facilities, operations, and activities that recover Organic Waste,
including, but not limited to, Compost facilities, in-vessel digestion facilities,
and publicly-owned treatment works shall, upon the City’s request, provide
information regarding available and potential new or expanded capacity at
Page 292
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 21 of 26
1
8
6
7
their facilities, operations, and activities, including information about
throughput and permitted capacity necessary for planning purposes.
Entities contacted by the City shall respond within 60 days, unless a shorter
timeframe is otherwise specified by the City.
2. Community Composting operators, upon the City’s request, shall provide
information to the City to support Organic Waste capacity planning,
including, but not limited to, an estimate of the amount of Organic Waste
anticipated to be handled at the Community Composting operation. Entities
contacted by the City shall respond within 60 days, unless a shorter
timeframe is otherwise specified by the City.
8.15.090. Self-Hauler Requirements
Notwithstanding any inconsistent provisions of this code and in addition to any other
requirements for Self-Haulers as contained in this Code, including the requirements in
Section 8.17.050 of this Code, not inconsistent with the requirements of this Article, the
following requirements shall apply to Self-Haulers:
A. Self-Haulers of Organic Waste shall comply with the requirements in 14 CCR
Section 18988.3.
B. Self-Haulers shall Source Separate all recyclable materials and Organic Waste
(materials that the City otherwise requires Organic Waste Generators to separate
for collection in the City’s organics and recycling collection program) generated on-
site from Solid Waste in a manner consistent with 14 CCR Section 18984.1, or
shall haul Organic Waste to a High Diversion Organic Waste Processing Facility
as specified in 14 CCR Section 18984.3 that is approved by the City.
C. Not less than every seven (7) days utilizing their own equipment and labor, Self-
Haulers shall haul their Source Separated Recyclable Materials to a facility that
recovers those materials and is approved by the City; and haul their Source
Separated Organic Waste to a Solid Waste facility, operation, activity, or property
that processes or recovers Source Separated Organic Waste and is approved by
the City. Alternatively, Self-Haulers may haul Organic Waste, not less than every
seven (7) days utilizing their own equipment and labor, to a High Diversion Organic
Waste Processing Facility that is approved by the City.
D. In addition to any information required to be reported by Section 8.17.050, Self-
Haulers that are Commercial Businesses (including Multi-Family Residential
Dwellings) shall keep a record of the amount of Organic Waste delivered to each
Solid Waste facility, operation, activity, or property that processes or recovers
Organic Waste that includes the information in subsection D.1 -.3. This record shall
be subject to Inspection by the City, shall be provided to the City upon request and
shall be included in the self-hauler report required under Section 8.17.050.
1. Delivery receipts and weight tickets from the entity accepting the waste.
Page 293
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 22 of 26
1
8
6
7
2. The amount of material in cubic yards or tons transported by the Generator
to each entity.
3. If the material is transported to a Community Composting site that does not
have scales on-site, the Self-Hauler is not required to record the weight of
material but shall keep a record of the entity that received the Organic
Waste.
E. A Single-Family Organic Waste Generator that self-hauls Organic Waste is not
required to record or report information in subsection D. of this section.
F. Self-haulers shall obtain a self-haul permit pursuant to Section 8.17.050 from the
City or its Designee for self-hauling Organic Waste and recyclable materials and
pay any applicable fees prior to commencing self-haul activities.
8.15.100 Compliance with CALGreen Recycling Requirements
A. In addition to the Construction and Demolition Diversion requirements in 8.19 and
any other requirements of this code, the following requirements also apply:
1. For projects covered by the California Green Building Standards Code, 24
CCR, Part 11, the applicants must, as a condition of the City’s permit
approval, comply with the following:
a. Where five (5) or more Multi-Family dwelling units are constructed
on a building site, provide readily accessible areas that serve
occupants of all buildings on the site and are identified for the storage
and collection of Blue Container, Brown Container and Green
Container materials, consistent with the collection program offered
by the City, or comply with provision of adequate space for recycling
for Multi-Family and Commercial premises pursuant to Sections
4.408.1, 4.410.2, 5.408.1, and 5.410.1 of the California Green
Building Standards Code, 24 CCR, Part 11 as amended July 1, 2019
and effective January 1, 2020.
b. Where new commercial construction or additions of more than 30%
of the existing floor area occur, provide readily accessible areas
identified for the storage and collection of Blue Container, Brown
Container and Green Container materials, consistent with the
collection program offered by the City, or shall comply with provision
of adequate space for recycling for Multi-Family and Commercial
premises pursuant to Sections 4.408.1, 4.410.2, 5.408.1, and
5.410.1 of the California Green Building Standards Code, 24 CCR,
Part 11 as amended July 1, 2019 and effective January 1, 2020.
Page 294
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 23 of 26
1
8
6
7
B. For Organic Waste commingled with C&D, the requirements of 24 CCR Sections
4.408.1 and 5.408.1, as amended July 1, 2019 and effective January 1, 2020 shall
be complied with.
8.15.110. Model Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance Requirements
In addition to any other requirements of this code, property owners or their building or
landscape designers, including anyone requiring a building or planning permit, plan
check, or landscape design review from the City, who are constructing a new (Single-
Family, Multi-Family, public, institutional, or Commercial) project with a landscape area
greater than 500 square feet, or rehabilitating an existing landscape with a total landscape
area greater than 2,500 square feet, shall comply with Sections 492.6(a)(3)(B) (C), (D),
and (G) of the MWELO, including sections related to use of Compost and mulch, as
amended September 15, 2015.
8.15.120. Procurement Requirements for Direct Service Providers and Vendors
Direct service providers to the City and all vendors providing Paper Products and Printing
and Writing Papers shall comply with the City’s policy regarding recovered Organic Waste
product procurement, including Recycled-Content Paper procurement.
8.15.130. Inspections and Investigations by the City
A. City representatives and/or its designated entity, including Designees, are
authorized to conduct Inspections and investigations, at random or otherwise, of
any collection container, collection vehicle loads, or transfer, processing, or
disposal facility for materials collected from Generators, or Source Separated
materials to confirm compliance with this chapter by Organic Waste Generators,
Commercial Businesses (including Multi-Family Residential Dwellings), property
owners, Commercial Edible Food Generators, haulers, Self-Haulers, Food
Recovery Services, and Food Recovery Organizations, subject to applicable laws.
This Section does not allow the City, its Designees or agents to enter the interior
of a private residential property for inspection. For the purposes of inspecting
Commercial Business containers for compliance with this chapter, the City may
conduct container Inspections for Prohibited Container Contaminants.
B. A regulated entity shall provide or arrange for access during all Inspections (with
the exception of residential property interiors) and shall cooperate with the City
representative and/or its designated entity, including Designee, during such
Inspections and investigations. Such Inspections and investigations may include
confirmation of proper placement of materials in containers, Edible Food Recovery
activities, records, or any other requirement of this chapter described herein.
Failure to provide or arrange for: (1) access to an entity’s premises; or (2) access
to records for any Inspection or investigation is a violation of this chapter and may
result in penalties described herein.
Page 295
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 24 of 26
1
8
6
7
C. Any records obtained by the City during its Inspections, and other investigations or
reviews shall be subject to the requirements and applicable disclosure exemptions
of the Public Records Act as set forth in State Government Code Section 6250 et
seq.
D. The City’s representatives, its Designees and agents are authorized to conduct
any Inspections, or other investigations as reasonably necessary to further the
goals of this chapter, subject to applicable laws.
E. The City shall receive written complaints from persons regarding an entity that may
be potentially non-compliant with SB 1383 Regulations, including receipt of
anonymous complaints in accordance with by 14 CCR Section 18995.3.
8.15.140. Enforcement
A. Violation of any provision of this chapter that occurs on or after January 1, 2024
shall constitute grounds for issuance of a Notice of Violation and assessment of a
fine by the Enforcement Official in accordance with 14 CCR Section 18995.4.
Enforcement Actions under this chapter are issuance of an administrative citation
and assessment of a fine. The City’s procedures on imposition of administrative
fines set forth in Chapter 1.12 of this Code are hereby incorporated in their entirety,
as modified from time to time, and shall govern the imposition, enforcement,
collection, and review of administrative citations issued to enforce this chapter and
any rule or regulation adopted pursuant to this chapter, except as otherwise
indicated in this chapter. Other remedies allowed by law may be used, including
civil action or prosecution as a misdemeanor or infraction. The City may pursue
civil actions in the State courts to seek recovery of unpaid administrative citations.
The City may choose to delay court action until such time as a sufficiently large
number of violations, or cumulative size of violations exist such that court action is
a reasonable use of City staff and resources.
B. The provisions of subsection A. do not apply to violations related to a Generator
placing Prohibited Container Contaminants in containers, which the Enforcement
Official and/or the City’s Designee shall enforce through the notice provisions of
14 CCR Section 18984.5(b), Section 8.17.150 of this code and the contamination
processing fees pursuant to the provisions of the applicable Collection Agreement
between the City and a franchised hauler.
C. Enforcement pursuant to this chapter may be undertaken by the Enforcement
Official.
D. With the exception of violations of Generator contamination of container contents
addressed under subsection B., the Enforcement Official shall issue a Notice of
Violation requiring compliance within 60 days of issuance of the notice. Absent
compliance by the respondent within the deadline set forth in the Notice of
Violation, Enforcement Official shall commence an action to impose penalties
consistent with the procedures and requirements of Chapter 1.12.
Page 296
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 25 of 26
1
8
6
7
E. Penalty Amounts for Types of Violations. For the purposes of this chapter, the
penalty levels for violations of the provisions of this chapter are as follows:
(1) For a first violation, the penalty shall be $100 per violation.
(2) For a second violation, the penalty shall be $200 per violation.
(3) For a third or subsequent violation, the penalty shall be $500 per violation.
F. Compliance Deadline Extension Considerations. The City may extend the
compliance deadlines set forth in a Notice of Violation if it finds that there are
extenuating circumstances beyond the control of the respondent that make
compliance within the deadlines impracticable, including the following:
(1) Acts of God such as earthquakes, wildfires, flooding, and other
emergencies or natural disasters;
(2) Delays in obtaining discretionary permits or other government agency
approvals; or,
(3) Deficiencies in Organic Waste recycling infrastructure or Edible Food
Recovery capacity and the City is under a corrective action plan with
CalRecycle pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18996.2 due to those deficiencies.”
SECTION 2. CEQA. The City Council finds that this Ordinance is exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15308 on the grounds that it can be seen with certainty that the
enhanced solid waste regulations, as provided for in this Ordinance will not have a
significant effect on the environment and that the new requirements, which strengthen
requirements for the handling of solid waste, represent actions by a regulatory agency
(the City) for the protection of the environment.
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause,
phrase, or portion of this Ordinance for any reason is held to be invalid or unconstitutional
by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares
that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, subdivision,
sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more
sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be
declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty
(30) days after its passage.
SECTION 5. PUBLICATION. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance
and shall post or publish this Ordinance as required by law.
Page 297
Ordinance No. XXX – Page 26 of 26
1
8
6
7
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga this ____ day of ______________, 2021.
Page 298
SB 1383
SHORT LIVED CLIMATE
POLLUTANTS
PROGRAM OVERVIEW
ATTACHMENT #2
Page 299
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
Burrtec’s conscious decision to know our customers personally, involve ourselves in the
community, and provide excellent customer service are core values ideal to implementing
Senate Bill 1383 successfully. The company takes great pride in knowing we have the resources
to meet the individual needs of the customers and the communities we serve. An even greater
satisfaction comes from our ability to be personally involved with our community partners. The
cornerstones of Burrtec’s motto, “We’ll Take Care Of It”, ensures each customer we service,
each community in which we operate, the environment we protect, and each employee of our
company continue to be the keys to our success.
The implementation of the state’s organic
waste reduction regulations adopted under
Senate Bill 1383 (Short Lived Climate
Pollutants) is the next critical step to
protect our communities and our
environment from the impacts of climate
change. Organic waste in landfills
accounts for 20 percent of the methane
gas generated in California. Methane, a
super-pollutant, has a short-term
atmospheric life, but a long-term impact on
the climate. Targeting methane reductions
in emissions is an effective mechanism for
combating climate change and moving
toward a more sustainable future.
Burrtec will collaborate with the jurisdiction to implement its SB 1383 compliance program and
fulfill the state mandated requirements ensuring organic waste collection service is provided to
all residents and businesses. This mandatory program focuses on residential, commercial, and
multi-family generators to maximize the organic waste diversion potential throughout the
community. Burrtec’s source separated collection system is an operational platform designed
to minimize contaminants in the organic material waste stream while ensuring maximum
diversion from disposal operations. Once processed, organic waste materials will be made
available to each jurisdiction in the form of renewable organic products such as mulch and
compost to assist in meeting SB 1383 procurement requirements. Coupled with a robust
ordinance as an enforcement mechanism and an active monitoring system the following critical
components will work toward meeting compliance initiatives:
ü An ordinance enacted to ensure customers, self-haulers, and edible food
generators can subscribe to and participate in required services and meet
compliance initiatives.
ü Implementing collection systems specifically designed to source separate
materials from the waste stream to maximize diversion and minimize
contamination.
ü Partnering in education and outreach activities informing the community of
program participation requirements.
Page 300
ü Supporting contract amendments and rate reviews to fund new collection,
material processing, and food recovery programs.
ü Ensuring adequate capacity to recover edible food from Tier 1 generators initially,
followed by eligible Tier 2 subscribers in subsequent years.
ü Engaging in the procurement of recycled content paper products, renewable
organic waste products such as compost and mulch, renewable natural gas for
vehicle fuel, heat and electricity created from organic waste, or electricity
produced at biomass facilities.
ü Documenting and recording each activity to demonstrate regulatory
achievements and progress toward compliance initiatives beginning with the
jurisdiction’s implementation plan.
ü Ensuring appropriate staffing levels in Code Enforcement and administrative
departments to compel generators to comply with enacted ordinances, approve
waivers, procure products, assess monetary penalties, document implementation
activities, and investigate complaints.
Each jurisdiction should follow a compliance plan specifically designed to meet all requirements
with the new legislation. Burrtec will work closely with each community throughout the
implementation process and cities should anticipate partnering with local counties and regional
groups to ensure adequate capacity is available to recover edible food throughout their
community. The jurisdiction’s implementation plan will need to be readily available for
CalRecycle review.
COLLECTION PROGRAM
The collection program implemented is considered to be the foundational pillar in achieving the
organic waste reduction targets established by SB 1383. Burrtec differentiates its container
collection services between residential, commercial, and multi-family collection subscribers. SB
1383 requires recycling containers to be blue, organics containers green, food waste containers
brown, and refuse containers to be either gray or black. Labeling requirements for containers
call for decals, imprinted text, and/or graphics to include the primary acceptable items allowed in
each container in addition to the primary prohibited items not authorized to be collected in the
container. Beginning January 1, 2022, existing containers not conforming to label or color
requirements will be replaced at the end of their useful life but no later than January 1, 2036.
Containers purchased prior to January 1, 2022, will be delivered to new subscribers with proper
labeling or decals. Containers purchased after January 1, 2022, will meet container color and
labeling compliance requirements.
Blue Containers: Recyclable materials will be
collected in the blue containers. Burrtec will
label and use the blue color scheme containers
for the collection of primarily non-organic
recyclables including plastics #1 - #7, glass
bottles, jars, and aluminum cans. Selected
organic wastes such as cardboard and paper
will also be allowed to be collected in the blue
container. Burrtec will transport the collected
recyclables to a material recovery facility
specifically designed to process source
separated recyclables.
Page 301
Green Containers: Organic waste materials will
be collected in green containers. Burrtec will label
and use the green color scheme containers for
the collection of organic waste including grass,
weeds, flowers, leaves, pruning’s, and other types
of source separated organics resulting from
normal yard and landscaping activities. In some
residential service applications, Burrtec will
instruct subscribers to bag their food waste and
place it in the green barrel. Burrtec will transport
the collected organic wastes to a fully permitted
organics processing facility.
Brown Containers: Source separated food
waste will be collected in brown containers.
Burrtec will label and use the brown color scheme
containers for the collection of source-separated
food waste for commercial, industrial, and multi-
family generators. Jurisdictions may elect a fourth
brown barrel for residential food waste collections
although space and cost impacts should be
considered. Burrtec will transport the collected
organic wastes to a fully permitted organics
processing facility.
Black / Gray Containers: Refuse will be
collected in black or gray containers. Burrtec will
label and use this color scheme for refuse
containers. Non-organic and non-recyclable
waste materials will only be permitted to be
placed in the black or gray containers. Inert
materials such as dirt, rock, and concrete are not
permitted in black or gray containers. Burrtec will
transport the material to a fully permitted transfer
facility or landfill for proper disposal. At times, the
black or gray container may be characterized to
determine the effectiveness of the source
separated programs implemented within the
community.
Container Contamination Minimization: Prohibiting contaminants in each collection
container is another critical component toward meeting diversion goals. Route reviews,
waste characterizations or a combination of both are effective and required tools used to
determine the success of the collection program. Commercial businesses, non-local
entities such as prisons, and local education agencies will be required to provide
education to their employees and students detailing the proper sorting of organic waste
and organic waste recovery requirements. Generators identified to have contaminated
containers will be provided notifications, education materials, and follow-up inspections.
Continued failure of generators to control contamination will ultimately culminate in
Page 302
notices of violation or administrative monetary penalties issued by the jurisdiction in
subsequent years.
Residential Collection Service: The residential collection
program will utilize the existing three container system
focusing on the individual collection of source-separated
materials for recyclables, refuse, and organics. In areas
where a two container residential refuse and recyclable
collection system is in place, an organics recycling program
may include processing the refuse container or introducing
a third container to recover organics.
Commercial Collection Service: Considering material
stream volumes and the individual customer’s need for
flexibility, commercial subscribers will be able to
choose a variety of services offered by Burrtec’s four-
container system. Other bin and roll-off serviced
sectors including multi-family complexes may also be
included in the four container system. Commercial
customers will have the ability to source separate
recyclables, organics, refuse, and food waste. This
service combination is designed to maximize diversion,
while minimizing the contamination of customized
services amongst bin and roll off serviced customers.
EDUCATION & OUTREACH ACTIVITIES
The SB 1383 regulations require that organics recycling education
and outreach is provided to all residents, businesses (including
those that generate edible food that can be donated), local food
banks, and other food recovery organizations.
In communities where a substantial number of residents speak non-
English languages, education and outreach materials must be
translated to ensure all residents and businesses can effectively
participate in organics collection services.
Residential Customers: A variety of outreach methods,
including community meetings, will be used to inform
residential customers on program requirements including:
• How to recycle organic waste.
• Proper container utilization techniques.
• Methane gas reduction benefits.
Page 303
Newsletters, automated calls, feedback from route audits or waste
characterizations, photographic evidence, and container red tags may all be
utilized at some point during the program’s implementation and to ensure its
ongoing success.
Commercial Customers: Commercial customers will also be informed of methods for
preventing organic waste, information related to public health and safety, and their ability
to donate edible food in the community. Commercial businesses will also be advised of
their ability to use the four container system (once authorized to be implemented in a
jurisdiction) and encouraged to attend Chamber presentations or participate in an onsite
Waste and Recycling consultation should the customer require additional support or
guidance in determining the most effective solution for their recycling needs.
Edible Food Generators: The commercial edible food education campaign will be
customized to focus on Tier 1 and Tier 2 generators as the regulation requires. Edible
food generators will receive additional information specifically informing them of
requirements to donate edible food to local recovery organizations.
EDIBLE FOOD RECOVERY
Edible food recovery programs focus on assisting commercial edible food generators with
compliance and expanding food recovery operations within the jurisdiction. Identifying qualified
Tier 1 edible food generators beginning January 1, 2022, will be the first steps in developing the
program followed by:
• Estimating the amount of edible food currently being disposed.
• Identifying existing food recovery organizations.
Page 304
• Ensuring adequate infrastructure is made available to support the program.
• Diverting 20% or more of estimated edible food from disposal to food recovery
organizations.
Consultations, generator education, outreach, and monitoring activities will all be required to
determine program effectiveness and whether adequate food recovery capacity exists.
Burrtec will develop and update a list of qualified edible food generators in the service area. The
list of food recovery organizations and food recovery services operating in the local region will
be maintained on the jurisdiction’s and Burrtec’s websites. This list will be verified and updated
annually. Food Rescue Regions and examples of the list for food recovery organizations are
shown below.
Example of Region #7 Edible Food Recovery Organizations
Organization Street Address City Zip Code
Saint Joseph's Catholic Church 42242 N. Shore Dr. Big Bear Lake 92314
Rios de Vida 7709 Victoria Ave. Highland 92346
The Salvation Army - Highland 2626 Pacific St. Highland 92346
PAL Center (PCA) - Muscoy Campus 2450 Blake St. Muscoy 92407
Family Service Association of Redlands 612 Lawton St. Redlands 92374
Faith Lutheran Church 12449 California St. Yucaipa 92399
St. Francis X. Cabrini Church 12687 California St. Yucaipa 92399
Page 305
JURISDICTIONAL PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS
Jurisdictions must ensure all vendors provide recycled-content paper products and recycled-
content printing and writing paper that consist of at least 30 percent, by fiber weight,
postconsumer fiber instead of non-recycled products. Records are required to be maintained
and shall include a copy of the invoice, written certifications of recycled-content, and other
general information. If non-recycled content paper products and printing and writing paper are
purchased, a description of why recycled-content paper products and printing and writing paper
were not available is required.
Burrtec will coordinate with each jurisdiction to assist in meeting their recycled organic waste
procurement targets as required by SB 1383 regulations. A combination of the following can be
used:
• Community compost and mulch giveaway events.
• Community parks landscape and turf enhancements where recycled organic products
are used to minimize water usage and improve soils.
• Utilizing renewable natural gas derived from organics conversion technologies for:
Heat Electricity Vehicle Fuel
• Utilizing electricity derived from biomass conversion facilities.
Procurement targets are based on population and shown below using the California Department
of Finance’s 2021 population estimates. CalRecycle will notify each jurisdiction of their specific
population to calculate procurement requirements to achieve targets in any one, or a
combination of categories as shown below.
California Dept.
of Finance
Population
Estimates -
2021
Estimated Procurement Requirements to Meet Targets in any One Category
Organic
Waste
Renewable
Gas in the
form of
Vehicle
Fuel
Electricity
from
Renewable
Gas
Heat from
Renewable
Gas
Electricity
from Biomass
Conversion
Compost Mulch
City Populations Tons DGE KWH Therms KWH Tons Tons
1,000 80 1,680 19,360 1,760 52,000 46 80
10,000 800 16,800 193,600 17,600 520,000 464 800
25,000 2,000 42,000 484,000 44,000 1,300,000 1,160 2,000
50,000 4,000 84,000 968,000 88,000 2,600,000 2,320 4,000
100,000 8,000 168,000 1,936,000 176,000 5,200,000 4,640 8,000
175,000 14,000 294,000 3,388,000 308,000 9,100,000 8,120 14,000
250,000 20,000 420,000 4,840,000 440,000 13,000,000 11,600 20,000
Page 306
Jurisdictions are not required to procure recovered organic waste products made from “their”
organic waste to satisfy the procurement requirements, nor do the products need to be produced
or consumed within their jurisdiction. A jurisdiction may purchase, cause to be purchased, or
otherwise acquire products from any entity and use these toward their procurement target. The
jurisdiction may use the end products in a way that best fits local needs, which may include use
or “no charge” distribution within their jurisdiction or other jurisdictions.
CAPICITY PLANNING
Capacity planning is vital to help jurisdictions meet SB 1383 mandates for both organics
processing and edible food recovery. Although counties have until August 1, 2022, to begin
reporting on capacity planning for the period covering January 1, 2022, to December 31, 2024,
infrastructure takes time to develop. Burrtec will partner with local jurisdictions to evaluate their
existing capacity for managing organics, including edible food recovery and organic waste
processing.
To achieve the goals of SB 1383, CalRecycle estimates that California needs approximately 50-
100 new or expanded organic waste recycling facilities to annually recycle an additional 20-25
million tons of organic waste. Burrtec has positioned itself to support the organic diversion
requirements set forth in SB 1383 regulations for each of the communities it services through
the use of material recovery and compost facilities authorized to recycle organic waste.
Jurisdictions should consider the following actionable items when determining capacity planning
requirements.
For organics recycling and edible food capacity planning efforts,
counties are responsible for:
ü Collecting capacity planning information from each
jurisdiction within the county
ü Submitting the capacity planning report to CalRecycle
ü Identifying any jurisdiction, including itself, that
does not have enough verified existing, planned,
or new capacity
ü Informing jurisdictions that lack capacity about
the timeline for submitting the implementation
schedule to CalRecycle
Jurisdictions, including counties, will be able to collaborate with Burrtec and its business
partners to:
ü Estimate organic waste and edible food disposal within the jurisdiction
ü Identify the amount of existing capacity, located both in the county and outside of the
county, that is verifiably available
ü Estimate the amount of new or expanded capacity that will be needed
ü Consult with various entities throughout the planning process
ü Submit an implementation schedule to CalRecycle when capacity deficiencies are
identified
Page 307
COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT
Monitoring & Reporting Requirements: Burrtec will partner with jurisdictions to
maintain records that demonstrate compliance. These records will document the
jurisdiction’s progress in complying with the regulation in accordance with the statutory
requirements. Beginning with an Implementation Record chronicling the development,
progress, and accomplishments related to SB 1383 mandates, Burrtec will assist
jurisdictions in documenting qualified customers, edible food generators, material
processing waste characterizations, educational and outreach activities conducted, route
audit results compiled, complaints investigated, recycled organic material products
procured, and ultimately the amount of organic waste diverted from landfill operations.
Jurisdictional Enforcement: The SB 1383 enforcement structure allows CalRecycle to
focus on compliance assistance first and dedicate enforcement efforts to serious
offenders. Regulations allow for flexibility and deadline extensions in some instances
when there are extenuating circumstances causing compliance issues. While the
regulation becomes effective Jan. 1, 2022, enforcement is an escalating process and
timelines are not triggered until a Notice of Violation (NOV) is issued. Below is an
illustration of the time allocated for each step in the enforcement process.
Subscriber Enforcement: Starting January 1, 2022, Burrtec will partner with Code
Enforcement or designated jurisdiction staff to enforce compliance with SB 1383
requirements. Burrtec will continue to complete periodic compliance reviews of
commercial businesses and multifamily establishments to ensure they are subscribed to
organic recycling services. Jurisdictions may consider incorporating certain SB 1383
inspection requirements with existing health inspections. On or about April 1, 2022,
Burrtec will begin conducting route reviews and /or waste characterizations consistent
with the requirements set forth in the regulation. Beginning January 1, 2024, jurisdictions
are expected to begin enforcing compliance with the issuance of Notice of Violations.
Complaint Investigation: The statute includes a complaint and investigation
requirement to process a complaint received for potential violations associated with SB
1383. Complaints must be received in writing and investigated within 90 days from their
receipt. Burrtec will collaborate with jurisdictions and recommend optional procedures
required.
Page 308
WAIVERS & EXEMPTIONS
The state has identified certain conditions under which a waiver can be granted to qualifying
jurisdictions precluding them from the collection requirements. This preclusion is not intended to
exempt a jurisdiction from promoting and providing information to generators about waste
prevention, community composting, managing organic waste on-site, and other means of
recovering organic waste. Jurisdictions that have received waivers must still fulfill the remaining
regulatory obligations to reduce overall solid waste disposal through source reduction practices,
procurement of recycled paper products, using renewable organic waste products produced
from material diverted from disposal operations, and conducting edible food recovery activities.
While most Burrtec service areas are not eligible for collection waivers, the following
summarizes available waiver criteria:
Low Population: Low population areas of the state must meet specific conditions to be
considered for a waiver. The jurisdiction must have disposed less than 5,000 tons of
solid waste in 2014 as reported by the Disposal Reporting System and have a total
population of less than 7,500 people. It is estimated that only 20 jurisdictions throughout
the state may qualify for this exemption. Individual census tract waivers will be
considered if there is a population density of less than 75 people per square mile and
the tract is located in unincorporated portions of a county. Low population waivers are
granted for a term not to exceed 5 years.
Rural Exemption: Rural areas of the state are defined as areas with populations less
than 70,000 people and can include individual jurisdictions or regional agencies
consisting of one or multiple jurisdictions located within one or more rural county. Rural
jurisdictions seeking an exemption must first issue a resolution declaring their need for
an exemption prior to submitting their application. Granted rural exemption waivers will
be valid until December 31, 2026, and may be adjusted based on whether or not the
state has achieved organic waste reduction milestones set.
Elevation Waivers: Jurisdictions may apply for elevation waivers for some or all of the
generators if the entire community is at an elevation greater than 4,500 feet. Individual
census tract waivers will be considered if the tract is located in unincorporated portions
of a county at or above 4,500 feet.
Jurisdictions may also grant one or more of the three distinct waivers to qualified generators.
Waivers granted to generators include de minimis (low volume), physical space constraint, or
collection frequency. Burrtec will work with generators to determine if they qualify for a potential
waiver and ensure SB 1383’s recordkeeping requirements are maintained. Burrtec will review
each waiver application and verify the accuracy of the information presented by the generator.
Once the application has been reviewed and verified, Burrtec will provide the waiver application,
supporting documentation and recommendation to approve or deny the request, and submit the
information to the jurisdiction for final approval. The jurisdiction ultimately decides to approve or
deny any application and Burrtec will notify the customer of the waiver application determination
the jurisdiction has made. Waivers for generators will be determined using the following criteria:
De Minimis Waivers: Jurisdictions may waive a commercial business’ organic waste
collection requirements in a three or four container collection system if the amounts of
organic waste are less than 20 gallons for businesses that produce two cubic yards or
Page 309
more of total solid waste per week or less than 10 gallons for businesses that produce
less than two cubic yards of total solid waste per week.
Physical Space Waivers: Jurisdictions can exempt businesses with legitimate space
constraints from their obligation to set out an organic waste collection container. This
waiver should be applicable in limited scenarios and is expected to decrease in use over
the years once the jurisdiction’s building standards are current and include adequate
container space requirements for organic waste collection.
Collection Frequency Waivers: These waivers allow the bi-weekly collection of refuse
and/or commingled recycling containers under conditions that ensure all permitted
organic waste material has been placed in a source separated container. Prior to
authorizing collection frequency waivers, the Local Enforcement Agency must validate
that the bi-weekly collection of refuse and commingled recycling material streams will not
propagate vectors or cause other health concerns within the community.
Once the jurisdiction grants a waiver, Burrtec will process all necessary changes to the
subscriber’s collection service level and billing record. De minimis and physical space waivers
are valid for up to 5 years. Burrtec can conduct inspections and review the continued validity of
the waiver for each generator’s premises within those 5 years or once notified of changes to the
generators status that would invalidate the need for a waiver. Reverification results will be
provided to the subscriber once the jurisdiction has determined final waiver disposition.
Burrtec believes strongly in the spirit of community and we are dedicated in our commitment to
helping improve the quality of life in the communities where we live and work. We live this
commitment through charitable giving, volunteerism, community partnerships, and
unquestionable customer service. The successful implementation of state and local regulations
is no exception. Our efforts have taken us beyond the status of simply being a service provider
to that of being an important, integral part of the community. A more detailed list of actionable
items is included in the subsequent pages of this document for your reference.
”We’ll Take Care Of It”
Page 310
Senate Bill 1383 Checklist
Program Description Responsible Party
1. Edible Food Recovery Program
a. Identify Tier 1 & Tier 2 Generators Burrtec
b. Educate and Monitor Commercial Edible Food Generators Burrtec
c. Confirm compliance / Record Keeping Burrtec & Jurisdiction
i. Food recovery organizations list
ii. Confirm MOUs in place
iii. Food recovery % & Tonnage
d. Assure capacity to recover 20% of edible food County & Jurisdiction
2. Enforcement & Monitoring
a. Adopt all applicable Mandatory Recycling Ordinances Jurisdiction
i. Organics
ii. Construction & Demolition
iii. Water Efficient Landscape with compost / mulch
application requirements
b. Waivers Burrtec & Jurisdiction
i. Process and validate applications
ii. Maintain records
c. Issue Notice of Violation (NOV) as appropriate Jurisdiction
i. 90 day follow up
ii. Issue further NOV’s or penalties until compliance
is achieved
3. Procurement
a. Recycled content material Jurisdiction
b. Compost and mulch Burrtec
c. Renewable natural gas for fuel, heat, electricity Jurisdiction
d. Biomass energy conversion Jurisdiction
e. Record keeping Burrtec & Jurisdiction
4. Inspections & Reviews
a. Commercial Sector
i. Compliance review of all commercial accounts Burrtec
ii. Inspections of Tier 1 & 2 generators Burrtec & Jurisdiction
iii. Route Reviews or Waste Characterizations Burrtec
iv. Investigating 1383 complaints Burrtec & Jurisdiction
Page 311
Senate Bill 1383 Checklist
Program Description Responsible Party
5. Collection Programs & Operations
a. Hauler to identify organics processing location Burrtec
b. Organics Processor to provide letter of plastic bag Burrtec
acceptance where applicable
c. Implement residential, multi-family and commercial food Burrtec
waste recycling program
d. Containers to comply with the color requirements Burrtec
e. Label and/or imprint acceptable items on all new Burrtec
containers
f. Re-paint and relabel existing containers as required Burrtec
6. Outreach & Education
a. Educate all affected parties annually Burrtec & Jurisdiction
i. Generators (residential, multifamily, commercial)
ii. Edible Food Recovery Organizations
iii. City/County departments
b. Translate education materials as required Burrtec & Jurisdiction
c. Provide education materials to any non-compliant Burrtec & Jurisdiction
regulated entity
7. Record Keeping & Reporting
a. Maintain 1383 implementation record Burrtec & Jurisdiction
b. Generate an electronic or written report that includes Burrtec & Jurisdiction
i. Inspection information
ii. Route review
iii. Compliance review
c. Maintain records for the following Burrtec & Jurisdiction
i. 1383 Complaint date log
ii. 1383 Complaint investigation date and outcome
iii. Determination of compliance
iv. Notice of violations
d. Annual report to Cal Recycle Burrtec & Jurisdiction
Page 312
Senate Bill 1383 Checklist
Program Description Responsible Party
8. Materials Processing Audits
a. Inspect loads being received Burrtec
b. Validate diversion % at the processing facility Burrtec
c. Characterize the following material streams Burrtec
i. Organics Recovered from Black & Blue
Container Streams
ii. Residue in Organics Recovered from Black &
Blue Container Streams
iii. Organics Recovered from Green & Brown
Container Streams
iv. Residue in Organics Recovered from Green &
Brown Container Streams
d. Develop Areas to Segregate Organic Waste at the Burrtec
Processing Facility
e. Mandatory Black Barrel WC Burrtec
i. Beginning July 1, 2022 if a facility receives waste
streams and more than 500 tons of waste annually
from at least one jurisdiction, black barrel
characterizations become mandatory
f. Maximum Residue Allowed in Recovered Organic Waste Burrtec & Jurisdiction
i. Beginning Jan 1, 2022 = 20%
ii. Beginning Jan 1, 2024 = 10%
g. Waste Characterization Record Keeping & Reporting Burrtec & Jurisdiction
Requirements
Page 313
First Reading of Ordinance No. 989
Adding Chapter 8.15
Mandatory Organics Waste Disposal Reduction
November 17, 2021
Key Elements of Ordinance 989
Key Elements Effective January 2022 Already in Place
Provide organic waste recycling services to all businesses.
Provide organic waste recycling services to all residential and multi-
family.
Implement edible food recovery program.
Conduct outreach and education to all affected parties.
Procure recycled organic waste products such as compost, mulch,
and renewable natural gas, and require the City to purchase content
that is made out of minimum of 30% recycled material.
Maintain accurate and timely records of SB1383 compliance of
annual reporting requirements, and monitor compliance.
Haulers and self-haulers are required to report trash, recycling and
organic waste.
Inspections and Enforcement: Investigate for compliance and
violations will be issued a notice of violation and fee.
Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance Compliance: Comply
with regulations designed to prevent water from being wasted on
irrigated landscapes.
California Green Building Standards (CalGreen): Required under the
ordinance to comply with certain provisions of CalGreen, related to
accommodating collection containers and treatment of organics
commingled with construction and demolition debris.
Residential Food Waste Collection
Edible Food Recovery
City of Rancho Cucamonga Organics
Collection Implemented in 2011
Correction to Staff Report
Please note the following correction to the staff report:
•First bullet point under “Analysis” Section: The sentence
currently reads: “Food waste generated by residents and
businesses will be collected in the black or gray container.”
•Correction to read as follows: “Food waste generated by
residents with three containers will be collected in the
green container and food waste generated by
commercial businesses and multifamily residents with
a brown container will be collected in the brown
container.”
Recommendation
•Staff recommends that the City Council consider first reading of
Ordinance No. 989, to be read by title only and waive further reading,
adding Chapter 8.15 to Title 8 Health and Safety of the Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code, a Determination of Exemption under
CEQA.
•If approved by City Council, the ordinance will go into effect thirty (30)
days after its second reading and passage.
Questions?
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning Director
Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 990, to be Read by Title
Only and Waive Further Reading to Amend the Etiwanda Specific Plan
Land Use Designation of a 6.96-Acre Site Located at 12774 Banyan
Street from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential, Related
to the Subdivision of the Property into 9 Residential Lots for Future Single-
Family Development. Staff has Prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for Consideration.
(Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00730). APN: 0225-111-07.
(ORDINANCE NO. 990) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council conduct first reading of Ordinance No. 990, to be read by title
only to Amend the Etiwanda Specific Plan Land Use Designation of a 6.96-Acre Site Located at
12774 Banyan Street from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential.
BACKGROUND AND PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY:
The project site is an undeveloped, 6.96-acre parcel, and is generally rectangular in shape. The
existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent
properties are as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Very Low
Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
North Single-Family Residential Very Low
Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
South Single-Family Residential Very Low
Residential Very Low (VL) Residential 1, 2
East Preschool Very Low
Residential School (S) 1, 2
West Vacant Very Low
Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
1 – Equestrian Overlay; 2 – Etiwanda Specific Plan
Page 314
Page 2
1
0
2
0
On September 8, 2021, the Planning Commission considered Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18012-
1 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2018-00898. The Tentative Tract Map involves subdividing the
property into 9 lots for future single-family residential development. All 9 lots take access from a
proposed gated cul-de-sac which branches off from Banyan Avenue. The proposed tentative tract
map includes one lettered lot, which will be used as a private street and storm drain.
The project site is within the Equestrian Overlay and each lot is 20,000 square feet or larger,
which allows for equestrian, and animal-keeping uses. As such, the project will provide a
community trail along the north side of Banyan Street, to match the existing community trails on
residential developments east and south of the project site. Additionally, a 15-foot-wide local
feeder trail will loop around the entire tract to provide access to the rear of every lot and connect
to the community trail.
A Tree Survey conducted on site shows 158 trees on-site, 157 of which are considered Heritage
Trees due to their size or species. Roughly 70% (110 of 158) of the trees on-site are nearly dead
or dead. The remaining 48 trees are all in poor condition. As such, the applicant has applied for
a Tree Removal Permit to remove all trees on site, including 157 Heritage Trees. The applicant
is proposing to plant 47, 48-inch box trees on the project site to replace the trees to be removed.
The value of the 47 large replacement trees far exceeds the value of all existing Heritage Trees
on the project site, which currently hold little to no value due to their condition.
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s local CEQA
Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the
project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the
imposition of mitigation measures related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources,
geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services,
and tribal and cultural resources, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would
have a significant effect on the environment.
On September 8, 2021, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18012-
1 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2018-00898. The Planning Commission also recommended City
Council approval of Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00730 and adoption of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the project.
ANALYSIS:
To accommodate the subdivision, the applicant is requesting a Specific Plan Amendment to
change the Specific Plan Designation of the project site within the Etiwanda Specific Plan from
the current designation of Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential. This change
would allow a density increase on the project site from 1.08 dwelling units per acre under the
Estate Residential (ER) to a maximum of 2.17 dwelling units per acre under the Very Low (VL)
designation. The project as proposed will have a density of 1.29 dwelling units per acre.
Staff is in support of the requested Specific Plan Amendment, as the project site is one of the last
remaining parcels along Banyan Street between Bluegrass Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue that is
zoned Estate Residential (ER). Changing the Specific Plan designation to Very Low (VL)
Residential will allow development on the site to be consistent in density and character with all
other existing residential developments along the north and south sides of Banyan Street.
Additionally, this change is aligned with the General Plan designation identified in the
comprehensive PlanRC General Plan Update.
Page 315
Page 3
1
0
2
0
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project site is currently assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is
shared with the City. The proposed development will increase the value of the project site and the
City’s annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. When house product is
constructed in the future, the project proponent will be responsible for paying one-time impact
fees. These fees are intended to address the increase demand for City services. The following
types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services,
transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and
community and recreation services.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
One of the City Council’s core values is “providing and nurturing a high quality of life for all.” The
high-quality neighborhood enabled by project supports this core value by continuing to provide
world-class development within the City for the benefit of future and current residents.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 8, 2021 (with all Exhibits
and Resolutions)
Attachment 2 – Planning Commission Minutes dated September 8, 2021
Attachment 3 – Draft Ordinance No. 990, Approving Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00730
and adopting the related Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts
Page 316
DATE: September 8, 2021
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning Director
INITIATED BY: Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: LOCATED AT 12774 BANYAN STREET - EGL ASSOCIATES, INC. - A request
to subdivide a vacant 6.96-acre parcel into 9 residential lots for future single-family
development, a Specific Plan Amendment to amend the site’s Specific Plan
designation from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential within the
Etiwanda Specific Plan, Equestrian Overlay, and a Tree Removal Permit to remove
157 Heritage Trees from the project site. Staff has prepared an Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
Tentative Tract Map, Specific Plan Amendment, and Tree Removal Permit. APN:
0225-111-07. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts has been
prepared for consideration. (SUBTT18012-1, DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-
00898.)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following action:
•Approve Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18012-1 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00730 through the
adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions.
•Recommend City Council approval of Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00730 through the adoption
of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A request to change the Specific Plan designation and subdivide a vacant 6.96-acre property for future single-
family residential development.
BACKGROUND:
The project site is an undeveloped parcel with an area of 303,609 square feet (6.96 acres). The site is generally
rectangular in shape and has dimensions of about 575 feet north to south and 550 feet east to west (Exhibit A).
The site slopes down from north to south, from about 751 to 717 feet, which results in a change of elevation of
about 30 feet between the site’s highest and lowest point. It is covered by non-native grasses, ornamental
vegetation, and contains 158 trees.
The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent properties are
as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Very Low Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
Attachment 1Page317
Page 2 of 4
North Single-Family Residential Very Low Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
South Single-Family Residential Very Low Residential Very Low (VL) Residential 1, 2
East Preschool Very Low Residential School (S) 1, 2
West Vacant Very Low Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
1 – Equestrian Overlay; 2 – Etiwanda Specific Plan
PROJECT ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into 9 lots for future single-family residential
development (Exhibit B). All 9 lots take access from a proposed gated cul-de-sac which branches off
from Banyan Avenue. The proposed tentative tract map includes one lettered lot (Lot A), which will be
used as a private street and storm drain. Lot A will be maintained by a homeowner’s association.
As part of the subdivision, the applicant is proposing to change the project site’s zoning designation from
Estate (ER) Residential to Very Low (VL) Residential in the Etiwanda Specific Plan. As demonstrated in
the following table, the proposed subdivision meets all pertinent requirements in the Very Low (VL)
Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan.
Development Standard Required Proposed Complies?
Lot Area (Minimum) 20,000 SF 22,451 SF YES
Lot Area (Average) 25,000 SF 26,914 SF YES
Lot Depth (Minimum) 200’ 208’ YES
Lot Width (Minimum) 90’ 97’ YES
Lot Frontage (Minimum) 40’ 70’ YES
No development/construction of houses is included with the proposed subdivision. The applicant (or
subsequent future developers) will be required to submit a Design Review application to the City for
review when any house product is proposed in the future.
B. Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00730: The applicant is requesting a Specific Plan Amendment to
change the Specific Plan Designation of the project site within the Etiwanda Specific Plan from the
current designation of Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential. This change would allow a
density increase on the project site from the currently allowed 1.08 dwelling units per acre under the
Estate Residential (ER) to a maximum of 2.17 dwelling units per acre under the Very Low (VL)
designation. The project as proposed will have a density of 1.29 dwelling units per acre.
Staff is in support of the requested Specific Plan Amendment, as the project site is one of the last
remaining parcels along Banyan Street between Bluegrass Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue that are zoned
Estate Residential (ER). Changing the Specific Plan designation to Very Low (VL) Residential will allow
Page 318
Page 3 of 4
development on the site to be consistent in density and character with all other existing residential
developments along the north and south sides of Banyan Street.
C. Tree Removal Permit DRC2018-00898: A tree survey (prepared by Arbor Care, Inc., October 2020)
submitted by the applicant shows 158 trees on-site, 157 of which are considered “Heritage Trees” due to
their size or species as defined in Section 17.16.080 of the Development Code. Seventy percent (110 of
158) trees on-site are nearly dead or dead. The remaining 28 trees are all in poor condition. As such, the
applicant has applied for a Tree Removal Permit to remove all trees on site including the Heritage Trees.
The applicant is proposing to plant 47 48-inch box trees on the project site to replace the trees to be
removed. Staff’s opinion is the value of the 47 large replacement trees exceeds the value of all existing
Heritage Trees on the project site due to their condition.
D. Trails Advisory Committee: As the project site is within the Equestrian Overlay, it was reviewed by the
Trails Advisory Committee on March 10, 2021. Each lot has an area of 20,000 square feet or larger,
which allows for equestrian, and animal-keeping uses. As such, the project includes a 20-foot-wide
Community Trail segment that will be constructed along the north side of Banyan Street to match, and
connect with, the existing Community Trails adjacent to the residential developments located to the east
and south of the project site. Additionally, a 15-foot-wide local feeder trail will loop around the entire tract
to provide access to the rear of every lot and connect to the new Community Trail.
This is consistent with Section 3.4 of the City’s Trails Implementation Plan, which requires local feeder
trails to provide a logical riding loop within subdivisions and Section 17.70.040 of the Development Code
that require feeder trails to provide direct equestrian access to the rear of all lots. The proposed
equestrian trail will also include corner cutoffs to allow a vehicle to maneuver at trail ends. The Trails
Advisory Committee recommended approval of the project’s trails network. The location of the 24 by 24-
foot horse corral and access gates from the trail to each lot will be reviewed by the Planning Department
at the time the applicant applies for a Design Review to develop house product at the subdivision. The
required gates and equestrian step-thru posts are proposed to be provided where the private equestrian
trails (feeder trails) intersect with the community trail, approximately 20 feet from the curb face of Banyan
Street.
Pursuant to the Trails Advisory Committee’s recommendation (Exhibit C), the project is conditioned to
include a third equestrian access point with gates and step throughs toward the site’s northwesterly
corner along Amber Lane.
E. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was conducted for the project on April 13, 2021. The
meeting had 9 attendees. Attendees asked questions about the project’s entitlement process,
environmental review, and construction schedule. No attendees expressed opposition to the project.
F. Public Art: Per RCMC Chapter, 17.124.020(B)1, any project with a density that is equal to 4 dwelling units
per acre or below is exempt from the City’s Public Art requirement. As the project is proposing a density
of 1.29 dwelling units per acre, the project is exempt from the City’s Public Art requirements.
CEQA DETERMINATION:
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s local CEQA Guidelines, the City
staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings
contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to air
quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and
water quality, noise, public services, and tribal and cultural resources, there would be no substantial evidence
that the project would have a significant effect on the environment.
Page 319
Page 4 of 4
Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided
public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. On July
21, 2021, the City received comments from the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) in response to the
Mitigated negative declaration. The CVWD was requesting a minor correction in the percentage of groundwater
supply provided by the CVWD by the City, from 35% as stated in the Mitigated Negative Declaration to 47%
based on the CVWD’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. This correction has since been incorporated into
the environmental document.
California State Bill 18 requires that the City send project notification to California tribal communities when a
project proposes a General Plan or Specific Plan Amendment. Tribal Notifications were sent on January 11,
2018. On January 17, 2018, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians requested that mitigation measures in the
event that archeological/tribal resources are encountered during project activities be incorporated in the into the
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
As required by Assembly Bill 52 (AB52), the City submitted Tribal Consultation Requests to the San Gabriel
Band of Mission Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, Torres Martinez
Desert Cahuilla Indians, Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, and the Morongo Band of Mission
Indian following a completeness determination for the project. The notices were mailed out on January 20, 2021
and provided for a 30-day comment period ending on February 20, 2021.
On January 26, 2021, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians responded to the notice and requested that
mitigation measures related to archeological/cultural resources be incorporated into the Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration.
A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the
mitigation measures for the project.
CORRESPONDENCE:
This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin
newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of
the project site. To date, no written correspondence, phone calls, or in person inquiries have been received
regarding the project notifications.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
One of the City Council’s core values is “providing and nurturing a high quality of life for all.” The high-quality
neighborhood enabled by the project supports this core value by continuing to provide world-class development
within the City for the benefit of future and current residents.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A - Aerial
Exhibit B - Project Plans
Exhibit C - Trails Advisory Committee Comments (March 10, 2021) and Action Agenda
Exhibit D - Draft Resolution of Approval 21-47 Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18012-1
Exhibit E - Draft Resolution of Approval 21-49 Tree Removal Permit DRC2018-00898
Exhibit F - Draft Resolution of Approval 21-48 Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00730
Exhibit G - Conditions of Approval
Exhibit H - Statement of Agreement
Exhibit I - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Exhibit J - Mitigation Monitoring Program
Page 320
AERIAL
Exhibit A
PROJECT
SITE
N
Page 321
Exhibit BProject Plans Page 322
Page 323
Page 324
Page 325
Page 326
Page 327
Page 328
Page 329
Exhibit C
Page 330
Page 331
Page 332
RESOLUTION NO. 21-47
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP SUBTT18012-1, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A VACANT PARCEL OF
APPROXIMATELY 6.96 ACRES INTO 9 RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITHIN THE
VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN
(ESP), EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY, LOCATED AT 12774 BANYAN STREET;
AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF – APN: 0225-111-07.
A.Recitals.
1.EGL Associates, Inc. filed an application for the issuance of Tentative Tract Map
SUBTT18012-1, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application."
2.On the 8th day of September 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded
said hearing on that date.
3.All legal prerequisites prior 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 during the above-
referenced public hearing on September 8, 2021, including written and oral staff reports, together
with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a.The application applies to the property located at 12774 Banyan Street with a
linear dimension, from north to south, of approximately 575 feet and a linear dimension, from east
to west of approximately 550 feet and is presently undeveloped; and
b.The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations
for, the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted) are as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Very Low Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
North Single-Family Residential Very Low Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
South Single-Family Residential Very Low Residential Very Low (VL) Residential 1, 2
East Preschool Very Low Residential School (S) 1, 2
Exhibit D Page 333
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-47
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18012-1 – EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 8, 2021
Page 2
West Vacant Very Low Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
1 – Equestrian Overlay; 2 – Etiwanda Specific Plan (ESP)
c.The proposal is to subdivide a property of approximately 6.96 acres into 9 single-
family detached lots for future development. The proposed density for the project is 1.29 dwelling
units per acre. The maximum density allowed within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, ESP,
is 2.17 dwelling units per acre. The average lot area for the project is 26,914 square feet and the
minimum net average for the Very Low (VL) Residential District in the ESP is 25,000 square feet.
The site layout is consistent with the ESP’s development standards such as lot width and depth,
minimum and average lot area, street width, and wall design; and
d.The project site slopes down north to south, from about 751 feet to 717 feet. The
conceptual grading plan indicates the highest pad elevation is 747 feet at the northwest corner of
the site, and lowest pad elevation is 724 feet at the southeast portion of the site; and
e.The subdivision will have one point of access from the future cul-de-sac
accessed from Banyan Street. The Engineering Department has included conditions that require
the construction of right-of way improvements including curb and gutter, and a community trail;
and
f.The design of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the surrounding
residential subdivisions along Banyan Street; and
g.This application is in conjunction with Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-
00730 to amend the site’s Specific Plan designation from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low
(VL) Residential within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, Equestrian Overlay and Tree Removal Permit
DRC2018-00898; and
h.The project was reviewed by the Trails Advisory Committee (TAC) on March 10,
2021. The project includes local feeder trails and will be conditioned to have trail improvements
that meet City standards. The Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning
Commission with minor changes incorporated as discussed in the staff report and included in the
attached Conditions of Approval; and
i.On April 13, 2021, a neighborhood meeting was conducted by the applicant via
teleconference. The intent of this meeting was to invite property owners within a 660-foot radius
of the project boundaries for input relating to the project. There was a total of 9 attendees, in
addition to the applicant, Project Engineer, and Planning Department staff. During the meeting,
the applicant presented the tentative tract map and conceptual grading plan for the proposed
project. No opposition to the project was brought up; and
j.On January 11, 2018, per SB 18, Tribal notifications were sent to all tribes
recommended by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) informing them of the
proposed Specific Plan Amendment related to the project. On January 17, 2018, the San Manuel
Band of Mission Indians requested that mitigation measures in the event that archeological/tribal
resources are encountered during project activities be incorporated in the into the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
Page 334
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-47
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18012-1 – EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 8, 2021
Page 3
k.On January 20, 2021, per AB 52, the City sent Tribal Consultation Requests to
the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of
Luiseno Indians, Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians –
Kizh Nation, and the Morongo Band of Mission Indian following a completeness determination for
the project. On January 26, 2021, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians responded to the
notice and requested that mitigation measures related to archeological/cultural resources be
incorporated into the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
l.The Planning Department prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration which
incorporates all comments resulting from tribal notifications pursuant to SB 18 and AB 52.
Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to
adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
3.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a.That the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code,
and the ESP. The proposal involves a subdivision for residential development within the Very Low
(VL) Residential Zoning District of the ESP and the Very Low Residential General Plan land use
designation. The maximum density within this zone and General Plan land use designation is 2.17
dwelling units per acre. The proposed subdivision involves a density of 1.29 dwelling units per
acre; and
b.The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General
Plan, Development Code, and ESP. The project involves a request to subdivide a 6.96-acre site
into 9 residential lots for future single-family residential development. The minimum lot size is
20,000 square feet and the minimum net average for the Very Low (VL) Residential District in the
ESP is 25,000 square feet. The project complies with these standards. The project site layout is
also consistent with the ESP’s development standards such as lot width and depth, street width,
and wall design; and
c.The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. Currently,
the site is undeveloped. The project involves grading of the site to comply with the City
requirements and to be consistent with previously approved tract maps within the vicinity of the
subject property; and
d.The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat. An initial study was prepared
for the project that includes mitigation measures to reduce any potential impacts to humans or
wildlife to less than significant; and
e.The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The
proposed project involves a residential subdivision. The included mitigation measures, along with
the future single-family residential use, will not cause serious public health problems; and
f.The design of the tentative tract ties into the existing equestrian community trail
system and will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for
Page 335
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-47
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18012-1 – EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 8, 2021
Page 4
access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. The project incorporates
one point of primary access, which is from a future cul-de-sac branching from Banyan Street.
4.Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment
for the application, the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental
environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings
and determinations:
a.Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s
local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental
effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined
that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the
project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of
the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
b.The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole
record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with
CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial
evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that
determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided
public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative
Declaration.
c.The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation
Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public
Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance
with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore
recommends the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project.
d.The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration,
Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings
upon which the Planning Commission’s decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning
Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750.
5.Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above,
this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth in
the attached Conditions of Approval.
6.The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Page 336
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-47
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18012-1 – EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 8, 2021
Page 5
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman
ATTEST:
Anne McIntosh, AICP, Secretary
I, Anne McIntosh, AICP, Secretary 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 8th day of September 2021, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 337
RESOLUTION NO. 21-49
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2018-
00898, A REQUEST TO REMOVE 157 HERITAGE TREES RELATED TO THE
SUBDVISION OF A VACANT 6.96-ACRE PARCEL INTO 9 SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITHIN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT,
ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN (ESP), EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY LOCATED AT
12774 BANYAN STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF –
APN: 0225-111-07.
A.Recitals.
1.EGL Associates, Inc. filed an application for the issuance of Tree Removal Permit DRC2018-
00898, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tree Removal
Permit request is referred to as "the application."
2.On the 8th day of September 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date.
3.All legal prerequisites prior 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 during the
above-referenced public hearings on September 8, 2021, including written and oral staff reports, together
with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a.The application applies to the property located at 12774 Banyan Street with a linear
dimension, from north to south, of approximately 575 feet and a linear dimension, from east to west of
approximately 550 feet and is presently undeveloped; and
b. The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for, the
project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted) are as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Very Low Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
North Single-Family Residential Very Low Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
South Single-Family Residential Very Low Residential Very Low (VL) Residential 1, 2
East Preschool Very Low Residential School (S) 1, 2
Exhibit E Page 338
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-49
TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2018-00898 – EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 8, 2021
Page 2
West Vacant Very Low Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
1 – Equestrian Overlay; 2 – Etiwanda Specific Plan (ESP)
c.Tree Removal Permit DRC2018-00898 is for the removal of 157 Heritage Trees. A Tree
Survey (Arbor Care, Inc., October 2020) was submitted that reviews the health and condition of all 158
trees on-site, 157 of which are Heritage Trees. The report concludes that based on the poor condition of a
majority of the trees on the project site, all 158 trees will need to be removed, including 157 Heritage Trees;
and
d.The application is in conjunction to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18012-1 for the
subdivision of a vacant parcel into 9 single-family lots and Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00730 to
amend the site’s Specific Plan designation from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential
within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, Equestrian Overlay; and
e.On April 13, 2021, a neighborhood meeting was conducted by the applicant via
teleconference. The intent of this meeting was to invite property owners within a 660-foot radius of the
project boundaries for input relating to the project. There was a total of 9 attendees, in addition to the
applicant, Project Engineer, and Planning Department staff. During the meeting, the applicant presented
the tentative tract map and conceptual grading plan for the proposed project. No opposition to the project
was brought up; and
f.On January 11, 2018, per SB 18, Tribal notifications were sent to all tribes recommended
by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) informing them of the proposed Specific Plan
Amendment related to the project. On January 17, 2018, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
requested that mitigation measures in the event that archeological/tribal resources are encountered during
project activities be incorporated in the into the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
g.On January 20, 2021, per AB 52, the City sent Tribal Consultation Requests to the San
Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians,
Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, and the
Morongo Band of Mission Indian following a completeness determination for the project. On January 26,
2021, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians responded to the notice and requested that mitigation
measures related to archeological/cultural resources be incorporated into the Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration; and
h.The Planning Department prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration which incorporates
all comments resulting from tribal notifications pursuant to SB 18 and AB 52. Thereafter, the City staff
provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative
Declaration.
3.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the
above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
Page 339
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-49
TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2018-00898 – EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 8, 2021
Page 3
a.The proposed Tree Removal Permit is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan.
The related Tentative Map (SUBTT18012-1) will be consistent with the General Plan. The removal of the
subject trees is necessary to develop the related 9-lot single-family subdivision; and
b.The proposed Tree Removal Permit will be in accord with the objectives of the Municipal
Code and the purposes of the district in which permits the removal of heritage trees when associated with
the development of the project site. In this case, removal of the trees is necessary to construct the related
9-lot single-family subdivision. The Tree Survey submitted for the project (Arbor Care, Inc., October 2020)
concluded that based poor health of a majority of on-site trees, a total of 158 trees, 157 of which are
considered Heritage Trees, will need to be removed; and
c.The proposed Tree Removal Permit will be compliance with each of the applicable
provisions of the Development Code including replacement of the removed trees with trees of a species
and quantity commensurate with the aesthetic value of the trees to be removed. The removed trees will
be replaced by 47, 48-inch box trees as part of the proposed project, which far exceed the existing value
of all trees that are dead, dying or in poor condition currently on the project site; and
d.The proposed Tree Removal Permit, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will
not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity as the 157 Heritage Trees will be replaced with new trees as part of the overall
landscape theme.
4.Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,
together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,
the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval
of this application based upon the following findings and determinations:
a.Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s local CEQA
Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project.
Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of
mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect
on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared.
Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the
Mitigated Negative Declaration.
b.The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all
comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before
it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that,
based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have
a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was
prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent
to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
c.The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring
Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code
Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation
measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore recommends the City
Page 340
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-49
TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2018-00898 – EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 8, 2021
Page 4
Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project.
d.The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation
Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the
Planning Commission’s decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909)
477-2750.
5.Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this
Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth in the attached
Conditions of Approval.
6.The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman
ATTEST:
Anne McIntosh, AICP, Secretary
I, Anne McIntosh, AICP, 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 8th day of September 2021, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 341
RESOLUTION NO. 21-48
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00730, A REQUEST TO AMEND
THE SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION OF AN UNDEVELOPED, 6.96-ACRE
PROPERTY FROM ESTATE RESIDENTIAL (ER) TO VERY LOW (VL)
RESIDENTIAL WITHIN THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN (ESP),
EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY, LOCATED AT 12774 BANYAN STREET; AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF – APN: 0225-111-07.
A.Recitals.
1.EGL Associates, Inc. filed an application for the issuance of Specific Plan Amendment
DRC2016-00730, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Specific Plan Amendment request is referred to as "the application."
2.On the 8th day of September 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded
said hearing on that date.
3.All legal prerequisites prior 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 during the above-
referenced public hearing on September 8, 2021, including written and oral staff reports, together
with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a.The application applies to the property located at 12774 Banyan Street with a
linear dimension, from north to south, of approximately 575 feet and a linear dimension, from east
to west of approximately 550 feet and is presently undeveloped; and
b.The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations
for, the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted) are as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Very Low Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
North Single-Family Residential Very Low Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
South Single-Family Residential Very Low Residential Very Low (VL) Residential 1, 2
Exhibit F Page 342
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-48
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00730 – EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 8, 2021
Page 2
East Preschool Very Low Residential School (S) 1, 2
West Vacant Very Low Residential Estate (ER) Residential 1, 2
1 – Equestrian Overlay; 2 – Etiwanda Specific Plan (ESP)
c.The proposal is a Specific Plan Amendment to change the Specific Plan
Designation of the subject property from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential for
the development of 9 single-family lots within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, Equestrian Overlay.
House product for the lots is not a part of the project scope and will be submitted at a later date;
and
d.This application is in conjunction with Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18012-1 to
subdivide the subject property into 9 single-family lots and Tree Removal Permit DRC2018-
00898; and
e.The proposed lots comply with the 90-foot lot width and 200-foot lot depth
requirements of the Etiwanda Specific Plan for the Very Low (VL) Residential district. The lots
range in size from 22,451 to 29,703 square feet, with an average lot size of 26,914 square feet
which exceeds the required 25,000 square foot average lot size; and
f.The existing single-family residences to the south and west of the project site are
within the Very Low (VL) Residential district of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, and are developed in
accordance with all applicable zoning standards of their underlying zoning district including
average lot size, lot dimensions, and density. The design of the proposed subdivision is consistent
with the surrounding residential subdivisions along Banyan Street; and
g. On April 13, 2021, a neighborhood meeting was conducted by the applicant via
teleconference. The intent of this meeting was to invite property owners within a 660-foot radius
of the project boundaries for input relating to the project. There was a total of 9 attendees, in
addition to the applicant, Project Engineer, and Planning Department staff. During the meeting,
the applicant presented the tentative tract map and conceptual grading plan for the proposed
project. No opposition to the project was brought up; and
h.On January 11, 2018, per SB 18, Tribal notifications were sent to all tribes
recommended by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) informing them of the
proposed Specific Plan Amendment related to the project. On January 17, 2018, the San Manuel
Band of Mission Indians requested that mitigation measures in the event that archeological/tribal
resources are encountered during project activities be incorporated in the into the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
i.On January 20, 2021, per AB 52, the City sent Tribal Consultation Requests to
the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of
Luiseno Indians, Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians –
Kizh Nation, and the Morongo Band of Mission Indian following a completeness determination for
the project. On January 26, 2021, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians responded to the
notice and requested that mitigation measures related to archeological/cultural resources be
incorporated into the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
Page 343
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-48
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00730 – EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 8, 2021
Page 3
j.The Planning Department prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration which
incorporates all comments resulting from tribal notifications pursuant to SB 18 and AB 52. The
Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated on June 28, 2021. Thereafter, the City staff
provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated
Negative Declaration.
3.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. That proposed Etiwanda Specific Plan amendment does not conflict with the
Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for the development, within the district, in
a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development. As a Land Use Policy,
the General Plan states that new development should be accommodated in a manner that
integrates it into the physical structure of the City, is a logical extension of existing infrastructure
improvements and there are adequate public services available to serve the development. The
proposed Specific Plan Amendment will implement the Land Use Policies outlined above and will
not be inconsistent with the density or quality of existing development within the Etiwanda Specific
Plan area and the City.
b. The proposed Etiwanda Specific Plan amendment does promote the goals and
objectives of the Etiwanda Specific Plan which in turn are consistent with and implement the goals
and objectives of the General Plan. These goals include promoting the economical and efficient
use of land, promoting design and construction techniques that are responsive to the
environment, and promoting development compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The
proposed zoning amendment will result in development that is consistent with these goals and
objectives and will be indistinguishable in overall quality and design from existing development in
the surrounding area.
c.The proposed Etiwanda Specific Plan amendment will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment will enable development on the subject property to be
consistent with all other residential development along Banyan Street. The lots will be of similar
size to the surrounding development. The minor increase in density will not increase traffic in a
manner that is beyond what the roads were designed to accommodate or overwhelm the existing
public facilities in the surrounding area.
d. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. The General
Plan states that the Very Low (VL) land use designation is characterized by detached, very low
density single-family residential units on 0.5-acre lots or larger, with private yards and private
parking with a density range of 0.10 to 2 dwelling units per acre. The related subdivision
(SUBTT18012-1) for the project site has a proposed density of 1.29 dwelling units per acre. The
proposed Specific Plan Amendment will be fully compliant with the General Plan; and
e.The proposed amendment is consistent with the objectives of the Etiwanda
Specific Plan. The project site is being subdivided for the development of single-family residences
with a density of 1.29 dwelling units per acre and an average lot size of 26,914, in excess of the
Page 344
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-48
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00730 – EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 8, 2021
Page 4
required 25,000 square foot average lot size. The lots will be of similar size to the existing
residential lots to the south and east, and will become an integral part of the surrounding area.
4.Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment
for the application, the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental
environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings
and determinations:
a.Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s
local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental
effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined
that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the
project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of
the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
b.The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole
record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with
CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial
evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning
Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent
judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning
Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
c.The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation
Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public
Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance
with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission, therefore,
recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project.
d.The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration,
Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings
upon which the Planning Commission’s decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning
Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750.
5.Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above,
this Commission hereby recommends approval of Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00730 as
depicted on Exhibit B, attached hereto.
6.The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Page 345
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-48
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00730 – EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 8, 2021
Page 5
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman
ATTEST:
Anne McIntosh, AICP, Secretary
I, Anne McIntosh, AICP, Secretary 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 8th day of September 2021, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 346
Conditions of Approval
Community Development Department
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
The Cucamonga Valley Water District's (CVWD) Engineering Department shall be included in the final
design coordination. Designs of facilities connecting to the CVWD's systems, or construction which
have potential to impact their existing facilities must be formally submitted prior to construction.
Development Guidelines are available on the CVWD website at www.cvwdwater.com/Development.
1.
Developer shall provide elevations and details for the subdivision gate during building permit plan
check.
2.
Standard Conditions of Approval
The applicant shall sign the Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval
provided by the Planning Department. The signed Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of
Conditions of Approval shall be returned to the Planning Department prior to the submittal of
grading/construction plans for plan check, request for a business license, and/or commencement of the
approved activity.
3.
The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents,
officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such
approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs
and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay
as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the
defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this
condition.
4.
Approval of Tentative Tract No.18012-1 is granted subject to the approval of Specific Plan Amendment
DRC2016-00730.
5.
Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval or Approval Letter, Conditions of
Approval, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for
information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be
wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect.
6.
The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption
and Mitigated Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,530.25. All checks are to be made payable
to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to
public hearing.
7.
This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning
Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3
years from the date of the approval.
8.
www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 7/29/2021
Exhibit G Page 347
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Construct block walls between homes (i.e., along interior side and rear property lines ), rather than wood
fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency.
9.
The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site
Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading
on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, the Development Code regulations,
and the Etiwanda Specific Plan,
10.
All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for
consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building,
etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has
commenced, whichever comes first.
11.
Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall
condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property
owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owners at least
30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project perimeter.
12.
Street names shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval in accordance with the
adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map
13.
Engineering Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
The street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all
costs of street lights and to provide power to City owned street lights.
1.
All existing overhead lines on the project side of the street shall be undergrounded and poles shall be
removed.
2.
Provide full width improvements along Amber Lane to bring Amber Lane up to City Standards. An
in-lieu fee has been paid by 12770 Amber Lane for frontage improvements. Provide half width
improvements from the tract boundary to Etiwanda Avenue.
3.
(DIF Fees)
Development impact fees are due prior to issuance of a building permit or certificate of occupancy per
the Engineering Fee schedule, Government Code Section 66000, et seq. and local ordinance. Pursuant
to Government Code Section 66020(d), the 90-day approval period in which the applicant may protest
these fees will begin at the date the fees are invoiced. Protests must be made in writing and be
delivered to the City Clerk prior to the close of business on the 90th day of the 90-day approval period.
Note: Fees are subject to change annually.
4.
Standard Conditions of Approval
www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 348
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Private drainage easements for cross -lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted
on the final map.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the
project site from adjacent areas.
Easements for cross-lot drainage shall be private.
If a public storm drain easement is required to convey flows from Amber Lane to "A" Street; Public
storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a sump catch
basin on the public street, and provisions made to pass through walls.
5.
Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards.6.
Dedication shall be made of the following rights -of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street
centerline):
30' on Amber Lane
33' on Banyan
30' on "A" Street (Private Street)
7.
Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community
trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment and
maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and /or tentative map. Private
easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as
shown on the plans and/or tentative map.
8.
A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map
approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be
installed as required by the City Engineer.
9.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the
property from adjacent areas.
10.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall be
paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least
50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and
appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must
complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following
the completion of the construction and /or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits
issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a
completed CD-2 form, a copy of the cashier ’s receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight
tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www .CityofRC.us, under City Hall;
Engineering; Environmental Programs.
11.
www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 349
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new
streetlights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to Building Permit
issuance if no map is involved.
12.
A signed consent and waiver form to join and /or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts
shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of
Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer.
13.
Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: “All improvements within
the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans .” If
there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern.
14.
Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: for Banyan Street
and Amber Lane
Curb & Gutter
A.C. Pvmt
Side-walk
Drive Appr.
Street Lights
Street Trees
Comm Trail
Other
15.
Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of
energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a
permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all
improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and
accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure
or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of
completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined
by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In
no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources
prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development
approval.
16.
www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 350
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future
signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public
and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits,
whichever occurs first.
b. Prior to any work being performed in public right -of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit
shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required.
c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and
interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project
along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring .
Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other
locations approved by the City Engineer.
Notes:
1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart,
unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer.
2) Conduit shall be 3-inch pvc with pull rope or as specified.
e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA
standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate
detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be
provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the
construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to
City Standards, except for single-family residential lots.
h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check.
17.
www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 351
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed
legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement
plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating: “Street
trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on Sheet, typically Sheet 1.” Where public landscape
plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans.
Street Name: Banyan Street
Botanical Name: Lagerstroemia hybrid ‘Muskogee’
Common Name: Crape Myrtle
Min. Grow Space:
Spacing: 35 feet on center
Size: 15 gallon (minimum)
Qty.: To be determined during design
Street Name: Amber Lane
Botanical Name: Geijera parviflora
Common Name: Australian Willow
Min. Grow Space:
Spacing: 45-feet on center
Size: 15 gallon (minimum)
Qty.: To be determined during design
Street Name: "A" Street (Private)
Botanical Name: Geijera parviflora
Common Name: Australian Willow
Min. Grow Space:
Spacing: 25 feet on center
Size: 15 gallon (minimum)
Qty.: To be determined during design
Construction Notes for Street Trees:
1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans.
2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City
inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as
determined by the City inspector.
3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department.
Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only.
18.
Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted
policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including
driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines
of sight plotted as required.
19.
www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 352
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped
areas, etc.) shown on the plans and /or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior
street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive
approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees.
20.
Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance
with the City's street tree program.
21.
The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary.22.
Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric
power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements
shall be provided as required.
23.
Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of
the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them.
24.
Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga
Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental
Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required
prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been
issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior
to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects.
25.
An irrevocable offer of dedication for roadway purposes shall be made for the private streets.26.
Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for review and
approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the private streets, fees shall be
paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition
to any other permits required.
27.
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
Gates installed across a residential emergency vehicle access road (fire lane) are required to be in
accordance with Standard 5-3. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
1.
The site/project is located in the designated Wildland -Urban Interface Fire Area. Please include this
note on the plans. Construction materials and methods and automatic fire sprinkler systems are to be in
compliance with Chapter 7A of the California Building Code, Section R 337 of the California Residential
Code, and Fire District Standard 49-1. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
2.
The site/project is located in the designated Wildland -Urban Interface Fire Area. Please include this
note on the plans. Landscaping, vegetation management, fuel reduction, and other wildland fire safety
features and practices are required to comply with all applicable provisions of Fire District Standard
49-1. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
3.
www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 353
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
The site/project is located in the designated Wildland -Urban Interface Fire Area. Please include this
note on the plans. A site-specific or project -specific fire protection plan is required for this project. The
fire protection plan is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 49-1. The Standard has
been uploaded to the Documents section.
4.
Building and Safety Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural
calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance
with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards .
The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers per the CBC and Current
RCFPD Ordinance.
1.
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code
and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The
Grading and Drainage Plan (s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual
Grading and Drainage Plan.
1.
A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform
such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall
implement design recommendations per said report.
2.
The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be
completed, submitted, and approved by the City Engineer, or his designee, prior to the issuance of
building permits.
3.
A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and
for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of
combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by
a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit.
4.
The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust
control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be
located outside of the public right of way.
5.
If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan /Permit are submitted to the City Engineer for review, the rough
grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage
Plan/Permit.
6.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent
property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter
wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line.
7.
www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 354
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a
minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All
slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code.
8.
The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined
exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond
shall be approved by the City Engineer, or his designee.
9.
The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond
project boundary.
10.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit the precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format
provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout “Information for Grading Plans and Permit”.
11.
Grading Inspections:
a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre -grading
meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner /representative, the grading contractor and
the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a
pre-grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations, the grading permit
may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector;
b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department
at least 1 working day in advance to request the following grading inspections prior to continuing
grading operations:
i)The bottom of the over-excavation;
ii)Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building permit;
iii)At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit
Technicians (Building and Safety Front Counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be
prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record;
iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate
Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit.
12.
Prior to issuance of a wall permit, on engineered combination garden /retaining walls along the property
boundary the structural calculations for the wall shall assume a level toe /heel at the adjacent off-site
property (i.e. a manufactured slope is not present). This shall be shown in the typical sections of the
grading and drainage plan.
13.
Prior to issuance of a wall permit, a copy of the Grading Special Conditions of Approval shall be
included within the engineered wall plans and calculations.
14.
Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan )
set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separations between the
building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of Sections CBC 1804.3/CRC
R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.2/CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted
California Building Code/Residential Code.
15.
www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 355
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a signed and notarized letter from the
adjacent property owner(s) for ALL work proposed on the adjacent property. The letter shall be scanned
and pasted onto the permitted grading plan set. The letter shall show on either the title sheet or a detail
sheet of the grading and drainage plan set.
16.
Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit
to the City Engineer, or his designee, a rough or a precise grading plan showing the location and
elevations of existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of
proposed structures and drainage of the site.
17.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the following information
in the equestrian trails: – Provide PVC fencing per city standards, provide a 4” thick decomposed
granite (DG) surface, provide a drainage V ditch parallel to the trail, provide a bridge over the V ditch
where necessary for access to corals, and gates to corrals. The equestrian bridges shall be capable of
carrying vehicle loads where necessary. Where the longitudinal slope (s) is S< 5% the cross fall shall be
2%, if S>5% the cross fall may be 4% maximum. Where water bars required, the spacing for the water
bars is: 50’ maximum for longitudinal slopes of 4% to 6%, 40’ maximum for longitudinal slopes of 6.1%
to 9%, 30’ maximum for longitudinal slopes of 9.1% to 12%, 20’ maximum for longitudinal slopes
greater than 12%. In the equestrian trails water bars shall also be placed at the top and bottom of the
trail where the gradient of the trail changes, i .e. a steep downhill slope which will cause additional
erosion to the trail.
Banyan Street:
The Feeder trail along Banyan Street shall provide a vehicle gate with side access per City standard
1006-B and City standard 1007-B. City standard 1007-B (Pass Through Detail) shall be modified with
a spacing of 36” between each of the treated posts.
Amber Lane:
A 7 ft. pass-through access without a vehicle gate shall be provided along Amber lane per City standard
1007-B. City standard 1007-B (Pass Through Detail) shall be modified with a spacing of 36” between
each of the treated posts.
18.
A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for on -site drainage shall be
prepared and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval for on -site storm water drainage
prior to issuance of a grading permit. The report shall contain water surface profile gradient calculations
for all storm drain pipes 12-inches and larger in diameter. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by
the Engineer of Record. In addition, the project specific drainage study shall provide inlet calculations
showing the proper sizing of the water quality management plan storm water flows into the proposed
structural storm water treatment devices.
19.
Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard lined gutters and
swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps, and anywhere that flow lines exceed 10 percent. This
shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of a grading permit.
20.
www.CityofRC.us Page 10 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 356
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall demonstrate that the storm water run -off will not
adversely affect the downstream properties and that the water may legally discharge to the downstream
properties. The engineer of record shall show on the final permitted grading and drainage plan one (1)
or more of the following items are met: a) There is sufficient downstream capacity to accept the
proposed storm water flows and that the downstream property owner have provided permission to
accept the upstream storm water flows; b) a legal document /entity exists allowing developed storm
water flows to be discharged to the property lower in elevation; c) a storm drain system to safely convey
the storm water flows to a public storm drain system without causing flooding to adjacent property(ies).
21.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit and in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution 92-17, if
a lot may not directly drain off -site directly to the street or other acceptable drainage device (such as a
drainage ditch adjacent to an equestrian trail ), then: a) drainage may flow from only one lot onto only one
other lot; b) a drainage easement shall be provided over the lot accepting the drainage; c) the drainage
shall be contained within either a concrete /rock lined swale/channel or a reinforced concrete pipe; and
d) the drainage shall be designed with excess capacity to account for the probable lack of necessary
maintenance, therefore, it shall be designed to convey two (2) times the runoff from a 100-year storm
event with the minimum diameter of the pipe being 12-inches.
22.
Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California
Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan.
23.
Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the
engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP)
storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP).
24.
Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of
the project Conditions of Approval.
25.
Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance
of all storm water quality structural /treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as
provided for in the project ’s Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R ’s or
deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan, or the Final
Map, whichever occurs first. Said CC&R ’s and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific
Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document
and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan.
26.
Prior to the issuance of a Rough or Precise Grading Permit the City of Rancho Cucamonga ’s
“Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan” shall be submitted for review
and approval by the City Engineer and recorded with the County Recorder’s Office.
27.
Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification
Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan
document.
28.
www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 357
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
The applicant shall provide a copy of a completed EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) for
each underground infiltration device, with the Facility ID Number assigned, to the City Engineer, or his
designee, prior to issuance of the Grading Permit and /or approval of the project -specific Water Quality
Management Plan. A copy of EPA Form 7520-16 shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted
grading plan set, and a copy of said form shall be included in the project -specific Water Quality
Management Plan.
29.
The homeowners association shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person /company on a
biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells /underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The homeowners association shall maintain on a
regular basis all best management practices (BMP”s) as described in the Storm Water Quality
Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground
infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the homeowners association.
30.
The homeowners association shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural
storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Environmental Program Manager. The homeowners association shall maintain on a regular basis as
described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs
associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the homeowners
association.
31.
The homeowners association shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved
project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a
biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager.
32.
A final project-specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be approved by the City
Engineer, or his designee, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga ’s “Memorandum of Storm Water Quality
Management Plan” shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a rough or precise grading permit or any
building permit, or the approval of the Final Map, whichever occurs first.
33.
Prior to the issuance of a rough or precise grading permit, or a building permit or Engineering Services
Department issued right of way permit or the recordation of the Final Map, whichever occurs first, the
applicant shall submit to the City Engineer, or his designee, a final project specific water quality
management plan for review and approval, and shall have said document recorded with the San
Bernardino County Recorder's Office.
34.
www.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 358
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
The final project-specific water quality management plan (WQMP) shall include executed maintenance
agreements along with the maintenance guidelines for all proprietary structural storm water treatment
devices (BMP’s). In the event the applicant cannot get the proprietary device maintenance agreements
executed prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant is required to submit a letter to be included
within the WQMP document, and scanned and pasted onto the Site and Drainage Plan which states
that prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy with applicant shall enter into a contract for the
maintenance of the proprietary storm water treatment device. If the proprietary storm water treatment
device is part of a residential subdivision, prior to the sale of the residential lot, the developer shall
include maintenance agreement (s) as part of the sale of the residential lot to the buyer. A copy of the
maintenance agreements to be included in the sale of the property shall be included within the WQMP
document.
35.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit and approval of the project specific water quality management
plan all private storm water catch basin inlets shall include insert filters to capture those pollutants of
concern as addressed in the in the final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP). At a
minimum catch basin insert filters to capture trash and other floating debris. All catch basin insert filters
shall be maintained on a regular basis as described in the “Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility
for Post Construction BMP” section of the final project-specific water quality management plan.
36.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Project -Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall
include a completed copy of “Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet” located
in Appendix D “Section VII – Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety
Recommendations, …” of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality
Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer ’s recommendations for
Appendix D, Table VII.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety
Factors”. DESIGN ISSUE: All of the proposed infiltration trenches are located in the fill areas after rough
grading. Prior the approval of the pad certifications and issuance of a building permit, the applicant as a
condition of approval is required to provide additional infiltration testing at the bottom elevation of each
of the proposed infiltration trenches.
37.
Prior to approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan the applicant shall have a
soils engineer prepare a project -specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water
quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current
adopted “San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans ”.
If the project storm water treatment devices (infiltration trenches) are within the private street, then prior
to the approval of the pad certifications and issuance of a building permit (s), the applicant shall have a
soils engineer provide additional infiltration testing in the compacted soils. The infiltration shall be
provided to the City Engineer, or his designee, for review. If the infiltration testing requires a redesign of
storm water treatment devices, the water quality management plan shall be revised to meet the
graded/compacted soil requirements prior to the issuance of the building permits.
38.
www.CityofRC.us Page 13 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 359
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
The subject project, shall accept all existing off -site storm water drainage flows and safely convey those
flows through or around the project site. If existing off -site storm water drainage flows mix with any
on-site storm water drainage flows, then the off -site storm water drainage flows shall be treated with the
on-site storm water drainage flows for storm water quality purposes, prior to discharging the storm
water drainage flows from the project site.
39.
Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the City Engineer, or designee, the civil Engineer
of Record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction Storm Water
Treatment Devices As-Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City of Rancho
Cucamonga Engineering Services Department.
40.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga does not allow on -site storm water quality treatment BMP devices
within the individual single -family lots which will be required to be inspected and maintained by each
individual homeowner. As a condition of approval for this single -family residential project (including
tentative tract maps and parcel maps, and final tract maps and parcel maps of 2 lots/parcels or more) a
common storm water treatment system (s) will be required which shall be maintained by a homeowners ’
association prior to the approval of a water quality management plan and issuance of a grading permit.
41.
The proposed tentative map is proposing a land division only. The USEPA regulations include the term
“common plan of development or sale” to ensure that acreage within a common project does not
artificially escape the permit requirements because construction activities are phased, split among
smaller parcels, or completed by different owners /developers”. In keeping with the intent of this USEPA
regulation the applicant as a condition of approval shall be required to submit a final project -specific
water quality management plan to the City Engineer, or their designee, prior to the recordation of either
the final map or the parcel map. This final project -specific water quality management plan shall be
recorded prior to the recordation of either the final map or parcel map. As development of each lot is
unknown at this time, the applicant shall use the maximum allowed lot coverage per the zoning
requirements to calculate the design capture volume (DCV) for each lot and provide a typical structural
storm water treatment device meeting low impact development (LID) principles for each lot as the lot
develops in the future.
42.
RESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES – CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE –
Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant shall comply with Section 4.106.3 (Grading
and Paving) of the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code:
Construction plans shall indicate how the site grading or drainage system will manage all surface water
flows to keep water from entering building. Examples of methods to manage surface water include, but
are not limited to, the following:
1.Swales.
2.Water collection and disposal systems.
3.French drains.
4.Water retention gardens.
5.Other water measures which keep surface water away from buildings and aid in groundwater
recharge.
Exception: Additions and alterations not altering the drainage path.
43.
www.CityofRC.us Page 14 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 360
Project #: SUBTT18012-1 DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898
Project Name: Su 9-Lot Subdivision
Location: 12774 BANYAN ST - 022511107-0000
Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
www.CityofRC.us Page 15 of 15Printed: 7/29/2021 Page 361
Planning Department
Statement of Agreement and Acceptance
of Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18012-1,
Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00730, and Tree Removal Permit
DRC2018-00898
I, Norman Kulla, as applicant for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18012-1 and Tree Removal Permit
DRC2018-00898, hereby state that I am in agreement with and accept the conditions of approval
for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18012-1 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2018-00898, for property
located at 12774 Banyan Street Rancho Cucamonga, California, (APN: 0225-111-07) as adopted
by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on September 9, 2021 and as
listed below and attached.
Applicant Signature____________________________
Date ______________________________
Conditions of Approval
1.The applicant shall sign the Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of
Approval provided by the Planning Department. The signed Statement of Agreement and
Acceptance of Conditions of Approval shall be returned to the Planning Department prior to
the submittal of grading/construction plans for plan check, request for a business license,
and/or commencement of the approved activity.
2.All conditions of approval attached to Resolutions of Approval Nos. 21-47 and 21-49 for
Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18012-1 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2018-00898 respectively.
Exhibit H
Page 362
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1.Project File: Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1)
2.Related Files: Tree Removal Permit (DRC2018-00898) and Specific Plan Amendment (DRC2016-
00730)
3.Description of Project: A request to subdivide an approximately 6.96-acre vacant parcel for the
construction of 9 single-family residences within the Estate Residential (ER) district, Etiwanda
Specific Plan, located at 12774 Banyan Street. Also included is a request for the removal of trees
within the project site, and a specific plan amendment to change the zoning district of the subject
site from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low Residential (VL) within the Etiwanda Specific Plan.
The project site is within the Equestrian Overlay. APN: 0225-111-07.
5.General Plan Designation: Very Low Residential (VLR)
6.Zoning: Currently Estate Residential (ER) district, Etiwanda Specific Plan
7.Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is comprised of a vacant parcel
approximately 6.96 acres in size, located on the north side of Banyan Street, east of Etiwanda
Avenue. Limited street improvements including a curb and gutter are present along the project site’s
frontage along Banyan Street. The property slopes down from north to south, from about 751 feet
to 717 feet.
The site is bound to the west by a school (Frost Early Education Center,) and to the east is a vacant,
rectangular-shaped parcel, both of which are zoned Estate Residential (ER), Etiwanda Specific
Plan. The properties to the north comprise of vacant and undeveloped single -family lots zoned
Estate Residential (ER), Etiwanda Specific Plan. The properties to the south (across Banyan)
comprise of vacant land and a single-family residential tract within the Very Low Residential (VL)
district, Etiwanda Specific Plan. The project site and surrounding properties discussed above are
within the Equestrian Overlay.
Exhibit I
Page 363
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 2
8. Location Map
Page 364
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 3
9. Project Plans
Page 365
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 4
10. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
11. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Vincent Acuna
Associate Planner
(909) 774-4323
vincent.acuna@cityofrc.us
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving a t least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
( ) Aesthetics
( ) Biological Resources
( ) Greenhouse Gas Emissions
( ) Land Use & Planning
( ) Population & Housing
( ) Transportation/Traffic
( ) Mandatory Findings of
Significance
( ) Agricultural Resources
( ) Cultural Resources
( ) Hazards & Waste Materials
( ) Mineral Resources
( ) Public Services
( ) Tribal Cultural Resources
( ) Air Quality
( ) Geology & Soils
( ) Hydrology & Water Quality
( ) Noise
( ) Recreation
( ) Utilities & Service Systems
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
( ) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
(X) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by, or
agreed to, by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant
Unless Mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standard and 2) has been addressed
by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain
to be addressed.
( ) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because
all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant
to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that
are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Page 366
Page 367
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 6
accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements.
8. The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and
Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Particulate Matter (PM10)
emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403.
9. Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive
construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions.
10. Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant species to reduce water consumption and to
provide passive solar benefits.
11. All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high -efficiency/low-
polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters.
12. All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows
and weather-stripping.
13. Projects shall be designed in accordance with the applicable California Green Building Standards
(CALGreen) Code (24 CCR 11).
14. All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality
Management District’s Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to
reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning
devices (i.e. fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009.
Biological Resources
1. The proposed action should not occur during the migratory bird nesting season (Feb 1 - Aug 31).
In the event construction must occur during the nesting bird season, a qualified biologist should
conduct a nesting bird survey no more than ten (10) days before the start of construction. If the
biologist determines that there are active nests, appropriate buffers wil l be established for each
nest and no work will occur inside the buffer of an active nest until the fledglings are no longer
dependent on the nest or until the biologist otherwise determines the nest is inactive. In the event
this mitigation measure is implemented, it is expected that site development would not result in
"take" of nesting migratory birds.
2. Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife
Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of
groundbreaking activity. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol:
a. Burrowing Own Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and non-
breeding season surveys and reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -
construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre-construction survey
does not identify burrowing on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If
burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre-construction survey,
measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with the CDFW to
avoid impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be
based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of
buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground-disturbing actives are
delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre-construction survey, the site
shall be resurveyed for owls.
b. During the non-breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are
Page 368
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 7
occupied by migratory and non-migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre-
construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from
those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified
wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines.
c. During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are
discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer
setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary “no construction”
area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by
a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged
and have left the nest, construction in that area may resume.
3. A biological construction monitor (BCM) shall be present during the days when initial ground
clearing, best maintenance practice (BMP) installation and vegetation removal activities are
occurring. The BCM will be observe the activities and watch for special status reptiles such as the
Coast horned lizard ((Phrynosoma blainvillii) and Coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri),
and if detected will relocate them out of harm’s way.
Cultural Resources
1. If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer
will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures
to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho
Cucamonga will:
• Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant
modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value.
• Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new
developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point.
• Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area.
• Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archeological resources of
CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric
resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archeological sites, capping or covering
site with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee.
• Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation,
and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the
completed report, with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological
Information Center for permanent archiving.
2. In the event that cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate
vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting
Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the
project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Addition ally, the
San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) shall be contacted
regarding any pre-contact and/or post-contact finds and be provided information after the
archaeologist makes his/her initial assessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input
with regards to significance and treatment .
3. If significant pre-contact and/or post-contact cultural resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended,
2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, the archaeologist shall develop a
Monitoring and Treatment Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to SMBMI for review and
Page 369
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 8
comment, as detailed within TCR-1. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project
and implement the Plan accordingly.
4. If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the
project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the
County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that
code enforced for the duration of the project.
5. If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during
grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take
appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a
report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation
measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring
is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures:
• Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils
with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing
activities.
• Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing
activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel
make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert constructi on and
notify the monitor of the find.
• Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report
and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum).
• Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with
a copy to the report to San Bernardino County Museum.
Geology and Soils
1. The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and
RWQCB) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted
with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible.
2. Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce
PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tr acking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon
the time of year of construction.
3. Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM 10
emissions from the site during such episodes.
4. Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive
construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
1. The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in
compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or
other soil-stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
2. The construction contractor shall select construction equipment based on low-emission factors and
high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction
equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures’ specification.
Page 370
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 9
3. Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes.
4. Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel-powered engines
where feasible.
5. Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak -hour traffic.
6. Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for construction crew.
7. Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally , as feasible.
Use “Green Building Materials” such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled, and
manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low-volatile-organic-compound (VOC)
materials.
8. Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including but not
limited to any combination of:
• Increased insulation.
• Limit air leakage through the structure.
• Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment,
light fixtures, and appliances.
• Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping.
• Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems .
• Install light colored “cool” roofs and cool pavements.
• Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED’s) for outdoor lighting.
9. Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the
following:
• Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the
City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.
• Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the
Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD).
• Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances
including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinals/water heaters.
• Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non-vegetated surfaces.
10. Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas
for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and
about recycling.
Page 371
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 10
Hydrology and Water Quality
1. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to Building Official for
approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction
activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical.
2. An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the
proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time
ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan
shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction
to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection
and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-
site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program
within a specified time frame.
3. During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be us ed to prevent
discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff.
4. During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events
and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment
from the site.
5. Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to
comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control
Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification
Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage u nder the NPDES General
Construction Permit.
6. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Building Official for
approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and
identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into
the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural
and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and
Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004 .
7. Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of
fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least
two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including
monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and
approval prior to the issuance of grading permits.
8. The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan
prepared by (name/date) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to
the maximum extent practical.
Noise
1. Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction-related noise mitigation plan shall be
submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan shall depict the location of the construction
equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction.
Page 372
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 11
2. Consistent with the hours described in Section 17.66.050.D.4 of the RCMC, construction times
shall be limited between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM on weekdays and Saturdays. No
construction activity shall be permitted on Sundays and national holidays.
3. Construction activities shall be scheduled to avoid operating several pieces of equipment
simultaneously, to the maximum extent feasible.
4. Contractor shall provide stating areas on-site to minimize off-site transportation of heavy
construction equipment. These areas must be located to maximize the distance between activity
and sensitive receptors.
5. Construction vehicles shall not park, queue and/or idle at the project site or along the adjoining
public rights-of-way prior to the construction hours.
6. Electrical power shall be used to run air compressors and similar power tools and to power any
temporary structures, such as construction trailers.
7. Temporary noise barriers with a minimum height of 10 feet, would be placed along the northern,
eastern, and southern boundaries. To be effective the barriers must break the line-of-sight between
on-site construction activities and off-site receivers to the north, east, and south throughout the
duration of site preparation and grading activities. The noise barrier should be constructed of
material with a minimum weight of 2 pounds per square foot with no gaps or perforations. Noise
barriers may be constructed of, but are not limited to, 5/8 inch plywood, 5/8 inch oriented strand
board, or hay bales.
8. Implement a permanent solid wall with a height of a least six feet, or sufficient to break the line of
site, along the southern project site boundary capable of reducing traffic noise from Banyan Street
by at least 4.5 dBA.
9. The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase.
Public Services
1. The developer shall pay the current residential school facility fee plus the Etiwanda School District
special tax.
Tribal Cultural Resources
1. The project Applicant will be required to obtain the services of a qualified Native American
Monitor(s) during construction-related ground disturbance activities. Ground disturbance is defined
by the Tribal Representatives from the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities
that include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, weed
abatement, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The
monitor(s) must be approved by the Tribal Representatives and will be present on-site during the
construction phases that involve any ground disturbing activities. The Native American Monitor(s)
will complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the d aily
activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The
monitor(s) shall possess Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER)
certification. In addition, the monitor(s) will be required to provide insurance certificates, including
liability insurance, for any archaeological resource(s) encountered during grading and excavation
activities pertinent to the provisions outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act, California
Public Resources Code Division 13, Section 21083.2 (a) through (k). The on-site monitoring shall
end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal
Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low poten tial for archeological
resources.
Page 373
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 12
2. The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) and shall be
contacted, of any pre-contact and/or post-contact cultural resources discovered during project
implementation, and be provided information regarding the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal
input with regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as defined
by CEQA (as amended, 2015), a cultural resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be c reated
by the archaeologist, in coordination with SMBMI, and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this
Plan. This Plan shall allow for a monitor to be present that represents SMBMI for the remainder of
the project, should SMBMI elect to place a monitor on-site.
3. Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project (isolate records, site
records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant and Lead Agency
for dissemination to SMBMI. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with
SMBMI throughout the life of the project.
GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS
AB Assembly Bill
APE Area of Potential Effect
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
BMPs Best Management Practices
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CH4 methane
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
CO Plan Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide
CRHR California Register of Historic Places
CVWD
CWA
Cucamonga Valley Water District
Clean Water Act
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
EIC Eastern Information Center
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
GHG Greenhouse Gas
LST Localized Significance Threshold
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MLD Most Likely Descendent
MMT Million Metric Tons
Page 374
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 13
MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
MSHCP Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
MTCO2e metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
ND Negative Declaration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
N2O nitrous oxide
NOx nitrogen oxides
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
OHV Off-Highway Vehicle
OPR California Office of Planning and Research
PM2.5 Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Microns in Diameter
PM10 Particulate Matter Less than 10 Microns in Diameter
RCPG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide
ROG Reactive Organic Gases
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SIP State Implementation Plan
SP Service Population
SoCAB South Coast Air Basin
SR State Route
SRA Sensitive Receptor Area
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
Page 375
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 14
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Page 376
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 15
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
( )
( )
( )
(✓)
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but
not limited to, 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 source of substantial light or glare, which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
Comments:
a) There are no significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. The site is not within a
view corridor according to General Plan Figure LU-6. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
b) The project site contains no scenic resources and no historic buildings within a State Scenic
Highway. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
c) The site is located on the north side of Banyan Street, east of Etiwanda Avenue and is
characterized by single-family residential development as well as vacant land zoned for
single-family residential development to the south, east, and north. To the west is a school.
The visual quality of the area will not degrade as a result of this project because the project
is similar in development type, aesthetics, and massing as the surrounding built
environment. Design review is required prior to approval. City standards require the
developer to underground existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly
appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning
Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. Therefore, a less
than significant impact would occur.
d) The project would increase the number of streetlights and security lighting used in the
immediate vicinity. The design and placement of light fixtures will be shown on site plans
which require review for consistency with City standards that require shielding, diffusing, or
indirect lighting to avoid glare. Lighting will be selected and located to confine the area of
illumination to within the project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Page 377
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 16
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause re-zoning of,
forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220 (g), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code Section 51104 (g))?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The site is designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance. The site is located on the north side of Banyan Street, east of Etiwanda Avenue
and is characterized by single-family residential development as well as vacant land zoned
for single-family residential development to the south, east, and north. To the west is a
school. There are approximately 209 acres of Farmland of Local Importance, Prime
Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of
Rancho Cucamonga according to the General Plan and the California Department of
Conservation Farmland Map 2010. Concentrations of Important Farmland are sparsely
located in the southern and eastern parts of the City that is characterized by existing and
planned development. Farmland in the southern portion of the City is characterized by
industrial, residential, and commercial land uses and Farmland in the eastern portion of the
City is within the Etiwanda area and planned for development. Further, a large number of
the designated farmland parcels are small, ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their
economic viability is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as farmland in
the General Plan Land Use Plan. The General Plan FPEIR identified the conversion of
farmlands to urban uses as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement
of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. he proposed
project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts
evaluated. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no
Williamson Act contracts within the City. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
c) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that is zoned as forest land or
timberland. Therefore, no impacts would occur related to the conversion of forest land to
non-forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are
zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Therefore, no impact is
anticipated.
d) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land or
timberland. Therefore, no impacts would occur related of the loss or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga
that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Therefore, no impact
is anticipated.
Page 378
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 17
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) The site is located on the north side of Banyan Street, east of Etiwanda Avenue and is
characterized by single-family residential development as well as vacant land zoned for
single-family residential development to the south, east, and north. To the west is a school.
The nearest agricultural use is more than 500 feet east from the project site. Furthermore,
there are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land.
Therefore, there is no potential for conversion of forest land to a non-forest use. Therefore,
no impact is anticipated.
3. AIR QUALITY. 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?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
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 that exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) As discussed in subsection b, the project would not exceed any air quality standards and
would not interfere with the region’s ability to comply with Federal and State air quality
standards for Criterion 1 Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations (local air quality
impacts) or Criterion 2 Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP (consistency with the 20 19
AQMP). Therefore, the project is consistent with the 2019 AQMP, and no impacts are
anticipated.
b) Both the State of California and the Federal government have established health -based
ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for seven air pollutants. These pollutants include
ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse
particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM10), fine particulate matter less
than 2.5 (PM2.5) microns in diameter and lead. Among these pollutants, ozone and
particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) are considered regional pollutants while the others have
more localized effects. In addition, the State of California has set standards for sulfates,
hydrogen sulfide (H2S), vinyl chloride and visibility reducing particles. These standards are
designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of
safety.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga area is within the South Coast Air Basin, which is under
the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The
California Clean Air Act (CCAA) provides the SCAQMD with the authority to manage
Page 379
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 18
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
transportation activities at indirect sources. Indirect sources of pollution are generated when
minor sources collectively emit a su bstantial amount of pollution. Examples of this include
motor vehicles at an intersection, a mall and on highways. SCAQMD also regulates
stationary sources of pollution within a jurisdictional area. Direct emissions from motor
vehicles are regulated by the Air Resources Board (ARB).
The combination of topography, low mixing height, abundant sunshine, and emissions from
the second largest urban area in the United States gives the Basin the worst air po llution
problem in the nation. The Basin experiences a persistent temperature inversion (increasing
temperature with increasing altitude); this inversion (coupled with low wind speeds) limits
the vertical dispersion of air contaminants, holding them relatively near the ground.
Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) of 1970, the EPA established national ambient
air quality standards (NAAQS) for six major pollutants, termed criteria pollutants: ozone
(O3), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM10), fine particulate
matter less than 2.5 (PM2.5) microns in diameter, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide
(NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead.
Criteria pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the Federal and State
governments have established AAQS, or criteria, for outdoor conce ntrations in order to
protect public health. Data collected at permanent monitoring stations are used by the EPA
to classify regions as “attainment” or “non-attainment” depending on whether the regions
met the requirements stated in the primary NAAQS. Nonattainment areas have additional
restrictions as required by the EPA. The EPA has designated the Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG) as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
responsible for ensuring the Basin’s compliance with the FCAA. The South Coast Air Basin
is in Non-Attainment Status for Ozone, PM10 and PM2.5.
Specific criteria for determining whether the potential air quality impacts of a project are
significant are set forth in the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The criteria include
daily emissions thresholds, compliance with State and national air quality standards, and
consistency with the current AQMP. As prescribed by SCAQMD, an Air Quality Impact
Analysis (date) was prepared by Urban Crossroads (November 8, 2016) that utilizes
CalEEMod (Version 2016.3.1) to evaluate short-term construction emissions and short-term
construction emissions for localized significant thresholds, long-term operational emissions,
operation emissions for localized significant thresholds, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
Short Term (Construction): Project Emissions and Impacts
The project proposes to subdivide an approximately 6.96-acre parcel for the construction of
9 single-family residences. The project site is currently vacant. The potential emissions
associated with construction of the project are described in the following sections.
Page 380
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 19
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Summary of Peak Construction Emissions (Emissions Summary of Overall Construction
with Best Available Control Measures)
Construction activities associated with the project will result in emissions of CO, VOCs, NO x,
SOx, PM10 and PM2.5 and are expected from the following construction activities: demolition,
grading (including soil import), building construct ion, painting (architectural coatings) paving
(curb, gutter, flatwork, and parking lot), and construction worker commuting.
Localized Significance Summary (Construction Emissions with Best Available Control
Measures)
Equipment Exhausts and Related Construction Activities
Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources such as site
grading, utility engines, on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, asphalt paving, and motor
vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions from construction activities
Page 381
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 20
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
envisioned on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The use of
construction equipment on site would result in localized exhaust emiss ions; however, as
shown in the tables above, the amount will not exceed any threshold of significance.
Fugitive Dust
Fugitive dust emissions are generally emissions associated with land clearing and exposure
of soils to the air and wind and cut-and-fill grading operations. Dust generated during
construction varies substantially on a project-by project basis, depending on the level of
activity, the specific operation and weather conditions at the time of construction.
Construction emissions can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific
operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions and
other factors. The proposed project will be required to comply with SCAQMD Rules 402
and 403 to control fugitive dust.
Architectural Coatings
Architectural coatings contain VOCs that are similar to ROCs and are part of the O 3
precursors. Based on the proposed project, it is estimated that the proposed project will
result in a maximum of approximately 20.05 lbs of VOC per day (combined for all
construction sources) during construction. Therefore, this VOC emission is the principal air
emission and is less than the SCAQMD VOC threshold of 75 lbs/day.
Odors
Heavy-duty equipment in the project area during construction would emit odors. However,
the construction activity would cease to occur after individual construction is completed. N o
other sources of objectionable odors have been identified for the proposed project, and no
mitigation measures are required. In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 the proposed
uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors. Therefore, objectionable odors
posing a health risk to potential on-site and existing off-site uses would not occur as a result
of the proposed project.
Naturally Occurring Asbestos
The proposed project is located in San Bernardino County and it is not among the counties
that are found to have serpentine and ultramafic rock in their soils. In addition, there has
been no serpentine or ultramafic rock found in the project area. Therefore, the potential risk
for naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) during project construction is small and less than
significant.
Cumulative Impacts: Short-Term Construction Emissions
Continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga
area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. During the construction phases
of development, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, construction
worker vehicles, and energy use will generate emissions. In addition, fugitive dust would
also be generated during grading and construction activities. While most of the dust would
settle on or near the project site, smaller particles would remain in the atmosphere,
increasing particle levels within the surrounding area. Construction is an on-going industry
in the Rancho Cucamonga area. Construction workers and equipment work and operate at
Page 382
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 21
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
one development site until their tasks are complete. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and
equipment emissions are required to be assessed. The General Plan Final Program
Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Air Quality based on the
future build out of the City. Based upon on the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS7G)
estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan (FPEIR), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Ozone (O3),
and Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM10) would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for
significance; therefore, they would all be cumulatively considerable if they cannot be
mitigated on a project basis to a level less-than-significant. This city-wide increase in
emissions was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement
of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the
Section 4.3 of the General Plan FPEIR.
Although the project will have a less than significant impacts, the implementation of the
following best practices and mitigation measures from the City’s 2010 General Plan FPEIR
will further reduce the project’s short-term air quality impacts:
1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so
as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all
construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per
manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the
construction site for City verification.
2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the developer shall submit
construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected
equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low
emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was
investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also
conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff.
3) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel
powered equipment where feasible.
4) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans
include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use.
5) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule
1108.
6) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in
SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or
high-volume, low-pressure spray.
7) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403.
Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions:
• Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and
watering.
• Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads.
Page 383
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 22
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
• Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion
over extended periods of time.
• Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil
during and after the end of work periods.
• Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local
ordinances and use sound engineering practices.
• Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is
carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of
hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of
construction.
• Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds
exceeding 25mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements.
• Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or
cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means.
8) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by
SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)) daily to reduce
PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403.
9) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied
to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to
reduce PM10 emissions.
Project Long Term (Operational) Emissions and Impacts
Long-term air pollutant emissions are those associated with stationary sources and mobile
sources involving any project-related changes. The proposed project would result in a net
increase in the amount of development in the area; therefore, the proposed p roject would
result in net increases in both stationary and mobile source emissions. The stationary
source emissions would come from additional natural gas consumption for on -site buildings
and electricity for the lighting in the buildings and at the parking area. As shown in the
following tables, project implementation will not exceed any significance thresholds. No
long-term, operational impacts will occur as a result of the project.
Page 384
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 23
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Summary of Peak Operational Emissions
Cumulative Impacts (Long Term/Operational Emissions)
The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the
potential impacts to air quality based on the future build out of the City. In the long-term,
continued development would result in significant operational vehicle emissions based upon
on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan FPEIR; therefore,
all developments would be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project
basis to a less-than-significant level. This City-wide increase in emissions was identified as
a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding
Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the Section 4.3 of
the General Plan FPEIR.
Although the project will have less than significant impacts, the implementation of the
following mitigation measures from the City’s 2010 General Plan FPEIR are designed to
further reduce the project’s operational and cumulative air quality impacts:
Page 385
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 24
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
10) Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant species to reduce water
consumption and to provide passive solar benefits.
11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-
efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water
heaters.
12) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate
thermal pane windows and weather-stripping.
13) Projects shall be designed in accordance with the applicable California Green
Building Standards (CALGreen) Code (24 CCR 11).
c) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 4.3), continued development would contribute
to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and
State standards. The General Plan FPEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as
a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was
ultimately adopted by the City Council. Although the project will have less than significant
impacts, the implementation of mitigation measures listed in subsection b) above from the
City’s 2010 General Plan FPEIR designed to minimize long-term, operational air quality
impacts, will further reduce the project’s impact.
d) Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of
pollution than the population at large. The SCAQMD identifies the following as sensitive
receptors: long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers,
retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic
facilities. According to the SCAQMD, projects have the potential to create significant
impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air
contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401. The project site is located within ¼ mile of
single-family residences.
According to the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor
complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing
plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding
(SCAQMD 1993). The proposed residential project does not include any uses identifi ed by
the SCAQMD as being associated with odors and therefore would not produce
objectionable odors. As such, the proposed project would have no significant impact in
regard to objectionable odors. No mitigation is required.
Although the impacts are anticipated to be less than significant, the mitigation measures
listed under subsection b above and the following mitigation measure will further reduce
any potential impacts.
14) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South
Coast Air Quality Management District’s Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule
445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the
installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e. fireplaces/hearths)
in new development on or after March 9, 2009.
Page 386
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 25
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) Construction odors (Short-term) may include odors associated with equipment use including
diesel exhaust or roofing, painting and paving. These odors are temporary and would
dissipate rapidly. Operational odors (Long-term) are not typically associated with the type
of use. Odors from the proposed residential use would most likely be from activities such
as cooking and lawn care; however, these odors would be minimal and not considered to
be significant. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
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 U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
( )
(✓)
( )
( )
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, or 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 to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
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 tree 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The project site is located in a vacant parcel surrounded by single-family residential uses
and a school. The site has been previously disrupted due to its location in urban area.
According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, and Section 4.4 of the General Plan FPEIR,
the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore,
development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals
because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent
with the General Plan Land Use Plan. A Biological Assessment which included a field
survey, and a literature review was prepared for the project site by Bellini Biological
(November 22, 2016). Additionally, a Biological Assessment Memorandum was also
Page 387
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 26
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
prepared on September 19, 2020, in order to address any site changes from the original
2016 report,
Based upon the disturbed habitat conditions at the site, which is located in an urbanized
area, unique habitat and/or soil types and conditions do not exist, and therefore suitable
habitat is lacking at the site for all potentially present special status plant species. No special
status plants were detected during the site inspection. As such, it appears that no special
status plants are present and it is expected the proposed action would have no effect upon
special status plants.
The following special status wildlife species are potentially present at the subject property:
Cooper’s Hawk (Accipiter cooperii) – CDFW Watch List Species
Suitable habitat for Cooper’s hawks is described as: forest and woodlands and leafy
suburbs. These hawks are commonly found in parks, quiet neighborhoods, over fields, at
backyard feeders, and even along busy streets if there are trees around. Cooper’s Hawks
build nests in pines, oaks, Douglas-firs, beeches, spruces, and other tree species, often on
flat ground rather than hillsides, and in dense woods. Nests are typically 25 -50 feet high,
often about two-thirds of the way up the tree in a crotch or on a horizontal branch. Suitable
foraging habitat is present as Cooper’s hawks adapt well to urban settings. Cooper’s hawks
were not detected during the site inspection. Suitable nesting habitat is present in
eucalyptus trees at the site. In addition, other large trees within 500 feet of the subject
property provide nesting opportunities.
California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia) – CDFW Species of Special Concern
Suitable habitat for California horned larks is described as: the stubble, grass, and fall ow
lands near cultivated fields. The majority of the birds live in the wide expanses of the
deserts, foothills, and dry grasslands that encircle the farming areas. The nest is a
depression on the ground, lined with grass. Marginal foraging and nesting habitat is present.
Not detected during the site inspection.
Belding’s savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingt) – CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Suitable habitat for Belding’s savannah sparrows is described as: grasslands with few trees,
including meadows, pastures, grassy roadsides, sedge wetlands, and cultivated fields
planted with cover crops like alfalfa. Nests are amid a thick thatch of the prior season’s dead
grasses in densely vegetated areas. The nest is usually on the ground or low in grasses,
goldenrod, saltrnarsh vegetation, or low shrubs such as blueberry, blackberry, rose, and
bayberry. Marginal foraging and nesting habitat is present. Not detected during the site
inspection.
Critical habitat is a term defined and used in the Endangered Species Act. It is a specific
geographic area(s) that contains features essential for the conservation of a threatened or
endangered species and that may require special management and protection. Critical
habitat may include an area that is not currently occupied by the species but that will be
needed for its recovery. The closest critical habitat area with respect to the site has been
established for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat located roughly 0.4-miles northwest of the
subject property within the alluvial fan chaparral/ scrub habitat associated with Day and
Page 388
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 27
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Deer Creek canyon washes in the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains. Due to the
distance between the subject property and critical habitat areas it is apparent the proposed
action would not result in destruction or adverse modification of a critical habitat area of a
federally endangered or threatened species.
Under the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MTBA) (16 U.S.C., §703, Supp. I,
1989), it is unlawful to “pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture, or kill,
possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to barter, barter, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for
shipment, ship, export, import, cause to be shipped, exported, or imported, deliver for
transportation, transport or cause to be transported, carry or cause to be carried, or receive
for shipment, transportation, carriage, or export, any migratory bird, any part, nest, or eggs
of any such bird, or any product, whether or not manufactured, which consists, or is
composed in whole or part, of any such bird or any part, nest, or egg thereof.” In addition,
most birds that nest within the state of California are afforded further protections under
California Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) code. Section 3503 of CDFW code states “It is unlawful
to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise
provided by this code or any regulation made pursuant thereto.”
The following migratory birds were detected during the site inspection; Mourning dove
(Zenaida macroura), Eurasian collared-dove, American crow, Western scrub-jay, Northern
mockingbird, House finch, and Lark sparrow.
No nesting activity was detected during site inspection; however, the site inspection was
performed during non-nesting season. Suitable nesting habitat is present at the subject
property for nesting birds within the eucalyptus trees and other vegetation at site, and on
the ground. As such, the proposed action has the potential to impact nesting birds, including
the Burrowing Owl. This is true even if their nests are not directly impacted as disturbances
near an active nest can be disrupting to the point of causing nest failure. As such, the
following mitigation measures shall be implemented in order to reduce impacts to a less
than significant level:
1) The proposed action should not occur during the migratory bird nesting season
(Feb 1 – Aug 31). In the event construction must occur during the nesting bird
season, a qualified biologist should conduct a nesting bird survey no more than
ten (10) days before the start of construction. If the biologist determines that there
are active nests, appropriate buffers will be established for each nest and no work
will occur inside the buffer of an active nest until the fledglings are no longer
dependent on the nest or until the biologist otherwise determines the nest is
inactive. In the event this mitigation measure is implemented, it is expected that
site development would not result in “take” of nesting migratory birds.
2) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of
Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written
report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity.
The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol:
a. Burrowing Own Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D
(Breeding and non-breeding season surveys and reports) of the CDFW
Staff Report. Results of the pre-construction survey shall be provided to
CDFW and the City. If the pre-construction survey does not identify
Page 389
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 28
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
burrowing on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If
burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre -
construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified
biologist in coordination with the CDFW to avoid impacting occupied
burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the
most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment
of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground -
disturbing actives are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after
the pre-construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls.
b. During the non-breeding season from September 1 through January 31,
if burrows are occupied by migratory and non-migratory resident
burrowing owls during a pre-construction survey, burrow exclusion
and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow
exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife
biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW
guidelines.
c. During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if
nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of
an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife
biologist. The temporary “no construction” area would have to be
maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a
qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all
nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in th at area
may resume.
The Biological Assessment Memorandum submitted on September 19, 2020 identified that
two Special Status reptiles, the Coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) and Coastal
whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri) have the potential to occur on the project site. In
order to prevent impacts to special status reptiles, the following mitigation measure will be
implemented.
3) A biological construction monitor (BCM) shall be present during the days when
initial ground clearing, best maintenance practice (BMP) installation and
vegetation removal activities are occurring. The BCM will be observe the
activities and watch for special status reptiles such as the Coast horned lizard
((Phrynosoma blainvillii) and Coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri),
and if detected will relocate them out of harm’s way.
b) The project site is located in an urban area with no natural communities. No riparian habitat
exists on-site. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
c) No wetland habitat is present on-site. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
d) The City is primarily located in an urban area that does not contain large, contiguous natural
open space areas. Wildlife potentially may move through the north/south trending tributaries
in the northern portion of the City and within the Sphere of Influence. Therefore, no adverse
impacts are anticipated.
Page 390
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 29
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) There is a total of 158 trees on the project site, with 157 of them considered Heritage Trees
due to either their size or species. 110 of t he 158 trees (about 70%), are either dead or
nearly dead. The remaining 48 trees (47 of which are Heritage Trees) are in poor condition
due to the presence of Asian Longhorned Beetle and the wood decaying Sulfur Fu ngus.
These trees constitute a hazard on any future development on-site, as all trees are at risk
of toppling, which may result in property damage. The project proposes to remove all 158
existing trees. The Planning Director has approved the replacement of 47 trees, to be
planted on the project site, in order to mitigate the removal of the 47 heritage trees currently
in poor condition on the site. This tree replacement plan is incorporated in the project plans.
f) Neither the City nor the SOI are within an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved State
Habitat Conservation Plan area. The project site is not located within a local conservation
area according to the General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Plan, Figure RC-1. No
conflicts with habitat conservation plans will occur. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
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 archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
( ) (✓) ( ) ( )
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
( ) (✓) ( ) ( )
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
Comments:
a) The applicant has submitted a cultural resources study prepared by Earthtouch, Inc. on
December 2016. The cultural resources study included archaeological records search by
the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) of all properties within a 1-mile radius
of the project site. Data sources consulted at the SCCIC included archaeological records,
Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility (DOE), historic maps, and the Historic Property
Data File (HPDF) maintained by the Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). The HPDF
contains listings for the NRHP and/or CRHR, California Historical Landmarks (CH L), and
California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI). Additionally, the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Local Inventory of Historic Resources (2011) and the Local Register of Historic Resources
(last updated July 2012) were reviewed for any listings that might be relevant to the project.
A pedestrian survey was also conducted on the property.
The results of the records search at the SCCIC indicated that there have been at least 60
archaeological investigations conducted within a 1-mile radius of the subject property. None
of the 60 reports included any portion of the property. The SCCIC maps indicate that 16
archaeological resources have been identified within a 1- mile radius of the property.
However, there were no archeological resources or architectural properties recorded within
the project site.
Based on the information obtained through the records search and from the field survey,
there is sufficient information to conclude that the prosed development will not impact any
historic resources. Based on this information, no impact is anticipated.
Page 391
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 30
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
b) There are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site; however,
the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans
according to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6). Construction activity, particularly
grading, soil excavation, and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate existing and
potential archaeological resources. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact
Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Cultural Resources based on the future build out
of the City. The following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be
implemented:
1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during
grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor
construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve
them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho
Cucamonga will:
• Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or
significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its
archaeological value.
• Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological
sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or
focal point.
• Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area.
• Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological
resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant,
important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to,
avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning
the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee.
• Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the
inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the
project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original
illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information
Center for permanent archiving.
Additionally, during the tribal consultation process detailed in the Tribal Cultural Resources
section of this document, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians have asked to in clude the
following mitigation measures:
2) In the event that cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all
work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease
and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be
hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of
the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Additionally,
the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department
(SMBMI) shall be contacted regarding any pre-contact and/or post-contact
finds and be provided information after the archaeologist makes his/her initial
assessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards
to significance and treatment.
Page 392
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 31
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
3) If significant pre-contact and/or post-contact cultural resources, as defined by
CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured,
the archaeologist shall develop a Monitoring and Treatment Plan, the drafts of
which shall be provided to SMBMI for review and comment, as detailed within
TCR-1. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project and
implement the Plan accordingly.
4) If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities
associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot
buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted
pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for
the duration of the project.
c) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on an
alluvial fan. According to the research performed at the Natural History Museum of Los
Angeles County and the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or
resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the Sphere-of-
Influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity rating for
paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during
the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene
epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last "Ice Age" and the appearance of modern
man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The project site is underlain by
Quaternary alluvium per the Public Safety Element of the General Plan; therefore, the
following mitigation measures shall be implemented:
5) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered
before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to
monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or
preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings
that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation
measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where
mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be
limited to, the following measures:
• Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid
removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full -time
during the interval of earth-disturbing activities.
• Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-
disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If
construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should
immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find.
• Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the
summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San
Bernardino County Museum).
• Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected
specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum.
d) The proposed project is in an area that has already been disturbed by development. The
project site has already been disrupted by the construction of infrastructure, and
surrounding developments. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area.
Page 393
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 32
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
No evidence is in place to suggest the project site has been used for human burials. The
California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) states that if human remains are
discovered on-site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a
determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
As adherence to State regulations is required for all development, no mitigation is required
in the unlikely event human remains are discovered on -site. No adverse impacts are
anticipated.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential 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? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
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 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
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative wastewater d isposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) No known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the
Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault, according to the
General Plan Figure PS-2, and Section 4.7 of the General Plan FPEIR. The Red Hill Fault,
passes within 1,500 feet west of the site, and the Etiwanda Avenue Fault Scarp lies
approximately 2,500 feet to north. These faults are both capable of producing Mw 6.0-7.0
earthquakes. The San Andreas Fault, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is about 10 miles
northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Adhering
to the Uniform Building Code and Standard Conditions will ensure that geologic impacts are
less-than-significant.
Page 394
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 33
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
b) The City of Rancho Cucamonga is within a designated Soil Erosion Control Area Exhibit
4.7-4 of the General Plan FPEIR. The proposed project will require the excavation,
stockpiling, and/or movement of on-site soils. The Rancho Cucamonga area is subject to
strong Santa Ana wind conditions during September to April, which generates blowing sand
and dust, and creates erosion problems. Construction activities may temporarily exacerbate
the impacts of windblown sand, resulting in temporary problems of dust cont rol; however,
development of this project under the General Plan would help to reduce windblown sand
impacts in the area as pavement, roads, buildings, and landscaping are established.
Therefore, the following fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be im plemented to reduce
impacts to less-than-significant levels:
1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by
SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with
SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as
possible.
2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by
the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-
site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction.
3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to
minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes.
4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied
to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to
reduce PM10 emissions.
c) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.7) indicates that there is a potential for the hillside areas
at the northern end of the City and in the SOI for slope failure, landslides, and/or erosion.
Areas subject to slope instability contain slopes of 30 percent or greater. Landslides may
be induced by seismic activity, rain, or construction. The City Hillside Development
Regulations prohibits the development within slopes of 30 percent or greater and limit the
number of units that could be constructed within the Hillside Residential and Very Low
Density Residential designations in the Hillside areas. The site is not within an Earthquake
hazard zone or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FPEIR
Exhibit 4.7-2. Soil types on-site consist of Soboba Gravelly Loamy Sand Soil association
according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
d) The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil
deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on-site consist
of Soboba Gravelly Loamy Sand Soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit
4.7-3. These soils typically have very slow runoff. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
e) The project will connect to, and be served by, the existing local sewer system for wastewater
disposal. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed. Therefore, no
impacts are anticipated.
Page 395
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 34
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
( )
( )
(✓)
( )
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
Comments:
a) Regulations and Significance – The Federal government began studying the phenomenon
of global warming as early as 1979 with the National Climate Protection Act (92 Stat. 601).
In June of 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger established California’s Green House Gas
(GHG) emissions reduction target in Executive Order (EO) S-3-05. The EO created goals
to reduce GHG emissions for the State of California to 2000 levels by 2010; GHG emissions
reduced to 1990 levels by 2020; and GHG emissions reduced to 80 percent below 1990
levels by 2050. Additionally, on December 7, 2009 the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA) issued findings regarding GHGs under rule 202(a) of the Clean Air Act:
(1) that GHGs endanger human health; and (2) that this will be the first steps to regulating
GHGs through the Federal Clean Air Act. The USEPA defines 6 key GHGs (carbon dioxide
(CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons
(PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)). The combined emissions of these well-mixed
greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and engines contribute to GHG pollution.
The western states, including Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and
Washington, already experience hotter, drier climates. California is a substantial contributor
of GHGs and is expected to see an increase of 3 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit (oF) over the next
century.
Assembly Bill (AB) 32 requires that the California Air Resources Board (ARB), the lead
agency for implementing AB 32, determine what the statewide GHG emission level was in
1990 and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit (427 million metric tons of CO 2
equivalent) to be achieved by 2020 and prepare a Scoping Plan to outline the main
strategies for meeting the 2020 deadline. Significant progress can be made toward the 2020
goal through existing technologies and improving the efficiency of energy use. Other
solutions would include improving the State’s infrastructure, and transitioning to cleaner and
more efficient sources of energy.
The ARB estimates that 38 percent of the State’s GHG emissions in 2004 was from
transportation sources followed by electricity generation (both in -State and out-of-State) at
28 percent and industrial at 20 percent. Residential and commercial activities account for 9
percent, agricultural uses at 6 percent, high global warming potential gases at 3 percent,
and recycling and waste at 1 percent.
It is not anticipated that any single development project would have a substantial effect on
global climate change but that GHG emissions from the project would combine with
emissions across California, the United States, and the world to cumulatively contribute to
global climate change. Therefore, consistent with the ARB’s Climate Change Scoping Plan,
the proposed project was evaluated for consistency with the Early Action Measures
(Scoping Plan is a recommendation until adopted through normal rulemaking). The
Page 396
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 35
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
proposed project is assessed by determining its consistency with the 37 Recommended
Actions identified by ARB. In compliance with Senate Bill (S B) 97 and CEQA, the project
has been analyzed based on a qualitative analysis (CEQA 15064.4). Additionally, the ARB
was directed through SB 375 to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be
achieved within the automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035.
SCAQMD and ARB maintain ambient air quality monitoring stations in the Basin. The
stations closest to the project site are the Upland station and the Fontana -Arrow Highway
station. The Upland station monitors all criteria pollutants except PM10, PM2.5, and SO2
which are monitored at the Fontana-Arrow Highway station. The ambient air quality in the
project area for CO, NO2, and SO2 are consistently below the relevant State and Federal
standards (based on ARB and EPA from 2007, 2008, and 2009 readings). Oz one, PM10,
and PM2.5 levels all exceed State and Federal standards regularly.
Project Related Sources of GHG’s – Based on the Guidelines for the Implementation of
California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G, a project would normally be considered
to have a significant effect on air quality if the project would violate any ambient air quality
standards, contribute substantially to an existing air quality violation, expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or conflict with adopted environmental
plans and goals of the community. However, neither the CEQA statutes, Office of Planning
and Research (OPR) guidelines, nor the draft proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines
prescribe thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an impact
analysis. Significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga has not adopted a threshold of significance for GHG
emissions. However, a screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year is based upon South
Coast Air Quality Management District staff’s proposed GHG screening threshold for
stationary sources emissions for non-industrial projects, as described in the SCAQMD’s
Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans.
Project related GHG’s would include emissions from direct and indirect sources. Based on
the Greenhouse Gas Analysis by Urban Crossroads dated November 8, 2016, total project
related emissions would be 216.06 MTCO2eq/year, as shown in the following table:
Page 397
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 36
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
As shown in the table, direct and indirect operational emissions associated with the project
as compared to the SCAQMD’s interim threshold of significance of 3,000 MTCO2e per year
would result in a less than significant impact with respect to GHG emissions.
Cumulative Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions – The General Plan FPEIR
(Section 4.5) indicates that GHG emissions result from construction activities associated
with diesel-powered construction equipment and other combustion sources (i.e. Generators,
workers vehicles, material delivery, etc.). The GHG emitted by construction equipment is
primarily carbon dioxide (CO2). The highest levels of construction related GHG’s occur
during site preparation including demolition, grading and excavation. Construction related
GHG’s are also emitted from off-site haul trucks and construction workers traveling to the
job site. Exhaust emissions from construction activities would vary each day with the
changes in construction activity on site. The combustion of fossil-based fuels creates
GHG’s such as CO2, Ch4, and N2O. CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment.
Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis by Urban Crossroads dated November 8, 2016, no
significant impacts to GHGs from short-term construction impacts would occur as a result
of the project as shown in the table above. Because the project would result in minimal
emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD’s interim threshold of significance, the project’s
contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. The proposed project would
have less than a significant short-term cumulative impact.
Although a less than significant impact is anticipated with regard to cumulative short -term
construction emissions, the following enforceable mitigation measures in accordance with
Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR will further reduce the
project’s short-term impacts:
1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short -term air
pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive
Page 398
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 37
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
dust including treating the site with water or other soil -stabilizing agent twice
daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
2) The construction contractor shall select construction equipment based on low-
emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the
grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and
maintained in accordance with the manufactures’ specification.
3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes.
4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline - or
diesel-powered engines where feasible.
5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak-hour traffic.
6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for the
construction crew.
Cumulative Long Term (Operational) GHG’s Emissions – The primary source of GHG
emissions generated by the proposed project would be from motor vehicles, combustion of
natural gas for space and water heating, as well as off-site GHG emissions from generation
of electricity consumed by the proposed land use development over a long term. CEQA
requires the Lead Agency to review the project for “adequacy, com pleteness, and a good
faith effort at full disclosure,” to determine potential impacts of GHG’s. Therefore the project
has been analyzed based on methodologies and information available to the City at the time
this document was prepared. Estimates are based on past performance and represent a
scenario that is a worst case with the understanding that technology changes may reduce
GHG emissions in the future. To date, there is no established quantified GHG emission
threshold.
The project involves the subdivision an approximately 6.96-acre parcel for the construction
of 9 single-family residences and therefore would result in an increase in the net increases
of both stationary and mobile source emissions. The majority of energy consumption
typically occurs during project operation (more than 80 percent and less than 20 percent
during construction activities). The proposed project will incorporate several design features
that are consistent with the California Office of the Attorney General’s recommended
measures to reduce GHG emission including: water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and
walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks.
The project is consistent with the California Environmental Protection Agency Climate Action
Team proposed early action measures to mitigate climate change included in the CARB
Scoping Plan mandated under AB 32. The proposed project will incorporate several design
features including: water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide
accessibility to public sidewalks. Additionally, the City is participating in the development of
a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) with SANBAG for the San Bernardino County
area pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 375.
Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis by Urban Crossroads dated November 8, 2016, no
significant impacts to GHGs from long-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of
the project as shown in the table above. Because the project would result in minimal
emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD’s interim threshold of significance, the project’s
Page 399
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 38
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. The proposed project would
have less than a significant long-term operational impact.
Although a less than significant impact is anticipated with regard to cumulative long-term
construction emissions, the following enforceable mitigation measures in accordance with
Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR will further reduce the
project’s long-term operational impacts:
7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured
locally, as feasible. Use “Green Building Materials” such as materials that are
resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly
way including low-volatile-organic-compound (VOC) materials.
8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy
standard including but not limited to any combination of;
• Increased insulation.
• Limit air leakage through the structure.
• Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and
cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances.
• Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and
landscaping.
• Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems.
• Install light colored “cool” roofs and cool pavements.
• Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED’s) for outdoor lighting.
9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the
project and include the following;
• Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in
compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance.
• Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as
required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD).
• Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures
and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless
urinals/water heaters.
• Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated
surfaces.
Page 400
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 39
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and
exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate
employees about reducing waste and about recycling.
b) The project involves the subdivision an approximately 6.96-acre parcel for the construction
of 9 single-family residences which is consistent with the General Plan.
No other applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG
emission apply to the project. The 2010 General Plan Update includes adopted policies and
Standard Conditions that respond to the Attorney General and the California Air Pollution
Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). The General Plan policies and Standard
Conditions guide infill and sustainable development reliant on pedestrian connections, re -
use and rehabilitation of existing structures, link transportation opportunities, promote
development that is sensitive to natural resources and incentivizes denser mixed-use
projects that maximizes diverse opportunities.
The proposed project includes water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that
provide accessibility to public sidewalks and therefore is consistent with the sustainability
and climate change policies of the General Plan. The General Plan Final Program
Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of GHG’s and determined that
GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable, which would be a significant,
unavoidable adverse cumulative impact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was
ultimately adopted by the City Council. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis by Urban
Crossroads dated November 8, 2016, no significant impacts to GHGs from short-term,
construction impacts or long-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of the project.
Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD’s
interim threshold of significance, the project’s contribution to GHGs from short -term
construction and long-term operational cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. In
addition, the proposed project would not hinder the State’s GHG reduction goals established
by AB 32. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
8. HAZARDS AND WASTE 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 environment?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within 1/4 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Page 401
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 40
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 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 urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) Development within the City may utilize or generate hazardous materials or wastes. This is
usually associated with individual households, small business operations, and maintenance
activities like paints, cleaning solvents, fertilizers, and motor oil or through construction
activities that would use paints, solvents, acids, curing compounds, grease, and oils. These
materials would be stored and used at individual sites. The City participates in a countywide
interagency coalition, which is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that
is more comprehensive that any other in the State. The City has an Emergency Operations
Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the
approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance with Federal, State, and local
regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials and/or waste will
reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than-significant.
b) The proposed project does not include the use of hazardous materials or volatile fuels. The
City participates in a countywide interagency coalition , which is considered a full service
Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive than any other in the State. The
City has an Emergency Operations Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is
in the process of updating the approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance
with Federal, State, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous
materials or volatile fuels will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than-
significant.
c) There are schools located within 1/4 mile of the project site. The project site abuts an
existing school. The project will be required to comply with exist ing State and Federal
standards on the use and transport of hazardous materials. Typically, the residential uses
proposed do not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
d) The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site. Recent
site inspections did not reveal the presence of discarded drums or illegal dumping of
hazardous materials. No impact is anticipated.
e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan according to the General Plan Figure
PS-7 and General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.8-1 and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The
Page 402
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 41
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
project site is located approximately 7 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset
north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated.
f) There are no private airstrips within the City. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is
located approximately 2 and 1/2 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is
anticipated.
g) The City has a developed roadway network that provides emergency access and
evacuation routes to existing development. New development will be located on a site that
has access to existing roadways. The City's Emergency Operation Plan, which is updated
every 3 years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the City of Rancho
Cucamonga in the event of a disaster. Because the project is required to comply with all
applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances, no adverse impacts are anticipated.
h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from wind-driven fires in the Very
High Fire Hazard Severity Zone found in the northern part of the City; however, the
proposed project site is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according
to General Plan Figure PS-1. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
9. 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 aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater 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 alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
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 flooding on- or off-site?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
e) Create or contribute runoff water 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Page 403
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 42
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures
that 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 levee or dam?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). The
project is designed to connect to existing water and sewer systems. The State of California
is authorized to administer various aspects of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. The General
Construction Permit treats any construction activity over 1 acre as an industrial activity,
requiring a permit under the State’s General NPDES permit. The State Water Resource
Control Board (SWRCB), through the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB),
Santa Ana Region, administers these permits.
Construction activities covered under the State’s General Construction permit include
removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activity for new development or
significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger
must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The
General Permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction
activities, including site clearance and grading:
• Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would
specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent construction pollutants from
contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from
moving off-site into receiving waters.
• Eliminate or reduce non-storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other
waters of the nation.
• Perform inspections of all BMPs.
Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges.
A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an
NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare an SWPPP. To
comply with the NPDES, the project's construction contractor will be required to prepare an
SWPPP during construction activities, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for
post-construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant ha s
submitted a WQMP, prepared by EGL Associates, Inc., May 16, 2016 , which identifies
BMPs to minimize the amount of pollutants, such as eroded soils, entering the drainage
system after construction. Runoff from driveways, roads and other impermeable surfaces
must be controlled through an on-site drainage system. BMPs include both structural and
non-structural control methods. Structural controls used to manage storm water pollutant
levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural
controls focus on controlling pollutants at the source, generally throu gh implementing
erosion and sediment control plans, and various Business Plans that must be developed by
any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices such as periodic parking
lot sweeping can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain
Page 404
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 43
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
system. The following mitigation measures are required to control additional storm water
effluent:
Construction Activities:
1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the
Building Official for approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall
be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the
storm drain system to the maximum extent practical.
2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and
implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to
control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities
are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall
include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading
and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in
Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be
included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site
as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration
program within a specified time frame.
3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must
be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is
rainfall or other runoff.
4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed
prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order
to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site.
5) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a
Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm
Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that
this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification
Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the
NPDES General Construction Permit.
Post-Construction Operational:
6) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City
Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP),
including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices
(BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain
system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the
structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New
Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga
in June 2004.
7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the
use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored
Page 405
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 44
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable
growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum
of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the
issuance of grading permits.
b) According to CVWD, approximately 47 percent of the City's water is currently provided from
water supplies coming from the underlying Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins.
CVWD complies with its prescriptive water rights as managed by the Chino Basin
Watermaster and will not deplete the local groundwater resource. The proposed project will
not deplete groundwater supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge because it is not within
an area designated as a recharge basin or spreading ground ac cording to General Plan
Figure RC-3. Development of the site will require the grading and excavation, but would not
affect the existing aquifer, estimated to be about 300 to 470 feet below the ground surface.
As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.9), continued development citywide will
increase water needs but will not be a significant impact. CVWD has plans to meet this
increased need to the year 2030. No impacts are anticipated.
c) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage pa tterns, and the rate and
amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape
proposed on the site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river.
All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to
handle the flows. The project design includes landscaping of all non-hardscape areas to
prevent erosion. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official
and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, the project will not result
in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The impact is not considered significant.
d) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and
amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape
proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All
runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle
the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City
Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site
will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated.
e) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and
amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape
proposed on a site; however, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities,
which have been designed to handle the flows. The project will not result in substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by
the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of gradin g permits. Therefore,
increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are
anticipated.
f) Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary
increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm
event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts The site is for new development;
therefore, it is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) to minimize water pollution. With implementation of the mitigation measures
specified under subsection a) and the following mitigation measure, less than significant
impacts are anticipated.
Page 406
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 45
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
8) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quali ty
Management Plan prepared by EGL Associates, Inc., May 16, 2016 to reduce
construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum
extent practical.
g) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General
Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected.
h) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General
Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected.
i) The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system
designed to adequately convey floodwaters from a 100-year storm event. The system is
substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage
flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City,
spreading grounds, concrete-lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in
General Plan Figure PS-6. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard
area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected.
j) There are no oceans, lakes, or reservoirs near the project site; therefore, impacts from
seiche and tsunami are not anticipated. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of
the steep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain
streams. Numerous man-made controls have been constructed to reduce the mudflow
impacts to the level of non-significance within the City. This existing system includes several
debris dams and levees north of the City, and spreading grounds both within and north of
the City. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
10. 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, a 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The site is located on the north side of Banyan Street, east of Etiwanda Avenue and is
characterized by single-family residential development as well as vacant land zoned for
single-family residential development to the south, east, and north. To the west is a school.
This project will be of similar design and size to surrounding single-family residential
development to the north, west, and south. The project will become a part of the larger
community. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
b) The project site land use designation is Very Low Residential (VLR). The proposed project
is consistent with the General Plan and does not interfere with any policies for environmental
protection, or SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan. The General Plan states that the Very
Page 407
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 46
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Low (VLR) Land Use District is characterized by detached, very low -density single
residential units on 0.5 acre lots. The proposed lots average 27,043 square feet in size.
Additionally, the project is within the City’s Equestrian Overlay, and the site will include a
private equestrian trail system providing equestrian access to each lot and to the community
trail along Banyan Street. As such, no impacts are anticipated.
c) The project site is not located within any habitat conservation or natural community plan
area. According to General Plan Figure RC-4 and Section 4.10 of the General Plan FPEIR,
the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore,
development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals
because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent
with the General Plan Land Use Plan. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
11. 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The site is not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area according to the City
General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1; therefore, there is no impact.
b) The site is not designated by the General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1, as a valuable
mineral resource recovery site; therefore, there is no impact.
12. NOISE. Would the project result in:
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
ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
( ) (✓) ( ) ( )
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in 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 2 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Page 408
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 47
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The project site is not within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to
General Plan Figure PS-9 at build-out. Additionally, the applicant has submitted a Noise
Study by Rincon Consultants, Inc. (February 2020) to review existing noise conditions and
construction noise levels. The analysis finds that the primary existing sources of noise in
the project vicinity are motor vehicles along Banyan Street.
The measured noise levels in the vicinity of the project site range from approximately 46
dBA Leq to 70 dBA Leq. According to the City’s adopted exterior noise standards, an exterior
noise exposure below 60 CNEL is normally acceptable for single-family residences.
Conservatively assuming that the project site would be exposed to traffic noise levels up to
70 CNEL from Banyan Street, the proposed on-site noise-sensitive receivers could be
exposed to normally unacceptable noise levels. Using an attenuation rate of 4.5 dBA per
doubling of distance, single -family residences associated with the proposed project would
require a setback of at least 116 feet from the centerline of Banyan Street to meet the City’s
normally acceptable level of below 60 CNEL. Based on the project site plan shown in Figure
2, current plans for the project include a setback of approximately 50 feet from the centerline
of Banyan Street to the southern residential lots. At this distance, the traffic noise levels
from Banyan Street would attenuate to 65.5 CNEL based on an attenuation rate of 4.5 dBA
per doubling of distance.
Construction of the proposed project would generate temporary noise that would exceed
existing ambient noise levels on and around the project site but would cease upon
completion of construction. Oeration of equipment during site preparation and grading could
generate noise levels in excess of up to 68 dBA Leq at the nearest single-family residences
30 feet north of the project site boundary and Frost Early Education Center 30 feet east of
the project site boundary. Additionally, grading could generate noise levels up to 67 dBA
Leq at single-family residences 115 feet south of the project site boundary across Banyan
Street. Construction noise level estimates do not account for the presence of intervening
structures or topography, which could reduce noise levels at receiver locations. Ther efore,
the noise levels presented represent a reasonable worst-case estimate of actual
construction noise. According to Section 17.66.050.D.4 of the RCMC, construction noise
should not exceed 65 dBA Leq when measured at the property line of an adjacent residential
or school land use.
To further reduce noise impacts and to ensure noise levels are below the level of
significance, the following mitigation measures shall be incorporated into the project.
Exterior:
1) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction-related noise
mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan
shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from
this equipment would be mitigated during construction.
2) Consistent with the hours described in Section 17.66.050.D.4 of the RCMC,
construction times shall be limited between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM
Page 409
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 48
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
on weekdays and Saturdays. No construction activity shall be permitted on
Sundays and national holidays.
3) Construction activities shall be scheduled to avoid operating several pieces of
equipment simultaneously, to the maximum extent feasible.
4) Contractor shall provide stating areas on-site to minimize off-site
transportation of heavy construction equipment. These areas must be located
to maximize the distance between activity and sensitive receptors.
5) Construction vehicles shall not park, queue and/or idle at the project site or
along the adjoining public rights-of-way prior to the construction hours.
6) Electrical power shall be used to run air compressors and similar power tools
and to power any temporary structures, such as construction trailers.
7) Temporary noise barriers with a minimum height of 10 feet, would be placed
along the northern, eastern, and southern boundaries. To be effective the
barriers must break the line-of-sight between on-site construction activities
and off-site receivers to the north, east, and south throughout the duration of
site preparation and grading activities. The noise barrier should be
constructed of material with a minimum weight of 2 pounds per square foot
with no gaps or perforations. Noise barriers may be constructed of, but are not
limited to, 5/8 inch plywood, 5/8 inch oriented strand board, or hay bales.
8) Implement a permanent solid wall with a height of a least six feet, or sufficient
to break the line of site, along the southern project site boundary capable of
reducing traffic noise from Banyan Street by at least 4.5 dBA.
9) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first
phase.
b) The normal operating uses associated with this type of project normally do not induce
ground borne vibrations. Construction related vibration may create short term noise and
vibration impacts. With the mitigation measure listed in under d) below, any impacts will be
less than significant.
c) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. Because the
project will not significantly increase traffic as analyzed in Section 16 Transportation/Traffic;
it will likely not increase ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project. Impacts will
be less than significant.
d) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.12) indicates that during a construction phase, on -site
stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will
generate noise exceeding City standards. The mitigation measures listed under Section a)
above reduces any impacts related to constriction noise to a level less than si gnificant.
e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan and is not within 2 miles of a public
airport. The Project is located approximately 6 miles northeast of the Ontario Airport and is
offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated.
Page 410
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 49
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 1/2 miles to the west
of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated.
13. 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The project is located in a predominantly developed area and will include the construction
of 9 single family homes. Although the project will increase the population growth in the area
there will be a less than significant impact as the project is consistent with the underlying
Zoning and General Plan Designation. The density was analyzed as part of the build out in
the General Plan FPEIR. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not
attract new employees to the area. No significant impacts are anticipated.
b) Because the property is vacant there will be no displacement of housing or people.
Therefore no adverse impact is expected.
c) Because the property is vacant there will be no displacement of housing or people.
Therefore no adverse impact is expected.
14. PUBLIC SERVICES. 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 governmental 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:
a) Fire protection?
( )
( )
(✓)
( )
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
c) Schools? ( ) (✓) ( ) ( )
d) Parks? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
e) Other public facilities? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
Comments:
a) The site, located on the north side of Banyan Street, east of Etiwanda Avenue would be
served by a fire station located approximately 3/4 of a mile from the project site. The project
will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or
cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new
Page 411
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 50
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
facilities. Standard conditions of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be
placed on the project to lessen the future demand and impacts to fire services. Therefore,
a less than significant impact would occur.
b) The increase in residential units may lead to an increase in calls for service. Although there
may be an increase in calls, additional police protection is not required as the addition of
the project will not change the pattern of uses within the surrounding area and will not have
a substantial increase in property to be patrolled as the project site is within an area that is
regularly patrolled. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
c) The Etiwanda School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School Di strict serve the
project area. Both school districts have been notified regarding the proposed development.
A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay the school impact fees,
plus the Etiwanda School District special tax. This standard condition is also added as a
mitigation below. With this, impacts to the School Districts will therefore be considered less
than significant.
1) The developer shall pay the current residential school facility fee plus the
Etiwanda School District special tax.
d) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The
nearest park is located 1/2 mile from the project site. The project will not require the
construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in
the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. A standard
condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. Therefore,
a less than significant impact would occur.
e) The proposed project will utilize existing public facilities. The site is in a developed area,
currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project will not require the
construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in
the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Cumulative
development within Rancho Cucamonga will increase demand for library
services. According to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.14), there will be a projected
increase in library space demand but with the implementation of standard conditions the
increase in Library Services would be mitigated to less than significant impact. Additionally,
the closest public library, the Paul A. Biane Library, recently completed a second floor
addition that added 13,500 square feet of specialized programming space. The proposed
project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts
evaluated. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
15. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) 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?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
Page 412
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 51
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The
nearest park is located 1/2 mile from the project site. This project is proposing the
subdivision of an approximately 6.96-acre vacant parcel for the construction of 9 single-
family residences. The project is in conformance with the Very Low (VL) General Plan land
use designation and will not increase the use of parks or other recreational facilities beyond
that contemplated by the General Plan. A standard condition of approval will require the
developer to pay Park Development Fees. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant.
b) See a) response above.
16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass
transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but not
limited to intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass
transit?
( )
( )
( )
(✓)
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management
program, including, but not limited to a level of service
standards and travel demand measures, or other
standards 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 traffic levels or a change in location that
result 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) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities,
or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of
such facilities.
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) Implementation of the proposed project will generate 86 vehicle trips daily. The proposed
project includes the subdivision of a 6.96-acre lot for the construction of 9 single-family
residences. The ITE Trip Generation Manual estimates that each single-family residence
will generate 10 trips daily. As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.16), continued
development will contribute to the traffic load in the Rancho Cucamonga area. The
proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and
impacts evaluated. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with street
improvements existing or included in project design. The project will not create a substantial
Page 413
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 52
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
increase in the number of vehicle trips, traffic volume , or congestion at intersections. The
project site will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) along
the street frontage of the site per City roadway standards. In addition, the City has
established a Transportation Development fee that must be paid by the applicant prior to
issuance of building permits. Fees are used to fund roadway improvements necessary to
support adequate traffic circulation. No impacts are anticipated.
b) The ITE Trip Generation Manual estimates that each single-family residence will generate
7 morning and 9 evening two-way peak hour trips daily. In November 2004, San Bernardino
County voters passed the Measure I extension which requires local jurisdictions to impose
appropriate fees on development for their fair share toward regional transportation
improvement projects. On May 18, 2005, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted a
Comprehensive Transportation Fee Schedule updating these development impact fees. As
a result, the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Agency waived the
Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis reporting requirement. This
project will be required, as a condition of approval, to pay the adopted transportation
development fee prior to issuance of building permit. The project is in an area that is mostly
developed with all street improvements existing. The project will not negativel y impact the
level of service standards on adjacent arterials. The project will be required to provide street
improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. No impacts
are anticipated.
c) Located approximately 7 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport, the site is offset north of the
flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated.
d) The project is in an area that is mostly developed. The project will be required to provide
street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. The
project design does not include any sharp curves or dangerous intersections or farming
uses. The project will, therefore, not create a substantial increase in hazards because of a
design feature. No impacts are anticipated.
e) The project will be designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles during
construction and upon completion of the project and will therefore not create an inadequate
emergency access. No impacts are anticipated.
f) The project is residential. Although houses are not part of the proposal, when the houses
are submitted for review, adequate parking, specifically an enclosed garage and a driveway,
in compliance with standards of the City of Rancho Cucamonga will be required. Therefore,
no impacts are anticipated.
Page 414
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 53
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code
Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape
that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of
the landscape, sacred place, or object with the cultural value to
a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical
resources as defined in Public Resources Code
Section 5020.1 (K)?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c)
of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying
the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a California
Native American tribe.
( ) (✓) ( ) ( )
Comments:
a) The applicant has submitted a Phase I Cultural Assessment prepared by EarthTouch, Inc.
(December 2016) for the project site. The Study included an archaeological records search
by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCIC) at CSU Fullerton of all properties
within a 1-mile radius of the project site, a paleontological records search, and a pedestrian
field survey of the project site.
Based upon information provided by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCIC),
and a lack of permanent water within or near the subject property, cultural site sensitivity
was deemed to be low. Historic maps and aerial photographs suggest the subject property
was likely part of the Henry Albert family ranch.
The property, which was considerably larger and part of the lands owned by the Etiwanda
Colony, was planted as a fruit orchard in former years before the land was subdivided. In
summary, following a pedestrian survey of the entire parcel, no built environment or
architectural resources were found, nor were any prehistoric or historic archaeological sites
or features discovered. Near the center of the southern end of the project site, a granite
block fragment and clay brick were identified, along with the remaining eucalyptus trees.
The rock fragment and brick were likely remains from the nearby demolished residence to
the west on the adjacent parcel. Mechanical equipment may have moved the stone and
brick since the project site was tilled to eliminate weeds. Thus, no significant cultural
resources were identified in the direct project Area of Potential Effect (APE), and, therefore,
the proposed project will have no effect to historic properties. Nor will the project have a
significant impact on any cultural properties identified in the indirect or visual project APE.
b) In conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, a Phase I Cultural Assessment
was performed on the project site by EarthTouch, Inc. (December 2016). The study consists
Page 415
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 54
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
of an archeological record search and field visit. The results of the records search and field
survey are discussed in section a above.
In conformance of California Senate Bill (SB) 18, a notice of the proposed project was sent
out to the appropriate tribes as recommended by the Native American Heritage Commission
on January 16, 2018. On March 29, 2019, The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
requested that mitigation measures by incorporated in the event that archeological or
cultural resources are discovered during the grading process. These are incorporated
below.
In conformance with California Assembly Bill (AB) 52, a, notice of the proposed project was
sent to the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, the
San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, The
Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh nation, and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians
on January 20, 2021. The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians requested that mitigation
measures be incorporated in the event that archeological or cultural resources are
discovered during the grading process. These are incorporated below. S hould any
undocumented archaeological or cultural resources be discovered during grading activities,
adherence to the mitigation measures listed below will ensure that all impact s will be less
than significant.
1.) The project Applicant will be required to obtain the services of a qualified Native
American Monitor(s) during construction -related ground disturbance activities.
Ground disturbance is defined by the Tribal Representatives from the Gabrieleño
Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that include, but are not limited
to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, weed abatement, boring,
grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. T he
monitor(s) must be approved by the Tribal Representatives and will be present
on-site during the construction phases that involve any ground disturbing
activities. The Native American Monitor(s) will complete monitoring logs on a
daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities, including
construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The
monitor(s) shall possess Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response
(HAZWOPER) certification. In addition, the monitor(s) will be required to provide
insurance certificates, including liability insurance, for any archaeological
resource(s) encountered during grading and excavation activities pertinent to the
provisions outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public
Resources Code Division 13, Section 21083.2 (a) through (k). The on -site
monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are
completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor have indicated that
the site has a low potential for archeological resources.
2.) The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department
(SMBMI) and shall be contacted, of any pre-contact and/or post-contact cultural
resources discovered during project implementation, and be provided
information regarding the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with
regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as
defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), a cultural resources M onitoring and
Treatment Plan shall be created by the archaeologist, in coordination with SMBMI,
and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan shall allow for a
Page 416
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 55
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
monitor to be present that represents SMBMI for the remainder of the project ,
should SMBMI elect to place a monitor on-site.
3.) Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project
(isolate records, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be
supplied to the applicant and Lead Agency for dissemination to SMBMI. The Lead
Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with SMBMI throughout the
life of the project
18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
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
construction of which could cause si gnificant
environmental effects?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity
to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal
needs?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by
the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-1 and RP-4 treatment plants The RP-1 capacity
is sufficient to exceed the additional development within the western and southern areas of
the City. The RP-4 treatment plant has a potential ultimate capacity of 28 mgd which is
considered more than adequate to capacity to treat all increases in wastewater generation
for buildout of the General Plan. The project is required to meet the requirements of the
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are
anticipated.
b) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by
the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho
Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which is at capacity. The
Page 417
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 56
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality
Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated.
c) All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to
handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official
and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. The impact is not considered
significant.
d) The project is served by the CVWD water system. There is currently a sufficient water
supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve this project. No impacts are
anticipated.
e) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by
the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho
Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which is at capacity. No
impacts are anticipated.
f) Solid waste disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler who disposes
the refuse at a permitted landfill with sufficient capacity to handle the City’s solid waste
disposal needs. No impacts are anticipated.
g) This project complies with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid
waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste reduction
procedures consistent with AB 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
19. 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 wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife 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?
( )
(✓)
( )
( )
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
c) Does the project have environmental effects that will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
( ) (✓) ( ) ( )
Comments:
a) Certain biological resources described at the Initial Study Checklist Item 4, Biological
Resources may be adversely affected by the project. Additionally, as yet unknown cultural
Page 418
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 57
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
resources may exist within the project area. This IS/MND incorporates mitigation that
reduces potential biological resources impacts and potential cultural resources impacts to
levels that would be less than significant.
b) If the proposed project were approved, then the applicant would be required to develop the
site in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The 2010 General
Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program FEIR, Findings of Fact, and a
Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental effects of
build-out in the City and Sphere-of-Influence. The City made findings that adoption of the
General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forest
Resources, Air Quality, Climate Change and Mineral Resources. Mitigation measures were
adopted for each of these resources; however, they would not reduce impacts to less-than-
significant levels. As such, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations
balancing the benefits of development under the General Plan Update against the significant
unavoidable adverse impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 and 15096(h)). These
benefits include less overall traffic volumes by developing mixed-use projects that will be
pedestrian friendly and conservation of valuable natural open space. With these findings
and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, no further discussion or evaluation of
cumulative impacts is required.
c) Development of the site under the proposed land use change would not cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Initial Study identifies
construction-related emissions of criteria pollutants as having a potentially significant
impact. Proposed mitigation measures would further reduce emission levels. Additionally,
impacts resulting from air quality would be short-term and would cease once construction
activities were completed. The Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts
associated with the exposure of people to increased noise levels. Mitigation measures
contained in this Initial Study will ensure impacts are at less-than-significant levels.
EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or
more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier PEIR or Negative Declaration per Section
15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately
analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses wer e
utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply):
() General Plan FPEIR
(SCH#2000061027, Certified May 19, 2010)
() General Plan FEIR
(SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001)
() Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update
(SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989)
() Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR
(SCH #82061801, certified July 6, 1983)
Page 419
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 58
() Air Quality Impact Analysis (Urban Crossroads, November 2020)
() Biological Assessment (Earth Touch, Inc., November 2016)
() Biological Assessment Memorandum (Sentinel Science, September 2020)
() Cultural Resources Study (Earth Touch, Inc. December 2016)
() Geotechnical Report (EGL, Inc., June 2018)
() Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Urban Crossroads, November 2020)
() Noise Study (Rincon Consultants, February 2020)
() Tree Survey (Arbor Care, Inc. (October 2020)
Page 420
Page 421
Page 1 of 17
MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III)
Project File No.: SUBTT18012-1 Applicant: EGL, INC.
Initial Study Prepared by: VINCENT ACUNA, ASSOCIATE PLANNER Date: 07/29/2021
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
Section 1 - Aesthetics
1)None
Section 2 - Agricultural Resources
1)None
Section 3 – Air Quality
Short Term (Construction) Emissions
1)All construction equipment shall be maintained
in good operating condition so as to reduce
operational emissions. The contractor shall
ensure that all construction equipment is being
properly serviced and maintained as per
manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance
records shall be available at the construction
site for City verification.
PD C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
2)Prior to the issuance of any grading permits,
the developer shall submit Construction Plans
to the City denoting the proposed schedule
and projected equipment use. Construction
contractors shall provide evidence that
low-emission mobile construction equipment
will be utilized, or that their use was
investigated and found to be infeasible for the
project. Contractors shall also conform to any
construction measures imposed by the South
Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) as well as City Planning staff.
PD/BO C Review of Plans C 2
3)The construction contractor shall utilize electric
or clean alternative fuel powered equipment
where feasible.
BO C Review of Plans A/C 4
4)The construction contractor shall ensure that
construction-grading plans include a BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
Exhibit J Page 422
Page 2 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
statement that work crews will shut off
equipment when not in use
5) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance
standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. BO B Review of Plans A/C 2
6) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed
performance standards noted in SCAQMD
Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be
applied either by hand or high-volume, low
pressure spray
PD C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
7) All construction equipment shall comply with
SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally,
contractors shall include the following
provisions:
BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
• Reestablish ground cover on the
construction site through seeding and
watering.
BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
• Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul
roads. BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
• Phase grading to prevent the
susceptibility of large areas to erosion
over extended periods of time.
BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
• Schedule activities to minimize the
amounts of exposed excavated soil
during and after the end of work periods.
BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
• Dispose of surplus excavated material in
accordance with local ordinances and
use sound engineering practices.
BO C Review of Plans A 4
• Sweep streets according to a schedule
established by the City if silt is carried
over to adjacent public thoroughfares or
occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may
vary depending upon the time of year of
construction.
BO C During Construction A 4
• Suspend grading operations during high
winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding
25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD
Rule 403 requirements.
BO C During Construction A 4
• Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard
ratio on soils haul trucks or cover BO C During Construction A 4
Page 423
Page 3 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
payloads using tarps or other suitable
means.
8) The site shall be treated with water or other
soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD
and Regional Water Quality Control Board
[RWQCB]) daily to reduce Particulate Matter
(PM10) emissions, in accordance with
SCAQMD Rule 403.
BO C During Construction A 4
9) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by
SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all
inactive construction areas that remain
inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10
emissions.
BO C During Construction A 4
Long Term Emissions and Impacts
10) Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant
species to reduce water consumption and to
provide passive solar benefits.
BO C During Construction A 4
11) All residential and commercial structures shall
be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-
polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances,
and water heaters.
BO C/D Review of Plans C 2/4
12) All residential and commercial structures shall
be required to incorporate thermal pane
windows and weather-stripping.
BO C/D Review of Plans C 2/4
13) Projects shall be designed in accordance with
the applicable California Green Building
Standards (CALGreen) Code (24 CCR 11).
BO C/D Review of Plans C 2/4
14) All new development in the City of Rancho
Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast
Air Quality Management District’s Rule 445,
Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was
adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions
of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of
indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e.
fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or
after March 9, 2009.
BO C/D Review of Plans C 2/4
Section 4 - Biological Resources
1) The proposed action should not occur during
the migratory bird nesting season (Feb 1 - PD B Review of Report B 2/4
Page 424
Page 4 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
Aug 31). In the event construction must occur
during the nesting bird season, a qualified
biologist should conduct a nesting bird survey
no more than ten (10) days before the start of
construction. If the biologist determines that
there are active nests, appropriate buffers will
be established for each nest and no work will
occur inside the buffer of an active nest until
the fledglings are no longer dependent on the
nest or until the biologist otherwise
determines the nest is inactive. In the event
this mitigation measure is implemented, it is
expected that site development would not
result in "take" of nesting migratory birds.
2) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in
conformance with the Department of Fish and
Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl
Mitigation and submit the written report
outlining the findings to the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and
the Planning Department within 30 days of
groundbreaking activity. The Burrowing Owl
Survey shall follow the following protocol:
a) Burrowing Own Survey methodology shall be
based on Appendix D (Breeding and non-
breeding season surveys and reports) of the
CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre-
construction survey shall be provided to CDFW
and the City. If the pre-construction survey
does not identify burrowing on the project site,
then no further mitigation is required. If
burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the
project site during the pre-construction survey,
measures shall be developed by the qualified
biologist in coordination with the CDFW to
avoid impacting occupied burrows during the
nesting period. These measures shall be
based on the most current CDFW protocols
and will at minimum include establishment of
buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl
PD B Review of Report B 2/4
Page 425
Page 5 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
monitoring. If ground-disturbing actives are
delayed or suspended for more than 30 days
after the pre-construction survey, the site shall
be resurveyed for owls.
b) During the non-breeding season from
September 1 through January 31, if burrows
are occupied by migratory and non-migratory
resident burrowing owls during a pre-
construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or
closure may be used to exclude owls from
those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or
closure should only be conducted by a
qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with
CDFW using the most current CDFW
guidelines.
c) During the avian nesting season from February
1 through August 31, if nests are discovered,
they shall be avoided through the
establishment of an appropriate buffer setback,
as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist.
The temporary “no construction” area would
have to be maintained until the nest has
completed its cycle, as determined by a
qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle
is complete and all nestlings have fledged and
have left the nest, construction in that area may
resume.
3) A biological construction monitor (BCM) shall
be present during the days when initial ground
clearing, best maintenance practice (BMP)
installation and vegetation removal activities
are occurring. The BCM will be observe the
activities and watch for special status reptiles
such as the Coast horned lizard ((Phrynosoma
blainvillii) and Coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis
tigris stejnegeri), and if detected will relocate
them out of harm’s way.
Page 426
Page 6 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
Section 5 – Cultural Resources
1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are
encountered before or during grading, the
developer will retain a qualified archaeologist
to monitor construction activities, to take
appropriate measures to protect or preserve
them for study. With the assistance of the
archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga
will:
• Enact interim measures to protect
undesignated sites from demolition or
significant modification without an
opportunity for the City to establish its
archaeological value.
PD/BO C Review of Report A/D 3/4
• Consider establishing provisions to
require incorporation of archaeological
sites within new developments, using
their special qualities as a theme or focal
point.
PD/BO C Review of Report A/D 3/4
• Pursue educating the public about the
archaeological heritage of the area. PD/BO C Review of Report A/D 3/4
• Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with
Section 21083.2 Archeological resources
of CEQA to eliminate adverse project
effects on significant, important, and
unique prehistoric resources, including
but not limited to, avoiding archeological
sites, capping or covering site with soil,
planning the site as a park or green space
or paying an in-kind mitigation fee.
PD B/C Review of report
and plans during
construction
A/D 2/4
• Prepare a technical resources
management report, documenting the
inventory, evaluation, and proposed
mitigation of resources within the project
area. Submit one copy of the completed
report, with original illustrations, to the
San Bernardino County Archaeological
Information Center for permanent
archiving.
PD C Review of Report A/D 3/4
Page 427
Page 7 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
2) In the event that cultural resources are
discovered during project activities, all work in
the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-
foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified
archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior
standards shall be hired to assess the find.
Work on the other portions of the project
outside of the buffered area may continue
during this assessment period. Additionally,
the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI)
shall be contacted regarding any pre-contact
and/or post-contact finds and be provided
information after the archaeologist makes
his/her initial assessment of the nature of the
find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards
to significance and treatment
PD C During Construction A/D 4
3) If significant pre-contact and/or post-contact
cultural resources, as defined by CEQA (as
amended, 2015), are discovered and
avoidance cannot be ensured, the
archaeologist shall develop a Monitoring and
Treatment Plan, the drafts of which shall be
provided to SMBMI for review and comment,
as detailed within TCR-1. The archaeologist
shall monitor the remainder of the project and
implement the Plan accordingly.
PD C During Construction A/D 4
4) If human remains or funerary objects are
encountered during any activities associated
with the project, work in the immediate vicinity
(within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall
cease and the County Coroner shall be
contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety
Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the
duration of the project.
PD C During Construction A/D 4
Page 428
Page 8 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
5) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or
animal fossils) are encountered before or
during grading, the developer will retain a
qualified paleontologist to monitor construction
activities, to take appropriate measures to
protect or preserve them for study. The
paleontologist shall submit a report of findings
that will also provide specific
recommendations regarding further mitigation
measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring)
that may be appropriate. Where mitigation
monitoring is appropriate, the program must
include, but not be limited to, the following
measures:
PD B Review of Report A/D 4
• Assign a paleontological monitor, trained
and equipped to allow the rapid removal
of fossils with minimal construction delay,
to the site full-time during the interval of
earth-disturbing activities.
PD B Review of Report A/D 4
• Should fossils be found within an area
being cleared or graded, divert earth-
disturbing activities elsewhere until the
monitor has completed salvage. If
construction personnel make the
discovery, the grading contractor should
immediately divert construction and notify
the monitor of the find.
BO B/C Review of Report A/D 4
• Prepare, identify, and curate all
recovered fossils for documentation in
the summary report and transfer to an
appropriate depository (i.e.,
San Bernardino County Museum).
PD D Review of Report D 3
• Submit summary report to City of Rancho
Cucamonga. Transfer collected
specimens with a copy to the report to
San Bernardino County Museum.
PD D Review of Report D 3
Section 6 – Geology and Soils
1) The site shall be treated with water or other
soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD
and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM10 emissions,
BO C During Construction A 4
Page 429
Page 9 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-
planted with drought resistant landscaping as
soon as possible.
2) Frontage public streets shall be swept
according to a schedule established by the
City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with
vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may
vary depending upon the time of year of
construction.
BO C During Construction A 4
3) Grading operations shall be suspended when
wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10
emissions from the site during such episodes.
BO C During Construction A 4
4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by
SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all
inactive construction areas that remain
inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10
emissions.
BO C During Construction A 4
Section 7 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions
1) The project must comply with all rules that
assist in reducing short-term air pollutant
emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule
403 regarding fugitive dust including treating
the site with water or other soil-stabilizing
agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas
as quickly as possible.
BO C During Construction A 4
2) The construction contractor shall select
construction equipment based on low-
emission factors and high energy efficiency
and submit a statement on the grading plan
that ensures all construction equipment will be
tuned and maintained in accordance with the
manufactures’ specification.
BO C During Construction A 4
3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more
than 5 minutes. BO C During Construction A 4
4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be
utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel-powered
engines where feasible.
BO C During Construction A 4
Page 430
Page 10 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
5) Construction should be timed so as not to
interfere with peak-hour traffic. BO C During Construction A 4
6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be
supported and encouraged for construction
crew.
BO C During Construction A 4
Long Term (Operational) GHG Emissions
7) Construction and Building materials shall be
produced and/or manufactured locally, as
feasible. Use “Green Building Materials” such
as materials that are resource efficient,
recycled, and manufactured in an
environmentally friendly way including low-
volatile-organic-compound (VOC) materials.
BO A During Construction C 2
8) Design all buildings to exceed California
Building Code Title 24 energy standard
including but not limited to any combination of:
• Increased insulation.
• Limit air leakage through the structure.
• Incorporate Energy Star or better rated
windows, space heating and cooling
equipment, light fixtures, and appliances.
• Landscape and develop site utilizing
shade, prevailing winds and landscaping.
• Install efficient lighting and lighting control
systems .
• Install light colored “cool” roofs and cool
pavements.
• Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED’s)
for outdoor lighting.
BO C During Construction A 4
9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation
strategy appropriate for the project and include
the following:
• Install water efficient landscapes and
irrigation systems and devices in
compliance with the City of Rancho
BO A During Construction C 2
Page 431
Page 11 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance.
• Use reclaimed water for landscaping within
the project if available or as required by the
Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD).
• Design building to be water efficient by
installing water efficient fixtures and
appliances including low flow faucets, dual
flush toilets and waterless urinals/water
heaters.
• Design irrigation to control runoff and to
remove water to non-vegetated surfaces.
10) Reuse and recycle construction and
demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior
storage areas for recyclables and green waste
in public areas. Educate employees about
reducing waste and about recycling.
CE A Review of Plans C 2
Section 8 – Hazards and Waste Materials
1) None
Section 9 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Construction Activities
1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit
applicant shall submit to Building Official for
approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be
used on-site to reduce pollutants during
construction activities entering the storm drain
system to the maximum extent practical.
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared,
included in the Grading Plan, and implemented
for the proposed project that identifies specific
measures to control on-site and off-site erosion
from the time ground disturbing activities are
initiated through completion of grading. This
Erosion Control Plan shall include the following
measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing
BO B/C/D/ Review of Plans A/C 2/4
Page 432
Page 12 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
of grading and construction to minimize soil
exposure to rainy periods experienced in
Southern California, and b) An inspection and
maintenance program shall be included to
ensure that any erosion which does occur either
on-site or off-site as a result of this project will
be corrected through a remediation or
restoration program within a specified time
frame.
3) During construction, temporary berms such as
sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to
prevent discharge of debris or sediment from
the site when there is rainfall or other runoff.
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
4) During construction, to remove pollutants,
street cleaning will be performed prior to storm
events and after the use of water trucks to
control dust in order to prevent discharge of
debris or sediment from the site.
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
5) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits,
the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent
(NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) General Construction Storm
Water Permit from the State Water Resources
Control Board. Evidence that this has been
obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste
Discharger's Identification Number) shall be
submitted to the City Building Official for
coverage under the NPDES General
Construction Permit.
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
Post-Construction Operational
6) Prior to issuance of building permits, the
applicant shall submit to the City Building
Official for approval of a Water Quality
Management Plan (WQMP), including a
project description and identifying Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that will be
used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm
drain system to the maximum extent
practicable. The WQMP shall identify the
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
Page 433
Page 13 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
structural and non-structural measures
consistent with the Guidelines for New
Development and Redevelopment adopted by
the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004.
7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for
controlling and minimizing the use of
fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped
areas shall be monitored and maintained for at
least two years to ensure adequate coverage
and stable growth. Plans for these areas,
including monitoring provisions for a minimum
of two years, shall be submitted to the City for
review and approval prior to the issuance of
grading permits.
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
Grading Activities
8) The developer shall implement the BMPs
identified in the Water Quality Management
Plan prepared by (name/date) to reduce
construction pollutants from entering the storm
drain system to the maximum extent practical.
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
Section 10 – Land Use and Planning
1) None
Section 11 – Mineral Resources
1) None
Section 12 – Noise
1) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a
construction-related noise mitigation plan shall
be submitted to the City for review and
approval. The Plan shall depict the location of
the construction equipment and how the noise
from this equipment would be mitigated during
construction.
PD/BO B Review of Plans C/A 4
2) Consistent with the hours described in
Section 17.66.050.D.4 of the RCMC,
construction times shall be limited between
the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM on
weekdays and Saturdays. No construction
activity shall be permitted on Sundays and
PD/BO C During Construction A/C 4
Page 434
Page 14 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
national holidays.
3) Construction activities shall be scheduled to
avoid operating several pieces of equipment
simultaneously, to the maximum extent
feasible.
PD/BO C During Construction A 4
4) Contractor shall provide stating areas on-site
to minimize off-site transportation of heavy
construction equipment. These areas must be
located to maximize the distance between
activity and sensitive receptors.
PD/BO C During Construction A 4
5) Construction vehicles shall not park, queue
and/or idle at the project site or along the
adjoining public rights-of-way prior to the
construction hours.
PD/BO C During Construction A 4
6) Electrical power shall be used to run air
compressors and similar power tools and to
power any temporary structures, such as
construction trailers
PD/BO C During Construction A 4
7) Temporary noise barriers with a minimum
height of 10 feet, would be placed along the
northern, eastern, and southern boundaries.
To be effective the barriers must break the
line-of-sight between on-site construction
activities and off-site receivers to the north,
east, and south throughout the duration of site
preparation and grading activities. The noise
barrier should be constructed of material with
a minimum weight of 2 pounds per square
foot with no gaps or perforations. Noise
barriers may be constructed of, but are not
limited to, 5/8 inch plywood, 5/8 inch oriented
strand board, or hay bales.
PD/BO C During Construction A/C 4
8) Implement a permanent solid wall with a
height of a least six feet, or sufficient to break
the line of site, along the southern project site
boundary capable of reducing traffic noise
from Banyan Street by at least 4.5 dBA.
PD/BO C During Construction A/C 4
9) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed
as early as possible in first phase. PD/BO C During Construction A/C 4
Section 13 – Population and Housing
Page 435
Page 15 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
1) None
Section 14 – Public Services
1) The developer shall pay the current
residential school facility fee plus the
Etiwanda School District special tax.
BO B Review of Plans C 2
Section 15 - Recreation
1) None
Section 16 – Transportation/Traffic
1) None
Section 17 – Tribal Cultural Resources
1) The project Applicant will be required to obtain
the services of a qualified Native American
Monitor(s) during construction-related ground
disturbance activities. Ground disturbance is
defined by the Tribal Representatives from the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh
Nation as activities that include, but are not
limited to, pavement removal, pot-holing or
auguring, grubbing, weed abatement, boring,
grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching,
within the project area. The monitor(s) must be
approved by the Tribal Representatives and
will be present on-site during the construction
phases that involve any ground disturbing
activities. The Native American Monitor(s) will
complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The
logs will provide descriptions of the daily
activities, including construction activities,
locations, soil, and any cultural materials
identified. The monitor(s) shall possess
Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency
Response (HAZWOPER) certification. In
addition, the monitor(s) will be required to
provide insurance certificates, including
liability insurance, for any archaeological
resource(s) encountered during grading and
excavation activities pertinent to the provisions
outlined in the California Environmental
Quality Act, California Public Resources Code
PD B During Grading B 4
Page 436
Page 16 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
Division 13, Section 21083.2 (a) through (k).
The on-site monitoring shall end when the
project site grading and excavation activities
are completed, or when the Tribal
Representatives and monitor have indicated
that the site has a low potential for
archeological resources.
2) The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) and
shall be contacted, of any pre-contact and/or
post-contact cultural resources discovered
during project implementation, and be
provided information regarding the nature of
the find, so as to provide Tribal input with
regards to significance and treatment. Should
the find be deemed significant, as defined by
CEQA (as amended, 2015), a cultural
resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan
shall be created by the archaeologist, in
coordination with SMBMI, and all subsequent
finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan
shall allow for a monitor to be present that
represents SMBMI for the remainder of the
project, should SMBMI elect to place a
monitor on-site.
PD C During Grading A/D 4
3) Any and all archaeological/cultural documents
created as a part of the project (isolate
records, site records, survey reports, testing
reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant
and Lead Agency for dissemination to
SMBMI. The Lead Agency and/or applicant
shall, in good faith, consult with SMBMI
throughout the life of the project
PD C During Grading A/D 4
Section 18 – Utility and Service Systems
1) None
Section 19 – Mandatory Findings of Significance
1) None
Key to Checklist Abbreviations
Page 437
Page 17 of 17
Responsible Person Monitoring Frequency Method of Verification Sanctions
CDD - Community Development Director or designee A - With Each New Development A - On-site Inspection 1 - Withhold Recordation of Final Map
PD - Planning Director or designee B - Prior To Construction B - Other Agency Permit / Approval 2 - Withhold Grading or Building Permit
CE - City Engineer or designee C - Throughout Construction C - Plan Check 3 - Withhold Certificate of Occupancy
BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order
PO - Police Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds
FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP
7 - Citation
Page 438
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND
PLANNING COMMISSION AND
AGENDA
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
September 8, 2021 @ 7:00 p.m.
MEETING MINUTES
The Regular meeting of the Historic Presentation Commission and Planning Commission was held on
September 8, 2021. The meeting was called to order by the Chair Oaxaca at 7:00 p.m.
A.Roll Cal
Planning Commission present: Chair Oaxaca, Vice Chair Dopp, Commissioner Guglielmo,
Commissioner Morales and Commissioner Williams.
Staff Present: Nicholas Ghirelli, City Attorney; David Eoff IV, Acting Planning Director; Mike
Smith, Principal Planner; Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant; Vincent Acuna, Associate
Planner.
B.Public Communications
Chair Oaxaca opened the public communications and hearing no comment, closed public
communications.
C.Consent Calendar
C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2021.
Motion by Commissioner Guglielmo, second by Commissioner Williams to approve Consent
Calendar. Motion carried unanimously 5-0 vote.
D.Public Hearings
D1. LOCATED AT 12774 BANYAN STREET - EGL ASSOCIATES, INC. - A request to
subdivide a vacant 6.96-acre parcel into 9 residential lots for future single-family
development, a Specific Plan Amendment to amend the site’s Specific Plan
designation from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential within the
Etiwanda Specific Plan, Equestrian Overlay, and a Tree Removal Permit to remove
157 Heritage Trees from the project site. Staff has prepared an Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
Tentative Tract Map, Specific Plan Amendment, and Tree Removal Permit. APN:
0225-111-07. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts has been
prepared for consideration. (SUBTT18012-1, DRC2016-00730, DRC2018-00898.) Attachment 2Page439
HPC/PC Regular Minutes – September 8, 2021
Page 2 of 2
FINAL
Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and presentation
(copy on file).
Chair Oaxaca asked the Commission if there were any comments for staff on this public hearing item.
With no further discussion from Commissioners, Chair Oaxaca opened public hearing.
With no comments from the Public, Chair Oaxaca closed public hearing.
Commissioners expressed general support of the project.
Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Morales, to adopt the proposed
Resolutions 21-47, 21-48, 21-49 to approve Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18012-1, Tree Removal Permit
DRC2018-00898 and Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00730. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0
vote.
E. Director Announcements
David Eoff, Acting Planning Director, announced the General Plan EIR is moving along and will be released
this Friday, 9/9/2021 on the City website. He mentioned a pre-recorded video is being prepared that
discusses the EIR that will be available at a later date. He also provided an update on the Regina Winery
RFP project that included details on the entire process, what has occurred to date, what is coming next, and
details on the City Council Special Workshop that occurred earlier in the afternoon.
Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant, asked Commissioners to select an alternate meeting date to replace
November 24th (day before Thanksgiving Holiday). Commissioners agreed to meet on Monday, November
22nd and start the meeting at 6:00 p.m. She also mentioned December 22nd meeting will not be cancelled.
We plan to have the meeting unless no items are submitted.
F. Commission Announcements - None
G. Adjournment
Motion by Commissioner Morales, second by Chair Oaxaca to adjourn the meeting, motion carried
unanimously, 5-0 vote. Meeting was adjourned at 7:28 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Elizabeth Thornhill
Executive Assistant, Planning Department
Approved: HPC/PC Meeting September 22, 2021.
Page 440
ORDINANCE NO. 990
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT DRC2016-00730, A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONING
DESIGNATION FOR A 6.96 ACRE SITE WITHIN THE ETIWANDA
SPECIFIC PLAN FROM ESTATE RESIDENTIAL (ER) TO VERY LOW (VL)
RESIDENTIAL FOR A SITE LOCATED ON 12774 BANAN AVENUE; AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF – APN: 0225-111-07
A.Recitals.
1.EGL Associates, Inc. filed an application for the approval of Specific Plan Amendment
DRC2016-00730 as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the
subject Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment request is referred to as "the application."
2.On the 18th day of September 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing with respect to the above referenced Specific Plan
Amendment and, following the conclusion thereof, adopted its Resolution No. 21-48, recommending
that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt said Specific Plan Amendment.
3.On the 17th day of November 2021, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date.
4.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
B.Ordinance.
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the
Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct.
SECTION 2: Based upon substantial evidence presented to the City Council during the
above-referenced public hearing on November 17, 2021, including written and oral staff reports,
together with public testimony, the City Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
a.The application applies to a property located on 12774 Banyan Street in the Very
Low (VL) Zoning District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and
b.To the north are single-family residences within the Estate Residential (ER) Zoning
District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan; to the south are single-family residences within the Very Low
(VL) Zoning District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan; to the west is a vacant property within the Estate
Residential (ER) Zoning District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and to the east is a preschool within
the School (S) Zoning District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and
c.The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Very Low (VL)
Residential and the Etiwanda Specific Plan zoning designation for the project site is Estate
Residential (ER); and
Attachment 3
Page 441
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 990
ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00730
EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
NOVEMBER 17, 2021
Page 2
d. EGL Associates, Inc. submitted an application for the subdivision of a vacant 6.96-
acre site into 9 lots (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18012-1). All 9 lots are for the future development
of 9 single-family residences: and
e. The application includes Specific Plan Amendment to change the project site’s
zoning designation from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low (VL) Residential for the 9 residential
lots. The project also includes Tree Removal Permit DRC2018 to remove up to 157 Heritage Trees.
House product for the lots is not a part of the project scope and will be submitted at a later date; and
f. The site is currently zoned Estate Residential (ER) and is within the Etiwanda
Specific Plan. The applicant has requested to change the zoning designation to Very Low (VL)
Residential, which will enable the subdivision of the project site in a manner which is consistent in
design and density with all other existing residential development along the north and south side of
Banyan Street, between Bluegrass Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue; and
g. The proposed lots comply with the 90-foot lot width and 200-foot lot depth
requirements of the Etiwanda Specific Plan for the Very Low (VL) Zoning District. The subdivision
has an average lot size of 26,914 square feet, which exceeds the required 25,000 square foot
average lot size.
SECTION 3: Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the
above-referenced public 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 proposed Etiwanda Specific Plan amendment does not conflict with the Land
Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for the development, within the district, in a
manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development. As a Land Use Policy, the
General Plan states that new development should be accommodated in a manner that integrates it
into the physical structure of the City, is a logical extension of existing infrastructure improvements
and there are adequate public services available to serve the development. The proposed Specific
Plan Amendment will implement the Land Use Policies outlined above and will not be inconsistent
with the density or quality of existing development within the Etiwanda Specific Plan area and the
City.
b. The proposed Etiwanda Specific Plan amendment does promote the goals and
objectives of the Etiwanda Specific Plan which in turn are consistent with and implement the goals
and objectives of the General Plan. These goals include promoting the economical and efficient use
of land, promoting design and construction techniques that are responsive to the environment, and
promoting development compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed zoning
amendment will result in development that is consistent with these goals and objectives and will be
indistinguishable in overall quality and design from existing development in the surrounding area.
c. The proposed Etiwanda Specific Plan amendment will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment will enable development on the subject property to be
consistent with all other residential development along Banyan Street. The lots will be of similar size
to the surrounding development. The minor increase in density will not increase traffic in a manner
that is beyond what the roads were designed to accommodate or overwhelm the existing public
facilities in the surrounding area.
Page 442
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 990
ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00730
EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
NOVEMBER 17, 2021
Page 3
d. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. The General
Plan states that the Very Low (VL) land use designation is characterized by detached, very low
density single-family residential units on 0.5-acre lots or larger, with private yards and private
parking with a density range of 0.10 to 2 dwelling units per acre. The related subdivision
(SUBTT18012-1) for the project site has a proposed density of 1.29 dwelling units per acre. The
proposed Specific Plan Amendment will be fully compliant with the General Plan; and
e. The proposed amendment is consistent with the objectives of the Etiwanda
Specific Plan. The project site is being subdivided for the development of single-family residences
with a density of 1.29 dwelling units per acre and an average lot size of 26,914, in excess of the
required 25,000 square foot average lot size. The lots will be of similar size to the existing
residential lots to the south and east, and will become an integral part of the surrounding area.
SECTION 4: Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated
Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental
assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the
project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference,
based upon the findings as follows:
a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s local
CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of
the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the
imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would
have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative
Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment
period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
b. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the
comments received from the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) regarding the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative
Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that based on the imposition of
mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on
the environment. During the Public Comment Period, staff received comments from the CVWD
regarding requesting a minor textual correction in the percentage of groundwater provided by
CVWD to the City, from 35% to 45%. This correction has been incorporated into the Mitigated
Negative Declaration. The City Council further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects
the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. Based on these findings, the City
Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
c. The City Council has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring
Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources
Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the
mitigation measures during project implementation. The City Council therefore adopts the Mitigation
Monitoring Program for the project; and
d.The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and
all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning
Commission’s recommendation is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Page 443
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 990
ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00730
EGL ASSOCIATES, INC.
NOVEMBER 17, 2021
Page 4
Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone
(909) 477-2750.
SECTION 5: The Etiwanda Specific Plan is hereby amended to change the project site land
use district from Estate Residential (ER) Residential to Very Low (VL) Residential, in words and
figures, as shown in Attachment A.
SECTION 6: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance
is, for any reason, deemed or held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of
competent jurisdiction, or preempted by legislative enactment, such decision or legislation shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or words thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more
sections, subsections, clauses, phrases, or words might subsequently be declared invalid or
unconstitutional or preempted by subsequent legislation.
SECTION 7: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the
same to be published within 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and
circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 17th day of November, 2021.
BY: ____________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
I, JANICE REYNOLDS, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held
on the 17th day of November, 2021, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the ______ day of ______________, 2021, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ATTEST:_______________________________
City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Page 444
ATTACHMENT A
NEW ETIWANDA SPECIFIC
PLAN DESIGNATION WITH THE
APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT DRC2016-00730
Page 445
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1. Project File: Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1)
2. Related Files: Tree Removal Permit (DRC2018-00898) and Specific Plan Amendment (DRC2016-
00730)
3. Description of Project: A request to subdivide an approximately 6.96-acre vacant parcel for the
construction of 9 single-family residences within the Estate Residential (ER) district, Etiwanda
Specific Plan, located at 12774 Banyan Street. Also included is a request for the removal of trees
within the project site, and a specific plan amendment to change the zoning district of the subject
site from Estate Residential (ER) to Very Low Residential (VL) within the Etiwanda Specific Plan.
The project site is within the Equestrian Overlay. APN: 0225-111-07.
5. General Plan Designation: Very Low Residential (VLR)
6. Zoning: Currently Estate Residential (ER) district, Etiwanda Specific Plan
7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is comprised of a vacant parcel
approximately 6.96 acres in size, located on the north side of Banyan Street, east of Etiwanda
Avenue. Limited street improvements including a curb and gutter are present along the project site’s
frontage along Banyan Street. The property slopes down from north to south, from about 751 feet
to 717 feet.
The site is bound to the west by a school (Frost Early Education Center,) and to the east is a vacant,
rectangular-shaped parcel, both of which are zoned Estate Residential (ER), Etiwanda Specific
Plan. The properties to the north comprise of vacant and undeveloped single -family lots zoned
Estate Residential (ER), Etiwanda Specific Plan. The properties to the south (across Banyan)
comprise of vacant land and a single-family residential tract within the Very Low Residential (VL)
district, Etiwanda Specific Plan. The project site and surrounding properties discussed above are
within the Equestrian Overlay.
Page 446
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 2
8. Location Map
Page 447
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 3
9. Project Plans
Page 448
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 4
10. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
11. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Vincent Acuna
Associate Planner
(909) 774-4323
vincent.acuna@cityofrc.us
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving a t least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
( ) Aesthetics
( ) Biological Resources
( ) Greenhouse Gas Emissions
( ) Land Use & Planning
( ) Population & Housing
( ) Transportation/Traffic
( ) Mandatory Findings of
Significance
( ) Agricultural Resources
( ) Cultural Resources
( ) Hazards & Waste Materials
( ) Mineral Resources
( ) Public Services
( ) Tribal Cultural Resources
( ) Air Quality
( ) Geology & Soils
( ) Hydrology & Water Quality
( ) Noise
( ) Recreation
( ) Utilities & Service Systems
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
( ) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
(X) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by, or
agreed to, by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant
Unless Mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standard and 2) has been addressed
by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain
to be addressed.
( ) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because
all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant
to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that
are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Page 449
Page 450
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 6
accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements.
8. The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and
Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Particulate Matter (PM10)
emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403.
9. Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive
construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions.
10. Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant species to reduce water consumption and to
provide passive solar benefits.
11. All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high -efficiency/low-
polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters.
12. All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows
and weather-stripping.
13. Projects shall be designed in accordance with the applicable California Green Building Standards
(CALGreen) Code (24 CCR 11).
14. All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality
Management District’s Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to
reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning
devices (i.e. fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009.
Biological Resources
1. The proposed action should not occur during the migratory bird nesting season (Feb 1 - Aug 31).
In the event construction must occur during the nesting bird season, a qualified biologist should
conduct a nesting bird survey no more than ten (10) days before the start of construction. If the
biologist determines that there are active nests, appropriate buffers wil l be established for each
nest and no work will occur inside the buffer of an active nest until the fledglings are no longer
dependent on the nest or until the biologist otherwise determines the nest is inactive. In the event
this mitigation measure is implemented, it is expected that site development would not result in
"take" of nesting migratory birds.
2. Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife
Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of
groundbreaking activity. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol:
a. Burrowing Own Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and non-
breeding season surveys and reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -
construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre-construction survey
does not identify burrowing on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If
burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre-construction survey,
measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with the CDFW to
avoid impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be
based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of
buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground-disturbing actives are
delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre-construction survey, the site
shall be resurveyed for owls.
b. During the non-breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are
Page 451
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 7
occupied by migratory and non-migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre-
construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from
those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified
wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines.
c. During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are
discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer
setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary “no construction”
area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by
a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged
and have left the nest, construction in that area may resume.
3. A biological construction monitor (BCM) shall be present during the days when initial ground
clearing, best maintenance practice (BMP) installation and vegetation removal activities are
occurring. The BCM will be observe the activities and watch for special status reptiles such as the
Coast horned lizard ((Phrynosoma blainvillii) and Coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri),
and if detected will relocate them out of harm’s way.
Cultural Resources
1. If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer
will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures
to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho
Cucamonga will:
• Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant
modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value.
• Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new
developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point.
• Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area.
• Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archeological resources of
CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric
resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archeological sites, capping or covering
site with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee.
• Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation,
and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the
completed report, with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological
Information Center for permanent archiving.
2. In the event that cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate
vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting
Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the
project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Addition ally, the
San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) shall be contacted
regarding any pre-contact and/or post-contact finds and be provided information after the
archaeologist makes his/her initial assessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input
with regards to significance and treatment .
3. If significant pre-contact and/or post-contact cultural resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended,
2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, the archaeologist shall develop a
Monitoring and Treatment Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to SMBMI for review and
Page 452
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 8
comment, as detailed within TCR-1. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project
and implement the Plan accordingly.
4. If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the
project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the
County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that
code enforced for the duration of the project.
5. If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during
grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take
appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a
report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation
measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring
is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures:
• Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils
with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing
activities.
• Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing
activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel
make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert constructi on and
notify the monitor of the find.
• Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report
and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum).
• Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with
a copy to the report to San Bernardino County Museum.
Geology and Soils
1. The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and
RWQCB) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted
with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible.
2. Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce
PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tr acking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon
the time of year of construction.
3. Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM 10
emissions from the site during such episodes.
4. Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive
construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
1. The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in
compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or
other soil-stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
2. The construction contractor shall select construction equipment based on low-emission factors and
high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction
equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures’ specification.
Page 453
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 9
3. Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes.
4. Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel-powered engines
where feasible.
5. Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak -hour traffic.
6. Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for construction crew.
7. Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally , as feasible.
Use “Green Building Materials” such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled, and
manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low-volatile-organic-compound (VOC)
materials.
8. Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including but not
limited to any combination of:
• Increased insulation.
• Limit air leakage through the structure.
• Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment,
light fixtures, and appliances.
• Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping.
• Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems .
• Install light colored “cool” roofs and cool pavements.
• Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED’s) for outdoor lighting.
9. Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the
following:
• Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the
City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.
• Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the
Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD).
• Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances
including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinals/water heaters.
• Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non-vegetated surfaces.
10. Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas
for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and
about recycling.
Page 454
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 10
Hydrology and Water Quality
1. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to Building Official for
approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction
activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical.
2. An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the
proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time
ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan
shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction
to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection
and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-
site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program
within a specified time frame.
3. During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be us ed to prevent
discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff.
4. During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events
and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment
from the site.
5. Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to
comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control
Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification
Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage u nder the NPDES General
Construction Permit.
6. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Building Official for
approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and
identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into
the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural
and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and
Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004 .
7. Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of
fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least
two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including
monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and
approval prior to the issuance of grading permits.
8. The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan
prepared by (name/date) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to
the maximum extent practical.
Noise
1. Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction-related noise mitigation plan shall be
submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan shall depict the location of the construction
equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction.
Page 455
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 11
2. Consistent with the hours described in Section 17.66.050.D.4 of the RCMC, construction times
shall be limited between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM on weekdays and Saturdays. No
construction activity shall be permitted on Sundays and national holidays.
3. Construction activities shall be scheduled to avoid operating several pieces of equipment
simultaneously, to the maximum extent feasible.
4. Contractor shall provide stating areas on-site to minimize off-site transportation of heavy
construction equipment. These areas must be located to maximize the distance between activity
and sensitive receptors.
5. Construction vehicles shall not park, queue and/or idle at the project site or along the adjoining
public rights-of-way prior to the construction hours.
6. Electrical power shall be used to run air compressors and similar power tools and to power any
temporary structures, such as construction trailers.
7. Temporary noise barriers with a minimum height of 10 feet, would be placed along the northern,
eastern, and southern boundaries. To be effective the barriers must break the line-of-sight between
on-site construction activities and off-site receivers to the north, east, and south throughout the
duration of site preparation and grading activities. The noise barrier should be constructed of
material with a minimum weight of 2 pounds per square foot with no gaps or perforations. Noise
barriers may be constructed of, but are not limited to, 5/8 inch plywood, 5/8 inch oriented strand
board, or hay bales.
8. Implement a permanent solid wall with a height of a least six feet, or sufficient to break the line of
site, along the southern project site boundary capable of reducing traffic noise from Banyan Street
by at least 4.5 dBA.
9. The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase.
Public Services
1. The developer shall pay the current residential school facility fee plus the Etiwanda School District
special tax.
Tribal Cultural Resources
1. The project Applicant will be required to obtain the services of a qualified Native American
Monitor(s) during construction-related ground disturbance activities. Ground disturbance is defined
by the Tribal Representatives from the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities
that include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, weed
abatement, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The
monitor(s) must be approved by the Tribal Representatives and will be present on-site during the
construction phases that involve any ground disturbing activities. The Native American Monitor(s)
will complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the d aily
activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The
monitor(s) shall possess Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER)
certification. In addition, the monitor(s) will be required to provide insurance certificates, including
liability insurance, for any archaeological resource(s) encountered during grading and excavation
activities pertinent to the provisions outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act, California
Public Resources Code Division 13, Section 21083.2 (a) through (k). The on-site monitoring shall
end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal
Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low poten tial for archeological
resources.
Page 456
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 12
2. The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) and shall be
contacted, of any pre-contact and/or post-contact cultural resources discovered during project
implementation, and be provided information regarding the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal
input with regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as defined
by CEQA (as amended, 2015), a cultural resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be c reated
by the archaeologist, in coordination with SMBMI, and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this
Plan. This Plan shall allow for a monitor to be present that represents SMBMI for the remainder of
the project, should SMBMI elect to place a monitor on-site.
3. Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project (isolate records, site
records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant and Lead Agency
for dissemination to SMBMI. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with
SMBMI throughout the life of the project.
GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS
AB Assembly Bill
APE Area of Potential Effect
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
BMPs Best Management Practices
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CH4 methane
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
CO Plan Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide
CRHR California Register of Historic Places
CVWD
CWA
Cucamonga Valley Water District
Clean Water Act
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
EIC Eastern Information Center
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
GHG Greenhouse Gas
LST Localized Significance Threshold
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MLD Most Likely Descendent
MMT Million Metric Tons
Page 457
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 13
MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
MSHCP Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
MTCO2e metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
ND Negative Declaration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
N2O nitrous oxide
NOx nitrogen oxides
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
OHV Off-Highway Vehicle
OPR California Office of Planning and Research
PM2.5 Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Microns in Diameter
PM10 Particulate Matter Less than 10 Microns in Diameter
RCPG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide
ROG Reactive Organic Gases
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SIP State Implementation Plan
SP Service Population
SoCAB South Coast Air Basin
SR State Route
SRA Sensitive Receptor Area
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
Page 458
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 14
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Page 459
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 15
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
( )
( )
( )
(✓)
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but
not limited to, 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 source of substantial light or glare, which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
Comments:
a) There are no significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. The site is not within a
view corridor according to General Plan Figure LU-6. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
b) The project site contains no scenic resources and no historic buildings within a State Scenic
Highway. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
c) The site is located on the north side of Banyan Street, east of Etiwanda Avenue and is
characterized by single-family residential development as well as vacant land zoned for
single-family residential development to the south, east, and north. To the west is a school.
The visual quality of the area will not degrade as a result of this project because the project
is similar in development type, aesthetics, and massing as the surrounding built
environment. Design review is required prior to approval. City standards require the
developer to underground existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly
appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning
Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. Therefore, a less
than significant impact would occur.
d) The project would increase the number of streetlights and security lighting used in the
immediate vicinity. The design and placement of light fixtures will be shown on site plans
which require review for consistency with City standards that require shielding, diffusing, or
indirect lighting to avoid glare. Lighting will be selected and located to confine the area of
illumination to within the project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Page 460
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 16
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause re-zoning of,
forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220 (g), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code Section 51104 (g))?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The site is designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance. The site is located on the north side of Banyan Street, east of Etiwanda Avenue
and is characterized by single-family residential development as well as vacant land zoned
for single-family residential development to the south, east, and north. To the west is a
school. There are approximately 209 acres of Farmland of Local Importance, Prime
Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of
Rancho Cucamonga according to the General Plan and the California Department of
Conservation Farmland Map 2010. Concentrations of Important Farmland are sparsely
located in the southern and eastern parts of the City that is characterized by existing and
planned development. Farmland in the southern portion of the City is characterized by
industrial, residential, and commercial land uses and Farmland in the eastern portion of the
City is within the Etiwanda area and planned for development. Further, a large number of
the designated farmland parcels are small, ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their
economic viability is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as farmland in
the General Plan Land Use Plan. The General Plan FPEIR identified the conversion of
farmlands to urban uses as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement
of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. he proposed
project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts
evaluated. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no
Williamson Act contracts within the City. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
c) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that is zoned as forest land or
timberland. Therefore, no impacts would occur related to the conversion of forest land to
non-forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are
zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Therefore, no impact is
anticipated.
d) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land or
timberland. Therefore, no impacts would occur related of the loss or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga
that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Therefore, no impact
is anticipated.
Page 461
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 17
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) The site is located on the north side of Banyan Street, east of Etiwanda Avenue and is
characterized by single-family residential development as well as vacant land zoned for
single-family residential development to the south, east, and north. To the west is a school.
The nearest agricultural use is more than 500 feet east from the project site. Furthermore,
there are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land.
Therefore, there is no potential for conversion of forest land to a non-forest use. Therefore,
no impact is anticipated.
3. AIR QUALITY. 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?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
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 that exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) As discussed in subsection b, the project would not exceed any air quality standards and
would not interfere with the region’s ability to comply with Federal and State air quality
standards for Criterion 1 Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations (local air quality
impacts) or Criterion 2 Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP (consistency with the 20 19
AQMP). Therefore, the project is consistent with the 2019 AQMP, and no impacts are
anticipated.
b) Both the State of California and the Federal government have established health -based
ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for seven air pollutants. These pollutants include
ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse
particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM10), fine particulate matter less
than 2.5 (PM2.5) microns in diameter and lead. Among these pollutants, ozone and
particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) are considered regional pollutants while the others have
more localized effects. In addition, the State of California has set standards for sulfates,
hydrogen sulfide (H2S), vinyl chloride and visibility reducing particles. These standards are
designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of
safety.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga area is within the South Coast Air Basin, which is under
the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The
California Clean Air Act (CCAA) provides the SCAQMD with the authority to manage
Page 462
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 18
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
transportation activities at indirect sources. Indirect sources of pollution are generated when
minor sources collectively emit a su bstantial amount of pollution. Examples of this include
motor vehicles at an intersection, a mall and on highways. SCAQMD also regulates
stationary sources of pollution within a jurisdictional area. Direct emissions from motor
vehicles are regulated by the Air Resources Board (ARB).
The combination of topography, low mixing height, abundant sunshine, and emissions from
the second largest urban area in the United States gives the Basin the worst air po llution
problem in the nation. The Basin experiences a persistent temperature inversion (increasing
temperature with increasing altitude); this inversion (coupled with low wind speeds) limits
the vertical dispersion of air contaminants, holding them relatively near the ground.
Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) of 1970, the EPA established national ambient
air quality standards (NAAQS) for six major pollutants, termed criteria pollutants: ozone
(O3), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM10), fine particulate
matter less than 2.5 (PM2.5) microns in diameter, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide
(NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead.
Criteria pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the Federal and State
governments have established AAQS, or criteria, for outdoor conce ntrations in order to
protect public health. Data collected at permanent monitoring stations are used by the EPA
to classify regions as “attainment” or “non-attainment” depending on whether the regions
met the requirements stated in the primary NAAQS. Nonattainment areas have additional
restrictions as required by the EPA. The EPA has designated the Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG) as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
responsible for ensuring the Basin’s compliance with the FCAA. The South Coast Air Basin
is in Non-Attainment Status for Ozone, PM10 and PM2.5.
Specific criteria for determining whether the potential air quality impacts of a project are
significant are set forth in the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The criteria include
daily emissions thresholds, compliance with State and national air quality standards, and
consistency with the current AQMP. As prescribed by SCAQMD, an Air Quality Impact
Analysis (date) was prepared by Urban Crossroads (November 8, 2016) that utilizes
CalEEMod (Version 2016.3.1) to evaluate short-term construction emissions and short-term
construction emissions for localized significant thresholds, long-term operational emissions,
operation emissions for localized significant thresholds, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
Short Term (Construction): Project Emissions and Impacts
The project proposes to subdivide an approximately 6.96-acre parcel for the construction of
9 single-family residences. The project site is currently vacant. The potential emissions
associated with construction of the project are described in the following sections.
Page 463
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 19
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Summary of Peak Construction Emissions (Emissions Summary of Overall Construction
with Best Available Control Measures)
Construction activities associated with the project will result in emissions of CO, VOCs, NO x,
SOx, PM10 and PM2.5 and are expected from the following construction activities: demolition,
grading (including soil import), building construct ion, painting (architectural coatings) paving
(curb, gutter, flatwork, and parking lot), and construction worker commuting.
Localized Significance Summary (Construction Emissions with Best Available Control
Measures)
Equipment Exhausts and Related Construction Activities
Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources such as site
grading, utility engines, on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, asphalt paving, and motor
vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions from construction activities
Page 464
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 20
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
envisioned on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The use of
construction equipment on site would result in localized exhaust emiss ions; however, as
shown in the tables above, the amount will not exceed any threshold of significance.
Fugitive Dust
Fugitive dust emissions are generally emissions associated with land clearing and exposure
of soils to the air and wind and cut-and-fill grading operations. Dust generated during
construction varies substantially on a project-by project basis, depending on the level of
activity, the specific operation and weather conditions at the time of construction.
Construction emissions can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific
operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions and
other factors. The proposed project will be required to comply with SCAQMD Rules 402
and 403 to control fugitive dust.
Architectural Coatings
Architectural coatings contain VOCs that are similar to ROCs and are part of the O 3
precursors. Based on the proposed project, it is estimated that the proposed project will
result in a maximum of approximately 20.05 lbs of VOC per day (combined for all
construction sources) during construction. Therefore, this VOC emission is the principal air
emission and is less than the SCAQMD VOC threshold of 75 lbs/day.
Odors
Heavy-duty equipment in the project area during construction would emit odors. However,
the construction activity would cease to occur after individual construction is completed. N o
other sources of objectionable odors have been identified for the proposed project, and no
mitigation measures are required. In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 the proposed
uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors. Therefore, objectionable odors
posing a health risk to potential on-site and existing off-site uses would not occur as a result
of the proposed project.
Naturally Occurring Asbestos
The proposed project is located in San Bernardino County and it is not among the counties
that are found to have serpentine and ultramafic rock in their soils. In addition, there has
been no serpentine or ultramafic rock found in the project area. Therefore, the potential risk
for naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) during project construction is small and less than
significant.
Cumulative Impacts: Short-Term Construction Emissions
Continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga
area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. During the construction phases
of development, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, construction
worker vehicles, and energy use will generate emissions. In addition, fugitive dust would
also be generated during grading and construction activities. While most of the dust would
settle on or near the project site, smaller particles would remain in the atmosphere,
increasing particle levels within the surrounding area. Construction is an on-going industry
in the Rancho Cucamonga area. Construction workers and equipment work and operate at
Page 465
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 21
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
one development site until their tasks are complete. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and
equipment emissions are required to be assessed. The General Plan Final Program
Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Air Quality based on the
future build out of the City. Based upon on the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS7G)
estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan (FPEIR), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Ozone (O3),
and Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM10) would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for
significance; therefore, they would all be cumulatively considerable if they cannot be
mitigated on a project basis to a level less-than-significant. This city-wide increase in
emissions was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement
of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the
Section 4.3 of the General Plan FPEIR.
Although the project will have a less than significant impacts, the implementation of the
following best practices and mitigation measures from the City’s 2010 General Plan FPEIR
will further reduce the project’s short-term air quality impacts:
1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so
as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all
construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per
manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the
construction site for City verification.
2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the developer shall submit
construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected
equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low
emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was
investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also
conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff.
3) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel
powered equipment where feasible.
4) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans
include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use.
5) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule
1108.
6) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in
SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or
high-volume, low-pressure spray.
7) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403.
Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions:
• Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and
watering.
• Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads.
Page 466
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 22
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
• Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion
over extended periods of time.
• Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil
during and after the end of work periods.
• Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local
ordinances and use sound engineering practices.
• Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is
carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of
hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of
construction.
• Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds
exceeding 25mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements.
• Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or
cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means.
8) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by
SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)) daily to reduce
PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403.
9) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied
to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to
reduce PM10 emissions.
Project Long Term (Operational) Emissions and Impacts
Long-term air pollutant emissions are those associated with stationary sources and mobile
sources involving any project-related changes. The proposed project would result in a net
increase in the amount of development in the area; therefore, the proposed p roject would
result in net increases in both stationary and mobile source emissions. The stationary
source emissions would come from additional natural gas consumption for on -site buildings
and electricity for the lighting in the buildings and at the parking area. As shown in the
following tables, project implementation will not exceed any significance thresholds. No
long-term, operational impacts will occur as a result of the project.
Page 467
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 23
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Summary of Peak Operational Emissions
Cumulative Impacts (Long Term/Operational Emissions)
The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the
potential impacts to air quality based on the future build out of the City. In the long-term,
continued development would result in significant operational vehicle emissions based upon
on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan FPEIR; therefore,
all developments would be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project
basis to a less-than-significant level. This City-wide increase in emissions was identified as
a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding
Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the Section 4.3 of
the General Plan FPEIR.
Although the project will have less than significant impacts, the implementation of the
following mitigation measures from the City’s 2010 General Plan FPEIR are designed to
further reduce the project’s operational and cumulative air quality impacts:
Page 468
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 24
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
10) Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant species to reduce water
consumption and to provide passive solar benefits.
11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-
efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water
heaters.
12) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate
thermal pane windows and weather-stripping.
13) Projects shall be designed in accordance with the applicable California Green
Building Standards (CALGreen) Code (24 CCR 11).
c) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 4.3), continued development would contribute
to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and
State standards. The General Plan FPEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as
a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was
ultimately adopted by the City Council. Although the project will have less than significant
impacts, the implementation of mitigation measures listed in subsection b) above from the
City’s 2010 General Plan FPEIR designed to minimize long-term, operational air quality
impacts, will further reduce the project’s impact.
d) Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of
pollution than the population at large. The SCAQMD identifies the following as sensitive
receptors: long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers,
retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic
facilities. According to the SCAQMD, projects have the potential to create significant
impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air
contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401. The project site is located within ¼ mile of
single-family residences.
According to the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor
complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing
plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding
(SCAQMD 1993). The proposed residential project does not include any uses identifi ed by
the SCAQMD as being associated with odors and therefore would not produce
objectionable odors. As such, the proposed project would have no significant impact in
regard to objectionable odors. No mitigation is required.
Although the impacts are anticipated to be less than significant, the mitigation measures
listed under subsection b above and the following mitigation measure will further reduce
any potential impacts.
14) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South
Coast Air Quality Management District’s Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule
445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the
installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e. fireplaces/hearths)
in new development on or after March 9, 2009.
Page 469
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 25
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) Construction odors (Short-term) may include odors associated with equipment use including
diesel exhaust or roofing, painting and paving. These odors are temporary and would
dissipate rapidly. Operational odors (Long-term) are not typically associated with the type
of use. Odors from the proposed residential use would most likely be from activities such
as cooking and lawn care; however, these odors would be minimal and not considered to
be significant. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
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 U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
( )
(✓)
( )
( )
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, or 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 to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
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 tree 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The project site is located in a vacant parcel surrounded by single-family residential uses
and a school. The site has been previously disrupted due to its location in urban area.
According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, and Section 4.4 of the General Plan FPEIR,
the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore,
development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals
because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent
with the General Plan Land Use Plan. A Biological Assessment which included a field
survey, and a literature review was prepared for the project site by Bellini Biological
(November 22, 2016). Additionally, a Biological Assessment Memorandum was also
Page 470
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 26
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
prepared on September 19, 2020, in order to address any site changes from the original
2016 report,
Based upon the disturbed habitat conditions at the site, which is located in an urbanized
area, unique habitat and/or soil types and conditions do not exist, and therefore suitable
habitat is lacking at the site for all potentially present special status plant species. No special
status plants were detected during the site inspection. As such, it appears that no special
status plants are present and it is expected the proposed action would have no effect upon
special status plants.
The following special status wildlife species are potentially present at the subject property:
Cooper’s Hawk (Accipiter cooperii) – CDFW Watch List Species
Suitable habitat for Cooper’s hawks is described as: forest and woodlands and leafy
suburbs. These hawks are commonly found in parks, quiet neighborhoods, over fields, at
backyard feeders, and even along busy streets if there are trees around. Cooper’s Hawks
build nests in pines, oaks, Douglas-firs, beeches, spruces, and other tree species, often on
flat ground rather than hillsides, and in dense woods. Nests are typically 25 -50 feet high,
often about two-thirds of the way up the tree in a crotch or on a horizontal branch. Suitable
foraging habitat is present as Cooper’s hawks adapt well to urban settings. Cooper’s hawks
were not detected during the site inspection. Suitable nesting habitat is present in
eucalyptus trees at the site. In addition, other large trees within 500 feet of the subject
property provide nesting opportunities.
California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia) – CDFW Species of Special Concern
Suitable habitat for California horned larks is described as: the stubble, grass, and fall ow
lands near cultivated fields. The majority of the birds live in the wide expanses of the
deserts, foothills, and dry grasslands that encircle the farming areas. The nest is a
depression on the ground, lined with grass. Marginal foraging and nesting habitat is present.
Not detected during the site inspection.
Belding’s savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingt) – CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Suitable habitat for Belding’s savannah sparrows is described as: grasslands with few trees,
including meadows, pastures, grassy roadsides, sedge wetlands, and cultivated fields
planted with cover crops like alfalfa. Nests are amid a thick thatch of the prior season’s dead
grasses in densely vegetated areas. The nest is usually on the ground or low in grasses,
goldenrod, saltrnarsh vegetation, or low shrubs such as blueberry, blackberry, rose, and
bayberry. Marginal foraging and nesting habitat is present. Not detected during the site
inspection.
Critical habitat is a term defined and used in the Endangered Species Act. It is a specific
geographic area(s) that contains features essential for the conservation of a threatened or
endangered species and that may require special management and protection. Critical
habitat may include an area that is not currently occupied by the species but that will be
needed for its recovery. The closest critical habitat area with respect to the site has been
established for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat located roughly 0.4-miles northwest of the
subject property within the alluvial fan chaparral/ scrub habitat associated with Day and
Page 471
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 27
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Deer Creek canyon washes in the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains. Due to the
distance between the subject property and critical habitat areas it is apparent the proposed
action would not result in destruction or adverse modification of a critical habitat area of a
federally endangered or threatened species.
Under the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MTBA) (16 U.S.C., §703, Supp. I,
1989), it is unlawful to “pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture, or kill,
possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to barter, barter, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for
shipment, ship, export, import, cause to be shipped, exported, or imported, deliver for
transportation, transport or cause to be transported, carry or cause to be carried, or receive
for shipment, transportation, carriage, or export, any migratory bird, any part, nest, or eggs
of any such bird, or any product, whether or not manufactured, which consists, or is
composed in whole or part, of any such bird or any part, nest, or egg thereof.” In addition,
most birds that nest within the state of California are afforded further protections under
California Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) code. Section 3503 of CDFW code states “It is unlawful
to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise
provided by this code or any regulation made pursuant thereto.”
The following migratory birds were detected during the site inspection; Mourning dove
(Zenaida macroura), Eurasian collared-dove, American crow, Western scrub-jay, Northern
mockingbird, House finch, and Lark sparrow.
No nesting activity was detected during site inspection; however, the site inspection was
performed during non-nesting season. Suitable nesting habitat is present at the subject
property for nesting birds within the eucalyptus trees and other vegetation at site, and on
the ground. As such, the proposed action has the potential to impact nesting birds, including
the Burrowing Owl. This is true even if their nests are not directly impacted as disturbances
near an active nest can be disrupting to the point of causing nest failure. As such, the
following mitigation measures shall be implemented in order to reduce impacts to a less
than significant level:
1) The proposed action should not occur during the migratory bird nesting season
(Feb 1 – Aug 31). In the event construction must occur during the nesting bird
season, a qualified biologist should conduct a nesting bird survey no more than
ten (10) days before the start of construction. If the biologist determines that there
are active nests, appropriate buffers will be established for each nest and no work
will occur inside the buffer of an active nest until the fledglings are no longer
dependent on the nest or until the biologist otherwise determines the nest is
inactive. In the event this mitigation measure is implemented, it is expected that
site development would not result in “take” of nesting migratory birds.
2) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of
Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written
report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity.
The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol:
a. Burrowing Own Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D
(Breeding and non-breeding season surveys and reports) of the CDFW
Staff Report. Results of the pre-construction survey shall be provided to
CDFW and the City. If the pre-construction survey does not identify
Page 472
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 28
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
burrowing on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If
burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre -
construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified
biologist in coordination with the CDFW to avoid impacting occupied
burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the
most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment
of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground -
disturbing actives are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after
the pre-construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls.
b. During the non-breeding season from September 1 through January 31,
if burrows are occupied by migratory and non-migratory resident
burrowing owls during a pre-construction survey, burrow exclusion
and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow
exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife
biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW
guidelines.
c. During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if
nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of
an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife
biologist. The temporary “no construction” area would have to be
maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a
qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all
nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in th at area
may resume.
The Biological Assessment Memorandum submitted on September 19, 2020 identified that
two Special Status reptiles, the Coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) and Coastal
whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri) have the potential to occur on the project site. In
order to prevent impacts to special status reptiles, the following mitigation measure will be
implemented.
3) A biological construction monitor (BCM) shall be present during the days when
initial ground clearing, best maintenance practice (BMP) installation and
vegetation removal activities are occurring. The BCM will be observe the
activities and watch for special status reptiles such as the Coast horned lizard
((Phrynosoma blainvillii) and Coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri),
and if detected will relocate them out of harm’s way.
b) The project site is located in an urban area with no natural communities. No riparian habitat
exists on-site. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
c) No wetland habitat is present on-site. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
d) The City is primarily located in an urban area that does not contain large, contiguous natural
open space areas. Wildlife potentially may move through the north/south trending tributaries
in the northern portion of the City and within the Sphere of Influence. Therefore, no adverse
impacts are anticipated.
Page 473
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 29
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) There is a total of 158 trees on the project site, with 157 of them considered Heritage Trees
due to either their size or species. 110 of t he 158 trees (about 70%), are either dead or
nearly dead. The remaining 48 trees (47 of which are Heritage Trees) are in poor condition
due to the presence of Asian Longhorned Beetle and the wood decaying Sulfur Fu ngus.
These trees constitute a hazard on any future development on-site, as all trees are at risk
of toppling, which may result in property damage. The project proposes to remove all 158
existing trees. The Planning Director has approved the replacement of 47 trees, to be
planted on the project site, in order to mitigate the removal of the 47 heritage trees currently
in poor condition on the site. This tree replacement plan is incorporated in the project plans.
f) Neither the City nor the SOI are within an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved State
Habitat Conservation Plan area. The project site is not located within a local conservation
area according to the General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Plan, Figure RC-1. No
conflicts with habitat conservation plans will occur. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
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 archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
( ) (✓) ( ) ( )
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
( ) (✓) ( ) ( )
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
Comments:
a) The applicant has submitted a cultural resources study prepared by Earthtouch, Inc. on
December 2016. The cultural resources study included archaeological records search by
the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) of all properties within a 1-mile radius
of the project site. Data sources consulted at the SCCIC included archaeological records,
Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility (DOE), historic maps, and the Historic Property
Data File (HPDF) maintained by the Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). The HPDF
contains listings for the NRHP and/or CRHR, California Historical Landmarks (CH L), and
California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI). Additionally, the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Local Inventory of Historic Resources (2011) and the Local Register of Historic Resources
(last updated July 2012) were reviewed for any listings that might be relevant to the project.
A pedestrian survey was also conducted on the property.
The results of the records search at the SCCIC indicated that there have been at least 60
archaeological investigations conducted within a 1-mile radius of the subject property. None
of the 60 reports included any portion of the property. The SCCIC maps indicate that 16
archaeological resources have been identified within a 1- mile radius of the property.
However, there were no archeological resources or architectural properties recorded within
the project site.
Based on the information obtained through the records search and from the field survey,
there is sufficient information to conclude that the prosed development will not impact any
historic resources. Based on this information, no impact is anticipated.
Page 474
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 30
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
b) There are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site; however,
the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans
according to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6). Construction activity, particularly
grading, soil excavation, and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate existing and
potential archaeological resources. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact
Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Cultural Resources based on the future build out
of the City. The following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be
implemented:
1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during
grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor
construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve
them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho
Cucamonga will:
• Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or
significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its
archaeological value.
• Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological
sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or
focal point.
• Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area.
• Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological
resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant,
important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to,
avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning
the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee.
• Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the
inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the
project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original
illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information
Center for permanent archiving.
Additionally, during the tribal consultation process detailed in the Tribal Cultural Resources
section of this document, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians have asked to in clude the
following mitigation measures:
2) In the event that cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all
work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease
and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be
hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of
the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Additionally,
the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department
(SMBMI) shall be contacted regarding any pre-contact and/or post-contact
finds and be provided information after the archaeologist makes his/her initial
assessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards
to significance and treatment.
Page 475
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 31
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
3) If significant pre-contact and/or post-contact cultural resources, as defined by
CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured,
the archaeologist shall develop a Monitoring and Treatment Plan, the drafts of
which shall be provided to SMBMI for review and comment, as detailed within
TCR-1. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project and
implement the Plan accordingly.
4) If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities
associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot
buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted
pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for
the duration of the project.
c) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on an
alluvial fan. According to the research performed at the Natural History Museum of Los
Angeles County and the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or
resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the Sphere-of-
Influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity rating for
paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during
the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene
epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last "Ice Age" and the appearance of modern
man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The project site is underlain by
Quaternary alluvium per the Public Safety Element of the General Plan; therefore, the
following mitigation measures shall be implemented:
5) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered
before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to
monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or
preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings
that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation
measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where
mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be
limited to, the following measures:
• Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid
removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full -time
during the interval of earth-disturbing activities.
• Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-
disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If
construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should
immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find.
• Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the
summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San
Bernardino County Museum).
• Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected
specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum.
d) The proposed project is in an area that has already been disturbed by development. The
project site has already been disrupted by the construction of infrastructure, and
surrounding developments. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area.
Page 476
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 32
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
No evidence is in place to suggest the project site has been used for human burials. The
California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) states that if human remains are
discovered on-site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a
determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
As adherence to State regulations is required for all development, no mitigation is required
in the unlikely event human remains are discovered on -site. No adverse impacts are
anticipated.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential 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? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
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 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
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative wastewater d isposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) No known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the
Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault, according to the
General Plan Figure PS-2, and Section 4.7 of the General Plan FPEIR. The Red Hill Fault,
passes within 1,500 feet west of the site, and the Etiwanda Avenue Fault Scarp lies
approximately 2,500 feet to north. These faults are both capable of producing Mw 6.0-7.0
earthquakes. The San Andreas Fault, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is about 10 miles
northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Adhering
to the Uniform Building Code and Standard Conditions will ensure that geologic impacts are
less-than-significant.
Page 477
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 33
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
b) The City of Rancho Cucamonga is within a designated Soil Erosion Control Area Exhibit
4.7-4 of the General Plan FPEIR. The proposed project will require the excavation,
stockpiling, and/or movement of on-site soils. The Rancho Cucamonga area is subject to
strong Santa Ana wind conditions during September to April, which generates blowing sand
and dust, and creates erosion problems. Construction activities may temporarily exacerbate
the impacts of windblown sand, resulting in temporary problems of dust cont rol; however,
development of this project under the General Plan would help to reduce windblown sand
impacts in the area as pavement, roads, buildings, and landscaping are established.
Therefore, the following fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be im plemented to reduce
impacts to less-than-significant levels:
1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by
SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with
SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as
possible.
2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by
the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-
site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction.
3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to
minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes.
4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied
to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to
reduce PM10 emissions.
c) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.7) indicates that there is a potential for the hillside areas
at the northern end of the City and in the SOI for slope failure, landslides, and/or erosion.
Areas subject to slope instability contain slopes of 30 percent or greater. Landslides may
be induced by seismic activity, rain, or construction. The City Hillside Development
Regulations prohibits the development within slopes of 30 percent or greater and limit the
number of units that could be constructed within the Hillside Residential and Very Low
Density Residential designations in the Hillside areas. The site is not within an Earthquake
hazard zone or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FPEIR
Exhibit 4.7-2. Soil types on-site consist of Soboba Gravelly Loamy Sand Soil association
according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
d) The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil
deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on-site consist
of Soboba Gravelly Loamy Sand Soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit
4.7-3. These soils typically have very slow runoff. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
e) The project will connect to, and be served by, the existing local sewer system for wastewater
disposal. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed. Therefore, no
impacts are anticipated.
Page 478
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 34
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
( )
( )
(✓)
( )
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
Comments:
a) Regulations and Significance – The Federal government began studying the phenomenon
of global warming as early as 1979 with the National Climate Protection Act (92 Stat. 601).
In June of 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger established California’s Green House Gas
(GHG) emissions reduction target in Executive Order (EO) S-3-05. The EO created goals
to reduce GHG emissions for the State of California to 2000 levels by 2010; GHG emissions
reduced to 1990 levels by 2020; and GHG emissions reduced to 80 percent below 1990
levels by 2050. Additionally, on December 7, 2009 the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA) issued findings regarding GHGs under rule 202(a) of the Clean Air Act:
(1) that GHGs endanger human health; and (2) that this will be the first steps to regulating
GHGs through the Federal Clean Air Act. The USEPA defines 6 key GHGs (carbon dioxide
(CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons
(PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)). The combined emissions of these well-mixed
greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and engines contribute to GHG pollution.
The western states, including Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and
Washington, already experience hotter, drier climates. California is a substantial contributor
of GHGs and is expected to see an increase of 3 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit (oF) over the next
century.
Assembly Bill (AB) 32 requires that the California Air Resources Board (ARB), the lead
agency for implementing AB 32, determine what the statewide GHG emission level was in
1990 and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit (427 million metric tons of CO 2
equivalent) to be achieved by 2020 and prepare a Scoping Plan to outline the main
strategies for meeting the 2020 deadline. Significant progress can be made toward the 2020
goal through existing technologies and improving the efficiency of energy use. Other
solutions would include improving the State’s infrastructure, and transitioning to cleaner and
more efficient sources of energy.
The ARB estimates that 38 percent of the State’s GHG emissions in 2004 was from
transportation sources followed by electricity generation (both in -State and out-of-State) at
28 percent and industrial at 20 percent. Residential and commercial activities account for 9
percent, agricultural uses at 6 percent, high global warming potential gases at 3 percent,
and recycling and waste at 1 percent.
It is not anticipated that any single development project would have a substantial effect on
global climate change but that GHG emissions from the project would combine with
emissions across California, the United States, and the world to cumulatively contribute to
global climate change. Therefore, consistent with the ARB’s Climate Change Scoping Plan,
the proposed project was evaluated for consistency with the Early Action Measures
(Scoping Plan is a recommendation until adopted through normal rulemaking). The
Page 479
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 35
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
proposed project is assessed by determining its consistency with the 37 Recommended
Actions identified by ARB. In compliance with Senate Bill (S B) 97 and CEQA, the project
has been analyzed based on a qualitative analysis (CEQA 15064.4). Additionally, the ARB
was directed through SB 375 to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be
achieved within the automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035.
SCAQMD and ARB maintain ambient air quality monitoring stations in the Basin. The
stations closest to the project site are the Upland station and the Fontana -Arrow Highway
station. The Upland station monitors all criteria pollutants except PM10, PM2.5, and SO2
which are monitored at the Fontana-Arrow Highway station. The ambient air quality in the
project area for CO, NO2, and SO2 are consistently below the relevant State and Federal
standards (based on ARB and EPA from 2007, 2008, and 2009 readings). Oz one, PM10,
and PM2.5 levels all exceed State and Federal standards regularly.
Project Related Sources of GHG’s – Based on the Guidelines for the Implementation of
California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G, a project would normally be considered
to have a significant effect on air quality if the project would violate any ambient air quality
standards, contribute substantially to an existing air quality violation, expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or conflict with adopted environmental
plans and goals of the community. However, neither the CEQA statutes, Office of Planning
and Research (OPR) guidelines, nor the draft proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines
prescribe thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an impact
analysis. Significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga has not adopted a threshold of significance for GHG
emissions. However, a screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year is based upon South
Coast Air Quality Management District staff’s proposed GHG screening threshold for
stationary sources emissions for non-industrial projects, as described in the SCAQMD’s
Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans.
Project related GHG’s would include emissions from direct and indirect sources. Based on
the Greenhouse Gas Analysis by Urban Crossroads dated November 8, 2016, total project
related emissions would be 216.06 MTCO2eq/year, as shown in the following table:
Page 480
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 36
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
As shown in the table, direct and indirect operational emissions associated with the project
as compared to the SCAQMD’s interim threshold of significance of 3,000 MTCO2e per year
would result in a less than significant impact with respect to GHG emissions.
Cumulative Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions – The General Plan FPEIR
(Section 4.5) indicates that GHG emissions result from construction activities associated
with diesel-powered construction equipment and other combustion sources (i.e. Generators,
workers vehicles, material delivery, etc.). The GHG emitted by construction equipment is
primarily carbon dioxide (CO2). The highest levels of construction related GHG’s occur
during site preparation including demolition, grading and excavation. Construction related
GHG’s are also emitted from off-site haul trucks and construction workers traveling to the
job site. Exhaust emissions from construction activities would vary each day with the
changes in construction activity on site. The combustion of fossil-based fuels creates
GHG’s such as CO2, Ch4, and N2O. CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment.
Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis by Urban Crossroads dated November 8, 2016, no
significant impacts to GHGs from short-term construction impacts would occur as a result
of the project as shown in the table above. Because the project would result in minimal
emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD’s interim threshold of significance, the project’s
contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. The proposed project would
have less than a significant short-term cumulative impact.
Although a less than significant impact is anticipated with regard to cumulative short -term
construction emissions, the following enforceable mitigation measures in accordance with
Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR will further reduce the
project’s short-term impacts:
1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short -term air
pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive
Page 481
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 37
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
dust including treating the site with water or other soil -stabilizing agent twice
daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
2) The construction contractor shall select construction equipment based on low-
emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the
grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and
maintained in accordance with the manufactures’ specification.
3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes.
4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline - or
diesel-powered engines where feasible.
5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak-hour traffic.
6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for the
construction crew.
Cumulative Long Term (Operational) GHG’s Emissions – The primary source of GHG
emissions generated by the proposed project would be from motor vehicles, combustion of
natural gas for space and water heating, as well as off-site GHG emissions from generation
of electricity consumed by the proposed land use development over a long term. CEQA
requires the Lead Agency to review the project for “adequacy, com pleteness, and a good
faith effort at full disclosure,” to determine potential impacts of GHG’s. Therefore the project
has been analyzed based on methodologies and information available to the City at the time
this document was prepared. Estimates are based on past performance and represent a
scenario that is a worst case with the understanding that technology changes may reduce
GHG emissions in the future. To date, there is no established quantified GHG emission
threshold.
The project involves the subdivision an approximately 6.96-acre parcel for the construction
of 9 single-family residences and therefore would result in an increase in the net increases
of both stationary and mobile source emissions. The majority of energy consumption
typically occurs during project operation (more than 80 percent and less than 20 percent
during construction activities). The proposed project will incorporate several design features
that are consistent with the California Office of the Attorney General’s recommended
measures to reduce GHG emission including: water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and
walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks.
The project is consistent with the California Environmental Protection Agency Climate Action
Team proposed early action measures to mitigate climate change included in the CARB
Scoping Plan mandated under AB 32. The proposed project will incorporate several design
features including: water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide
accessibility to public sidewalks. Additionally, the City is participating in the development of
a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) with SANBAG for the San Bernardino County
area pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 375.
Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis by Urban Crossroads dated November 8, 2016, no
significant impacts to GHGs from long-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of
the project as shown in the table above. Because the project would result in minimal
emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD’s interim threshold of significance, the project’s
Page 482
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 38
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. The proposed project would
have less than a significant long-term operational impact.
Although a less than significant impact is anticipated with regard to cumulative long-term
construction emissions, the following enforceable mitigation measures in accordance with
Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR will further reduce the
project’s long-term operational impacts:
7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured
locally, as feasible. Use “Green Building Materials” such as materials that are
resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly
way including low-volatile-organic-compound (VOC) materials.
8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy
standard including but not limited to any combination of;
• Increased insulation.
• Limit air leakage through the structure.
• Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and
cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances.
• Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and
landscaping.
• Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems.
• Install light colored “cool” roofs and cool pavements.
• Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED’s) for outdoor lighting.
9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the
project and include the following;
• Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in
compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance.
• Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as
required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD).
• Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures
and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless
urinals/water heaters.
• Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated
surfaces.
Page 483
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 39
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and
exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate
employees about reducing waste and about recycling.
b) The project involves the subdivision an approximately 6.96-acre parcel for the construction
of 9 single-family residences which is consistent with the General Plan.
No other applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG
emission apply to the project. The 2010 General Plan Update includes adopted policies and
Standard Conditions that respond to the Attorney General and the California Air Pollution
Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). The General Plan policies and Standard
Conditions guide infill and sustainable development reliant on pedestrian connections, re -
use and rehabilitation of existing structures, link transportation opportunities, promote
development that is sensitive to natural resources and incentivizes denser mixed-use
projects that maximizes diverse opportunities.
The proposed project includes water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that
provide accessibility to public sidewalks and therefore is consistent with the sustainability
and climate change policies of the General Plan. The General Plan Final Program
Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of GHG’s and determined that
GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable, which would be a significant,
unavoidable adverse cumulative impact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was
ultimately adopted by the City Council. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis by Urban
Crossroads dated November 8, 2016, no significant impacts to GHGs from short-term,
construction impacts or long-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of the project.
Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD’s
interim threshold of significance, the project’s contribution to GHGs from short -term
construction and long-term operational cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. In
addition, the proposed project would not hinder the State’s GHG reduction goals established
by AB 32. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
8. HAZARDS AND WASTE 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 environment?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within 1/4 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Page 484
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 40
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 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 urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) Development within the City may utilize or generate hazardous materials or wastes. This is
usually associated with individual households, small business operations, and maintenance
activities like paints, cleaning solvents, fertilizers, and motor oil or through construction
activities that would use paints, solvents, acids, curing compounds, grease, and oils. These
materials would be stored and used at individual sites. The City participates in a countywide
interagency coalition, which is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that
is more comprehensive that any other in the State. The City has an Emergency Operations
Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the
approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance with Federal, State, and local
regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials and/or waste will
reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than-significant.
b) The proposed project does not include the use of hazardous materials or volatile fuels. The
City participates in a countywide interagency coalition , which is considered a full service
Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive than any other in the State. The
City has an Emergency Operations Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is
in the process of updating the approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance
with Federal, State, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous
materials or volatile fuels will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than-
significant.
c) There are schools located within 1/4 mile of the project site. The project site abuts an
existing school. The project will be required to comply with exist ing State and Federal
standards on the use and transport of hazardous materials. Typically, the residential uses
proposed do not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
d) The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site. Recent
site inspections did not reveal the presence of discarded drums or illegal dumping of
hazardous materials. No impact is anticipated.
e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan according to the General Plan Figure
PS-7 and General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.8-1 and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The
Page 485
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 41
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
project site is located approximately 7 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset
north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated.
f) There are no private airstrips within the City. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is
located approximately 2 and 1/2 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is
anticipated.
g) The City has a developed roadway network that provides emergency access and
evacuation routes to existing development. New development will be located on a site that
has access to existing roadways. The City's Emergency Operation Plan, which is updated
every 3 years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the City of Rancho
Cucamonga in the event of a disaster. Because the project is required to comply with all
applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances, no adverse impacts are anticipated.
h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from wind-driven fires in the Very
High Fire Hazard Severity Zone found in the northern part of the City; however, the
proposed project site is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according
to General Plan Figure PS-1. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
9. 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 aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater 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 alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
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 flooding on- or off-site?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
e) Create or contribute runoff water 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Page 486
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 42
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures
that 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 levee or dam?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). The
project is designed to connect to existing water and sewer systems. The State of California
is authorized to administer various aspects of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. The General
Construction Permit treats any construction activity over 1 acre as an industrial activity,
requiring a permit under the State’s General NPDES permit. The State Water Resource
Control Board (SWRCB), through the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB),
Santa Ana Region, administers these permits.
Construction activities covered under the State’s General Construction permit include
removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activity for new development or
significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger
must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The
General Permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction
activities, including site clearance and grading:
• Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would
specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent construction pollutants from
contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from
moving off-site into receiving waters.
• Eliminate or reduce non-storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other
waters of the nation.
• Perform inspections of all BMPs.
Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges.
A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an
NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare an SWPPP. To
comply with the NPDES, the project's construction contractor will be required to prepare an
SWPPP during construction activities, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for
post-construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant ha s
submitted a WQMP, prepared by EGL Associates, Inc., May 16, 2016 , which identifies
BMPs to minimize the amount of pollutants, such as eroded soils, entering the drainage
system after construction. Runoff from driveways, roads and other impermeable surfaces
must be controlled through an on-site drainage system. BMPs include both structural and
non-structural control methods. Structural controls used to manage storm water pollutant
levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural
controls focus on controlling pollutants at the source, generally throu gh implementing
erosion and sediment control plans, and various Business Plans that must be developed by
any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices such as periodic parking
lot sweeping can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain
Page 487
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 43
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
system. The following mitigation measures are required to control additional storm water
effluent:
Construction Activities:
1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the
Building Official for approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall
be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the
storm drain system to the maximum extent practical.
2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and
implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to
control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities
are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall
include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading
and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in
Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be
included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site
as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration
program within a specified time frame.
3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must
be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is
rainfall or other runoff.
4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed
prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order
to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site.
5) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a
Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm
Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that
this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification
Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the
NPDES General Construction Permit.
Post-Construction Operational:
6) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City
Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP),
including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices
(BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain
system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the
structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New
Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga
in June 2004.
7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the
use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored
Page 488
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 44
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable
growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum
of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the
issuance of grading permits.
b) According to CVWD, approximately 47 percent of the City's water is currently provided from
water supplies coming from the underlying Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins.
CVWD complies with its prescriptive water rights as managed by the Chino Basin
Watermaster and will not deplete the local groundwater resource. The proposed project will
not deplete groundwater supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge because it is not within
an area designated as a recharge basin or spreading ground ac cording to General Plan
Figure RC-3. Development of the site will require the grading and excavation, but would not
affect the existing aquifer, estimated to be about 300 to 470 feet below the ground surface.
As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.9), continued development citywide will
increase water needs but will not be a significant impact. CVWD has plans to meet this
increased need to the year 2030. No impacts are anticipated.
c) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage pa tterns, and the rate and
amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape
proposed on the site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river.
All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to
handle the flows. The project design includes landscaping of all non-hardscape areas to
prevent erosion. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official
and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, the project will not result
in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The impact is not considered significant.
d) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and
amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape
proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All
runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle
the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City
Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site
will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated.
e) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and
amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape
proposed on a site; however, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities,
which have been designed to handle the flows. The project will not result in substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by
the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of gradin g permits. Therefore,
increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are
anticipated.
f) Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary
increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm
event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts The site is for new development;
therefore, it is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) to minimize water pollution. With implementation of the mitigation measures
specified under subsection a) and the following mitigation measure, less than significant
impacts are anticipated.
Page 489
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 45
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
8) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quali ty
Management Plan prepared by EGL Associates, Inc., May 16, 2016 to reduce
construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum
extent practical.
g) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General
Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected.
h) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General
Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected.
i) The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system
designed to adequately convey floodwaters from a 100-year storm event. The system is
substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage
flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City,
spreading grounds, concrete-lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in
General Plan Figure PS-6. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard
area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected.
j) There are no oceans, lakes, or reservoirs near the project site; therefore, impacts from
seiche and tsunami are not anticipated. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of
the steep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain
streams. Numerous man-made controls have been constructed to reduce the mudflow
impacts to the level of non-significance within the City. This existing system includes several
debris dams and levees north of the City, and spreading grounds both within and north of
the City. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
10. 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, a 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The site is located on the north side of Banyan Street, east of Etiwanda Avenue and is
characterized by single-family residential development as well as vacant land zoned for
single-family residential development to the south, east, and north. To the west is a school.
This project will be of similar design and size to surrounding single-family residential
development to the north, west, and south. The project will become a part of the larger
community. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
b) The project site land use designation is Very Low Residential (VLR). The proposed project
is consistent with the General Plan and does not interfere with any policies for environmental
protection, or SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan. The General Plan states that the Very
Page 490
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 46
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Low (VLR) Land Use District is characterized by detached, very low -density single
residential units on 0.5 acre lots. The proposed lots average 27,043 square feet in size.
Additionally, the project is within the City’s Equestrian Overlay, and the site will include a
private equestrian trail system providing equestrian access to each lot and to the community
trail along Banyan Street. As such, no impacts are anticipated.
c) The project site is not located within any habitat conservation or natural community plan
area. According to General Plan Figure RC-4 and Section 4.10 of the General Plan FPEIR,
the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore,
development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals
because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent
with the General Plan Land Use Plan. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
11. 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The site is not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area according to the City
General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1; therefore, there is no impact.
b) The site is not designated by the General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1, as a valuable
mineral resource recovery site; therefore, there is no impact.
12. NOISE. Would the project result in:
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
ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
( ) (✓) ( ) ( )
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in 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 2 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Page 491
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 47
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The project site is not within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to
General Plan Figure PS-9 at build-out. Additionally, the applicant has submitted a Noise
Study by Rincon Consultants, Inc. (February 2020) to review existing noise conditions and
construction noise levels. The analysis finds that the primary existing sources of noise in
the project vicinity are motor vehicles along Banyan Street.
The measured noise levels in the vicinity of the project site range from approximately 46
dBA Leq to 70 dBA Leq. According to the City’s adopted exterior noise standards, an exterior
noise exposure below 60 CNEL is normally acceptable for single-family residences.
Conservatively assuming that the project site would be exposed to traffic noise levels up to
70 CNEL from Banyan Street, the proposed on-site noise-sensitive receivers could be
exposed to normally unacceptable noise levels. Using an attenuation rate of 4.5 dBA per
doubling of distance, single -family residences associated with the proposed project would
require a setback of at least 116 feet from the centerline of Banyan Street to meet the City’s
normally acceptable level of below 60 CNEL. Based on the project site plan shown in Figure
2, current plans for the project include a setback of approximately 50 feet from the centerline
of Banyan Street to the southern residential lots. At this distance, the traffic noise levels
from Banyan Street would attenuate to 65.5 CNEL based on an attenuation rate of 4.5 dBA
per doubling of distance.
Construction of the proposed project would generate temporary noise that would exceed
existing ambient noise levels on and around the project site but would cease upon
completion of construction. Oeration of equipment during site preparation and grading could
generate noise levels in excess of up to 68 dBA Leq at the nearest single-family residences
30 feet north of the project site boundary and Frost Early Education Center 30 feet east of
the project site boundary. Additionally, grading could generate noise levels up to 67 dBA
Leq at single-family residences 115 feet south of the project site boundary across Banyan
Street. Construction noise level estimates do not account for the presence of intervening
structures or topography, which could reduce noise levels at receiver locations. Ther efore,
the noise levels presented represent a reasonable worst-case estimate of actual
construction noise. According to Section 17.66.050.D.4 of the RCMC, construction noise
should not exceed 65 dBA Leq when measured at the property line of an adjacent residential
or school land use.
To further reduce noise impacts and to ensure noise levels are below the level of
significance, the following mitigation measures shall be incorporated into the project.
Exterior:
1) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction-related noise
mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan
shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from
this equipment would be mitigated during construction.
2) Consistent with the hours described in Section 17.66.050.D.4 of the RCMC,
construction times shall be limited between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM
Page 492
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 48
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
on weekdays and Saturdays. No construction activity shall be permitted on
Sundays and national holidays.
3) Construction activities shall be scheduled to avoid operating several pieces of
equipment simultaneously, to the maximum extent feasible.
4) Contractor shall provide stating areas on-site to minimize off-site
transportation of heavy construction equipment. These areas must be located
to maximize the distance between activity and sensitive receptors.
5) Construction vehicles shall not park, queue and/or idle at the project site or
along the adjoining public rights-of-way prior to the construction hours.
6) Electrical power shall be used to run air compressors and similar power tools
and to power any temporary structures, such as construction trailers.
7) Temporary noise barriers with a minimum height of 10 feet, would be placed
along the northern, eastern, and southern boundaries. To be effective the
barriers must break the line-of-sight between on-site construction activities
and off-site receivers to the north, east, and south throughout the duration of
site preparation and grading activities. The noise barrier should be
constructed of material with a minimum weight of 2 pounds per square foot
with no gaps or perforations. Noise barriers may be constructed of, but are not
limited to, 5/8 inch plywood, 5/8 inch oriented strand board, or hay bales.
8) Implement a permanent solid wall with a height of a least six feet, or sufficient
to break the line of site, along the southern project site boundary capable of
reducing traffic noise from Banyan Street by at least 4.5 dBA.
9) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first
phase.
b) The normal operating uses associated with this type of project normally do not induce
ground borne vibrations. Construction related vibration may create short term noise and
vibration impacts. With the mitigation measure listed in under d) below, any impacts will be
less than significant.
c) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. Because the
project will not significantly increase traffic as analyzed in Section 16 Transportation/Traffic;
it will likely not increase ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project. Impacts will
be less than significant.
d) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.12) indicates that during a construction phase, on -site
stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will
generate noise exceeding City standards. The mitigation measures listed under Section a)
above reduces any impacts related to constriction noise to a level less than si gnificant.
e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan and is not within 2 miles of a public
airport. The Project is located approximately 6 miles northeast of the Ontario Airport and is
offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated.
Page 493
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 49
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 1/2 miles to the west
of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated.
13. 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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The project is located in a predominantly developed area and will include the construction
of 9 single family homes. Although the project will increase the population growth in the area
there will be a less than significant impact as the project is consistent with the underlying
Zoning and General Plan Designation. The density was analyzed as part of the build out in
the General Plan FPEIR. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not
attract new employees to the area. No significant impacts are anticipated.
b) Because the property is vacant there will be no displacement of housing or people.
Therefore no adverse impact is expected.
c) Because the property is vacant there will be no displacement of housing or people.
Therefore no adverse impact is expected.
14. PUBLIC SERVICES. 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 governmental 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:
a) Fire protection?
( )
( )
(✓)
( )
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
c) Schools? ( ) (✓) ( ) ( )
d) Parks? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
e) Other public facilities? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
Comments:
a) The site, located on the north side of Banyan Street, east of Etiwanda Avenue would be
served by a fire station located approximately 3/4 of a mile from the project site. The project
will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or
cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new
Page 494
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 50
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
facilities. Standard conditions of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be
placed on the project to lessen the future demand and impacts to fire services. Therefore,
a less than significant impact would occur.
b) The increase in residential units may lead to an increase in calls for service. Although there
may be an increase in calls, additional police protection is not required as the addition of
the project will not change the pattern of uses within the surrounding area and will not have
a substantial increase in property to be patrolled as the project site is within an area that is
regularly patrolled. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
c) The Etiwanda School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School Di strict serve the
project area. Both school districts have been notified regarding the proposed development.
A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay the school impact fees,
plus the Etiwanda School District special tax. This standard condition is also added as a
mitigation below. With this, impacts to the School Districts will therefore be considered less
than significant.
1) The developer shall pay the current residential school facility fee plus the
Etiwanda School District special tax.
d) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The
nearest park is located 1/2 mile from the project site. The project will not require the
construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in
the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. A standard
condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. Therefore,
a less than significant impact would occur.
e) The proposed project will utilize existing public facilities. The site is in a developed area,
currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project will not require the
construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in
the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Cumulative
development within Rancho Cucamonga will increase demand for library
services. According to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.14), there will be a projected
increase in library space demand but with the implementation of standard conditions the
increase in Library Services would be mitigated to less than significant impact. Additionally,
the closest public library, the Paul A. Biane Library, recently completed a second floor
addition that added 13,500 square feet of specialized programming space. The proposed
project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts
evaluated. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
15. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) 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?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
Page 495
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 51
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The
nearest park is located 1/2 mile from the project site. This project is proposing the
subdivision of an approximately 6.96-acre vacant parcel for the construction of 9 single-
family residences. The project is in conformance with the Very Low (VL) General Plan land
use designation and will not increase the use of parks or other recreational facilities beyond
that contemplated by the General Plan. A standard condition of approval will require the
developer to pay Park Development Fees. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant.
b) See a) response above.
16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass
transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but not
limited to intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass
transit?
( )
( )
( )
(✓)
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management
program, including, but not limited to a level of service
standards and travel demand measures, or other
standards 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 traffic levels or a change in location that
result 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) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities,
or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of
such facilities.
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) Implementation of the proposed project will generate 86 vehicle trips daily. The proposed
project includes the subdivision of a 6.96-acre lot for the construction of 9 single-family
residences. The ITE Trip Generation Manual estimates that each single-family residence
will generate 10 trips daily. As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.16), continued
development will contribute to the traffic load in the Rancho Cucamonga area. The
proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and
impacts evaluated. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with street
improvements existing or included in project design. The project will not create a substantial
Page 496
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 52
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
increase in the number of vehicle trips, traffic volume , or congestion at intersections. The
project site will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) along
the street frontage of the site per City roadway standards. In addition, the City has
established a Transportation Development fee that must be paid by the applicant prior to
issuance of building permits. Fees are used to fund roadway improvements necessary to
support adequate traffic circulation. No impacts are anticipated.
b) The ITE Trip Generation Manual estimates that each single-family residence will generate
7 morning and 9 evening two-way peak hour trips daily. In November 2004, San Bernardino
County voters passed the Measure I extension which requires local jurisdictions to impose
appropriate fees on development for their fair share toward regional transportation
improvement projects. On May 18, 2005, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted a
Comprehensive Transportation Fee Schedule updating these development impact fees. As
a result, the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Agency waived the
Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis reporting requirement. This
project will be required, as a condition of approval, to pay the adopted transportation
development fee prior to issuance of building permit. The project is in an area that is mostly
developed with all street improvements existing. The project will not negativel y impact the
level of service standards on adjacent arterials. The project will be required to provide street
improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. No impacts
are anticipated.
c) Located approximately 7 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport, the site is offset north of the
flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated.
d) The project is in an area that is mostly developed. The project will be required to provide
street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. The
project design does not include any sharp curves or dangerous intersections or farming
uses. The project will, therefore, not create a substantial increase in hazards because of a
design feature. No impacts are anticipated.
e) The project will be designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles during
construction and upon completion of the project and will therefore not create an inadequate
emergency access. No impacts are anticipated.
f) The project is residential. Although houses are not part of the proposal, when the houses
are submitted for review, adequate parking, specifically an enclosed garage and a driveway,
in compliance with standards of the City of Rancho Cucamonga will be required. Therefore,
no impacts are anticipated.
Page 497
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 53
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code
Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape
that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of
the landscape, sacred place, or object with the cultural value to
a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical
resources as defined in Public Resources Code
Section 5020.1 (K)?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c)
of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying
the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a California
Native American tribe.
( ) (✓) ( ) ( )
Comments:
a) The applicant has submitted a Phase I Cultural Assessment prepared by EarthTouch, Inc.
(December 2016) for the project site. The Study included an archaeological records search
by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCIC) at CSU Fullerton of all properties
within a 1-mile radius of the project site, a paleontological records search, and a pedestrian
field survey of the project site.
Based upon information provided by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCIC),
and a lack of permanent water within or near the subject property, cultural site sensitivity
was deemed to be low. Historic maps and aerial photographs suggest the subject property
was likely part of the Henry Albert family ranch.
The property, which was considerably larger and part of the lands owned by the Etiwanda
Colony, was planted as a fruit orchard in former years before the land was subdivided. In
summary, following a pedestrian survey of the entire parcel, no built environment or
architectural resources were found, nor were any prehistoric or historic archaeological sites
or features discovered. Near the center of the southern end of the project site, a granite
block fragment and clay brick were identified, along with the remaining eucalyptus trees.
The rock fragment and brick were likely remains from the nearby demolished residence to
the west on the adjacent parcel. Mechanical equipment may have moved the stone and
brick since the project site was tilled to eliminate weeds. Thus, no significant cultural
resources were identified in the direct project Area of Potential Effect (APE), and, therefore,
the proposed project will have no effect to historic properties. Nor will the project have a
significant impact on any cultural properties identified in the indirect or visual project APE.
b) In conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, a Phase I Cultural Assessment
was performed on the project site by EarthTouch, Inc. (December 2016). The study consists
Page 498
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 54
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
of an archeological record search and field visit. The results of the records search and field
survey are discussed in section a above.
In conformance of California Senate Bill (SB) 18, a notice of the proposed project was sent
out to the appropriate tribes as recommended by the Native American Heritage Commission
on January 16, 2018. On March 29, 2019, The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
requested that mitigation measures by incorporated in the event that archeological or
cultural resources are discovered during the grading process. These are incorporated
below.
In conformance with California Assembly Bill (AB) 52, a, notice of the proposed project was
sent to the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, the
San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, The
Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh nation, and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians
on January 20, 2021. The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians requested that mitigation
measures be incorporated in the event that archeological or cultural resources are
discovered during the grading process. These are incorporated below. S hould any
undocumented archaeological or cultural resources be discovered during grading activities,
adherence to the mitigation measures listed below will ensure that all impact s will be less
than significant.
1.) The project Applicant will be required to obtain the services of a qualified Native
American Monitor(s) during construction -related ground disturbance activities.
Ground disturbance is defined by the Tribal Representatives from the Gabrieleño
Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that include, but are not limited
to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, weed abatement, boring,
grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. T he
monitor(s) must be approved by the Tribal Representatives and will be present
on-site during the construction phases that involve any ground disturbing
activities. The Native American Monitor(s) will complete monitoring logs on a
daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities, including
construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The
monitor(s) shall possess Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response
(HAZWOPER) certification. In addition, the monitor(s) will be required to provide
insurance certificates, including liability insurance, for any archaeological
resource(s) encountered during grading and excavation activities pertinent to the
provisions outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public
Resources Code Division 13, Section 21083.2 (a) through (k). The on -site
monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are
completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor have indicated that
the site has a low potential for archeological resources.
2.) The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department
(SMBMI) and shall be contacted, of any pre-contact and/or post-contact cultural
resources discovered during project implementation, and be provided
information regarding the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with
regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as
defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), a cultural resources M onitoring and
Treatment Plan shall be created by the archaeologist, in coordination with SMBMI,
and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan shall allow for a
Page 499
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 55
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
monitor to be present that represents SMBMI for the remainder of the project ,
should SMBMI elect to place a monitor on-site.
3.) Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project
(isolate records, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be
supplied to the applicant and Lead Agency for dissemination to SMBMI. The Lead
Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with SMBMI throughout the
life of the project
18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
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
construction of which could cause si gnificant
environmental effects?
( ) ( ) (✓) ( )
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
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?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity
to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal
needs?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
Comments:
a) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by
the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-1 and RP-4 treatment plants The RP-1 capacity
is sufficient to exceed the additional development within the western and southern areas of
the City. The RP-4 treatment plant has a potential ultimate capacity of 28 mgd which is
considered more than adequate to capacity to treat all increases in wastewater generation
for buildout of the General Plan. The project is required to meet the requirements of the
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are
anticipated.
b) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by
the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho
Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which is at capacity. The
Page 500
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 56
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality
Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated.
c) All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to
handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official
and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. The impact is not considered
significant.
d) The project is served by the CVWD water system. There is currently a sufficient water
supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve this project. No impacts are
anticipated.
e) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by
the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho
Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which is at capacity. No
impacts are anticipated.
f) Solid waste disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler who disposes
the refuse at a permitted landfill with sufficient capacity to handle the City’s solid waste
disposal needs. No impacts are anticipated.
g) This project complies with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid
waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste reduction
procedures consistent with AB 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
19. 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 wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife 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?
( )
(✓)
( )
( )
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
( ) ( ) ( ) (✓)
c) Does the project have environmental effects that will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
( ) (✓) ( ) ( )
Comments:
a) Certain biological resources described at the Initial Study Checklist Item 4, Biological
Resources may be adversely affected by the project. Additionally, as yet unknown cultural
Page 501
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 57
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
resources may exist within the project area. This IS/MND incorporates mitigation that
reduces potential biological resources impacts and potential cultural resources impacts to
levels that would be less than significant.
b) If the proposed project were approved, then the applicant would be required to develop the
site in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The 2010 General
Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program FEIR, Findings of Fact, and a
Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental effects of
build-out in the City and Sphere-of-Influence. The City made findings that adoption of the
General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forest
Resources, Air Quality, Climate Change and Mineral Resources. Mitigation measures were
adopted for each of these resources; however, they would not reduce impacts to less-than-
significant levels. As such, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations
balancing the benefits of development under the General Plan Update against the significant
unavoidable adverse impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 and 15096(h)). These
benefits include less overall traffic volumes by developing mixed-use projects that will be
pedestrian friendly and conservation of valuable natural open space. With these findings
and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, no further discussion or evaluation of
cumulative impacts is required.
c) Development of the site under the proposed land use change would not cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Initial Study identifies
construction-related emissions of criteria pollutants as having a potentially significant
impact. Proposed mitigation measures would further reduce emission levels. Additionally,
impacts resulting from air quality would be short-term and would cease once construction
activities were completed. The Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts
associated with the exposure of people to increased noise levels. Mitigation measures
contained in this Initial Study will ensure impacts are at less-than-significant levels.
EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or
more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier PEIR or Negative Declaration per Section
15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately
analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses wer e
utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply):
() General Plan FPEIR
(SCH#2000061027, Certified May 19, 2010)
() General Plan FEIR
(SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001)
() Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update
(SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989)
() Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR
(SCH #82061801, certified July 6, 1983)
Page 502
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Tentative Tract Map No. 18012 (SUBTT18012-1) Page 58
() Air Quality Impact Analysis (Urban Crossroads, November 2020)
() Biological Assessment (Earth Touch, Inc., November 2016)
() Biological Assessment Memorandum (Sentinel Science, September 2020)
() Cultural Resources Study (Earth Touch, Inc. December 2016)
() Geotechnical Report (EGL, Inc., June 2018)
() Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Urban Crossroads, November 2020)
() Noise Study (Rincon Consultants, February 2020)
() Tree Survey (Arbor Care, Inc. (October 2020)
Page 503
Page 504
Page 1 of 17
MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III)
Project File No.: SUBTT18012-1 Applicant: EGL, INC.
Initial Study Prepared by: VINCENT ACUNA, ASSOCIATE PLANNER Date: 02/22/2021
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
Section 1 - Aesthetics
1) None
Section 2 - Agricultural Resources
1) None
Section 3 – Air Quality
Short Term (Construction) Emissions
1) All construction equipment shall be maintained
in good operating condition so as to reduce
operational emissions. The contractor shall
ensure that all construction equipment is being
properly serviced and maintained as per
manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance
records shall be available at the construction
site for City verification.
PD C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits,
the developer shall submit Construction Plans
to the City denoting the proposed schedule
and projected equipment use. Construction
contractors shall provide evidence that
low-emission mobile construction equipment
will be utilized, or that their use was
investigated and found to be infeasible for the
project. Contractors shall also conform to any
construction measures imposed by the South
Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) as well as City Planning staff.
PD/BO C Review of Plans C 2
3) The construction contractor shall utilize electric
or clean alternative fuel powered equipment
where feasible.
BO C Review of Plans A/C 4
4) The construction contractor shall ensure that
construction-grading plans include a BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
Page 505
Page 2 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
statement that work crews will shut off
equipment when not in use
5) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance
standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. BO B Review of Plans A/C 2
6) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed
performance standards noted in SCAQMD
Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be
applied either by hand or high-volume, low
pressure spray
PD C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
7) All construction equipment shall comply with
SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally,
contractors shall include the following
provisions:
BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
• Reestablish ground cover on the
construction site through seeding and
watering.
BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
• Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul
roads. BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
• Phase grading to prevent the
susceptibility of large areas to erosion
over extended periods of time.
BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
• Schedule activities to minimize the
amounts of exposed excavated soil
during and after the end of work periods.
BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4
• Dispose of surplus excavated material in
accordance with local ordinances and
use sound engineering practices.
BO C Review of Plans A 4
• Sweep streets according to a schedule
established by the City if silt is carried
over to adjacent public thoroughfares or
occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may
vary depending upon the time of year of
construction.
BO C During Construction A 4
• Suspend grading operations during high
winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding
25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD
Rule 403 requirements.
BO C During Construction A 4
• Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard
ratio on soils haul trucks or cover BO C During Construction A 4
Page 506
Page 3 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
payloads using tarps or other suitable
means.
8) The site shall be treated with water or other
soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD
and Regional Water Quality Control Board
[RWQCB]) daily to reduce Particulate Matter
(PM10) emissions, in accordance with
SCAQMD Rule 403.
BO C During Construction A 4
9) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by
SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all
inactive construction areas that remain
inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10
emissions.
BO C During Construction A 4
Long Term Emissions and Impacts
10) Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant
species to reduce water consumption and to
provide passive solar benefits.
BO C During Construction A 4
11) All residential and commercial structures shall
be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-
polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances,
and water heaters.
BO C/D Review of Plans C 2/4
12) All residential and commercial structures shall
be required to incorporate thermal pane
windows and weather-stripping.
BO C/D Review of Plans C 2/4
13) Projects shall be designed in accordance with
the applicable California Green Building
Standards (CALGreen) Code (24 CCR 11).
BO C/D Review of Plans C 2/4
14) All new development in the City of Rancho
Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast
Air Quality Management District’s Rule 445,
Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was
adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions
of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of
indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e.
fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or
after March 9, 2009.
BO C/D Review of Plans C 2/4
Section 4 - Biological Resources
1) The proposed action should not occur during
the migratory bird nesting season (Feb 1 - PD B Review of Report B 2/4
Page 507
Page 4 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
Aug 31). In the event construction must occur
during the nesting bird season, a qualified
biologist should conduct a nesting bird survey
no more than ten (10) days before the start of
construction. If the biologist determines that
there are active nests, appropriate buffers will
be established for each nest and no work will
occur inside the buffer of an active nest until
the fledglings are no longer dependent on the
nest or until the biologist otherwise
determines the nest is inactive. In the event
this mitigation measure is implemented, it is
expected that site development would not
result in "take" of nesting migratory birds.
2) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in
conformance with the Department of Fish and
Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl
Mitigation and submit the written report
outlining the findings to the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and
the Planning Department within 30 days of
groundbreaking activity. The Burrowing Owl
Survey shall follow the following protocol:
a) Burrowing Own Survey methodology shall be
based on Appendix D (Breeding and non-
breeding season surveys and reports) of the
CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre-
construction survey shall be provided to CDFW
and the City. If the pre-construction survey
does not identify burrowing on the project site,
then no further mitigation is required. If
burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the
project site during the pre-construction survey,
measures shall be developed by the qualified
biologist in coordination with the CDFW to
avoid impacting occupied burrows during the
nesting period. These measures shall be
based on the most current CDFW protocols
and will at minimum include establishment of
buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl
PD B Review of Report B 2/4
Page 508
Page 5 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
monitoring. If ground-disturbing actives are
delayed or suspended for more than 30 days
after the pre-construction survey, the site shall
be resurveyed for owls.
b) During the non-breeding season from
September 1 through January 31, if burrows
are occupied by migratory and non-migratory
resident burrowing owls during a pre-
construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or
closure may be used to exclude owls from
those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or
closure should only be conducted by a
qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with
CDFW using the most current CDFW
guidelines.
c) During the avian nesting season from February
1 through August 31, if nests are discovered,
they shall be avoided through the
establishment of an appropriate buffer setback,
as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist.
The temporary “no construction” area would
have to be maintained until the nest has
completed its cycle, as determined by a
qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle
is complete and all nestlings have fledged and
have left the nest, construction in that area may
resume.
3) A biological construction monitor (BCM) shall
be present during the days when initial ground
clearing, best maintenance practice (BMP)
installation and vegetation removal activities
are occurring. The BCM will be observe the
activities and watch for special status reptiles
such as the Coast horned lizard ((Phrynosoma
blainvillii) and Coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis
tigris stejnegeri), and if detected will relocate
them out of harm’s way.
Page 509
Page 6 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
Section 5 – Cultural Resources
1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are
encountered before or during grading, the
developer will retain a qualified archaeologist
to monitor construction activities, to take
appropriate measures to protect or preserve
them for study. With the assistance of the
archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga
will:
• Enact interim measures to protect
undesignated sites from demolition or
significant modification without an
opportunity for the City to establish its
archaeological value.
PD/BO C Review of Report A/D 3/4
• Consider establishing provisions to
require incorporation of archaeological
sites within new developments, using
their special qualities as a theme or focal
point.
PD/BO C Review of Report A/D 3/4
• Pursue educating the public about the
archaeological heritage of the area. PD/BO C Review of Report A/D 3/4
• Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with
Section 21083.2 Archeological resources
of CEQA to eliminate adverse project
effects on significant, important, and
unique prehistoric resources, including
but not limited to, avoiding archeological
sites, capping or covering site with soil,
planning the site as a park or green space
or paying an in-kind mitigation fee.
PD B/C Review of report
and plans during
construction
A/D 2/4
• Prepare a technical resources
management report, documenting the
inventory, evaluation, and proposed
mitigation of resources within the project
area. Submit one copy of the completed
report, with original illustrations, to the
San Bernardino County Archaeological
Information Center for permanent
archiving.
PD C Review of Report A/D 3/4
Page 510
Page 7 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
2) In the event that cultural resources are
discovered during project activities, all work in
the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-
foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified
archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior
standards shall be hired to assess the find.
Work on the other portions of the project
outside of the buffered area may continue
during this assessment period. Additionally,
the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI)
shall be contacted regarding any pre-contact
and/or post-contact finds and be provided
information after the archaeologist makes
his/her initial assessment of the nature of the
find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards
to significance and treatment
PD C During Construction A/D 4
3) If significant pre-contact and/or post-contact
cultural resources, as defined by CEQA (as
amended, 2015), are discovered and
avoidance cannot be ensured, the
archaeologist shall develop a Monitoring and
Treatment Plan, the drafts of which shall be
provided to SMBMI for review and comment,
as detailed within TCR-1. The archaeologist
shall monitor the remainder of the project and
implement the Plan accordingly.
PD C During Construction A/D 4
4) If human remains or funerary objects are
encountered during any activities associated
with the project, work in the immediate vicinity
(within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall
cease and the County Coroner shall be
contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety
Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the
duration of the project.
PD C During Construction A/D 4
Page 511
Page 8 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
5) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or
animal fossils) are encountered before or
during grading, the developer will retain a
qualified paleontologist to monitor construction
activities, to take appropriate measures to
protect or preserve them for study. The
paleontologist shall submit a report of findings
that will also provide specific
recommendations regarding further mitigation
measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring)
that may be appropriate. Where mitigation
monitoring is appropriate, the program must
include, but not be limited to, the following
measures:
PD B Review of Report A/D 4
• Assign a paleontological monitor, trained
and equipped to allow the rapid removal
of fossils with minimal construction delay,
to the site full-time during the interval of
earth-disturbing activities.
PD B Review of Report A/D 4
• Should fossils be found within an area
being cleared or graded, divert earth-
disturbing activities elsewhere until the
monitor has completed salvage. If
construction personnel make the
discovery, the grading contractor should
immediately divert construction and notify
the monitor of the find.
BO B/C Review of Report A/D 4
• Prepare, identify, and curate all
recovered fossils for documentation in
the summary report and transfer to an
appropriate depository (i.e.,
San Bernardino County Museum).
PD D Review of Report D 3
• Submit summary report to City of Rancho
Cucamonga. Transfer collected
specimens with a copy to the report to
San Bernardino County Museum.
PD D Review of Report D 3
Section 6 – Geology and Soils
1) The site shall be treated with water or other
soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD
and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM10 emissions,
BO C During Construction A 4
Page 512
Page 9 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-
planted with drought resistant landscaping as
soon as possible.
2) Frontage public streets shall be swept
according to a schedule established by the
City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with
vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may
vary depending upon the time of year of
construction.
BO C During Construction A 4
3) Grading operations shall be suspended when
wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10
emissions from the site during such episodes.
BO C During Construction A 4
4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by
SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all
inactive construction areas that remain
inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10
emissions.
BO C During Construction A 4
Section 7 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions
1) The project must comply with all rules that
assist in reducing short-term air pollutant
emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule
403 regarding fugitive dust including treating
the site with water or other soil-stabilizing
agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas
as quickly as possible.
BO C During Construction A 4
2) The construction contractor shall select
construction equipment based on low-
emission factors and high energy efficiency
and submit a statement on the grading plan
that ensures all construction equipment will be
tuned and maintained in accordance with the
manufactures’ specification.
BO C During Construction A 4
3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more
than 5 minutes. BO C During Construction A 4
4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be
utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel-powered
engines where feasible.
BO C During Construction A 4
Page 513
Page 10 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
5) Construction should be timed so as not to
interfere with peak-hour traffic. BO C During Construction A 4
6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be
supported and encouraged for construction
crew.
BO C During Construction A 4
Long Term (Operational) GHG Emissions
7) Construction and Building materials shall be
produced and/or manufactured locally, as
feasible. Use “Green Building Materials” such
as materials that are resource efficient,
recycled, and manufactured in an
environmentally friendly way including low-
volatile-organic-compound (VOC) materials.
BO A During Construction C 2
8) Design all buildings to exceed California
Building Code Title 24 energy standard
including but not limited to any combination of:
• Increased insulation.
• Limit air leakage through the structure.
• Incorporate Energy Star or better rated
windows, space heating and cooling
equipment, light fixtures, and appliances.
• Landscape and develop site utilizing
shade, prevailing winds and landscaping.
• Install efficient lighting and lighting control
systems .
• Install light colored “cool” roofs and cool
pavements.
• Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED’s)
for outdoor lighting.
BO C During Construction A 4
9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation
strategy appropriate for the project and include
the following:
• Install water efficient landscapes and
irrigation systems and devices in
compliance with the City of Rancho
BO A During Construction C 2
Page 514
Page 11 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance.
• Use reclaimed water for landscaping within
the project if available or as required by the
Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD).
• Design building to be water efficient by
installing water efficient fixtures and
appliances including low flow faucets, dual
flush toilets and waterless urinals/water
heaters.
• Design irrigation to control runoff and to
remove water to non-vegetated surfaces.
10) Reuse and recycle construction and
demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior
storage areas for recyclables and green waste
in public areas. Educate employees about
reducing waste and about recycling.
CE A Review of Plans C 2
Section 8 – Hazards and Waste Materials
1) None
Section 9 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Construction Activities
1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit
applicant shall submit to Building Official for
approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be
used on-site to reduce pollutants during
construction activities entering the storm drain
system to the maximum extent practical.
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared,
included in the Grading Plan, and implemented
for the proposed project that identifies specific
measures to control on-site and off-site erosion
from the time ground disturbing activities are
initiated through completion of grading. This
Erosion Control Plan shall include the following
measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing
BO B/C/D/ Review of Plans A/C 2/4
Page 515
Page 12 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
of grading and construction to minimize soil
exposure to rainy periods experienced in
Southern California, and b) An inspection and
maintenance program shall be included to
ensure that any erosion which does occur either
on-site or off-site as a result of this project will
be corrected through a remediation or
restoration program within a specified time
frame.
3) During construction, temporary berms such as
sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to
prevent discharge of debris or sediment from
the site when there is rainfall or other runoff.
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
4) During construction, to remove pollutants,
street cleaning will be performed prior to storm
events and after the use of water trucks to
control dust in order to prevent discharge of
debris or sediment from the site.
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
5) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits,
the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent
(NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) General Construction Storm
Water Permit from the State Water Resources
Control Board. Evidence that this has been
obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste
Discharger's Identification Number) shall be
submitted to the City Building Official for
coverage under the NPDES General
Construction Permit.
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
Post-Construction Operational
6) Prior to issuance of building permits, the
applicant shall submit to the City Building
Official for approval of a Water Quality
Management Plan (WQMP), including a
project description and identifying Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that will be
used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm
drain system to the maximum extent
practicable. The WQMP shall identify the
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
Page 516
Page 13 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
structural and non-structural measures
consistent with the Guidelines for New
Development and Redevelopment adopted by
the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004.
7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for
controlling and minimizing the use of
fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped
areas shall be monitored and maintained for at
least two years to ensure adequate coverage
and stable growth. Plans for these areas,
including monitoring provisions for a minimum
of two years, shall be submitted to the City for
review and approval prior to the issuance of
grading permits.
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
Grading Activities
8) The developer shall implement the BMPs
identified in the Water Quality Management
Plan prepared by (name/date) to reduce
construction pollutants from entering the storm
drain system to the maximum extent practical.
BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4
Section 10 – Land Use and Planning
1) None
Section 11 – Mineral Resources
1) None
Section 12 – Noise
1) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a
construction-related noise mitigation plan shall
be submitted to the City for review and
approval. The Plan shall depict the location of
the construction equipment and how the noise
from this equipment would be mitigated during
construction.
PD/BO B Review of Plans C/A 4
2) Consistent with the hours described in
Section 17.66.050.D.4 of the RCMC,
construction times shall be limited between
the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM on
weekdays and Saturdays. No construction
activity shall be permitted on Sundays and
PD/BO C During Construction A/C 4
Page 517
Page 14 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
national holidays.
3) Construction activities shall be scheduled to
avoid operating several pieces of equipment
simultaneously, to the maximum extent
feasible.
PD/BO C During Construction A 4
4) Contractor shall provide stating areas on-site
to minimize off-site transportation of heavy
construction equipment. These areas must be
located to maximize the distance between
activity and sensitive receptors.
PD/BO C During Construction A 4
5) Construction vehicles shall not park, queue
and/or idle at the project site or along the
adjoining public rights-of-way prior to the
construction hours.
PD/BO C During Construction A 4
6) Electrical power shall be used to run air
compressors and similar power tools and to
power any temporary structures, such as
construction trailers
PD/BO C During Construction A 4
7) Temporary noise barriers with a minimum
height of 10 feet, would be placed along the
northern, eastern, and southern boundaries.
To be effective the barriers must break the
line-of-sight between on-site construction
activities and off-site receivers to the north,
east, and south throughout the duration of site
preparation and grading activities. The noise
barrier should be constructed of material with
a minimum weight of 2 pounds per square
foot with no gaps or perforations. Noise
barriers may be constructed of, but are not
limited to, 5/8 inch plywood, 5/8 inch oriented
strand board, or hay bales.
PD/BO C During Construction A/C 4
8) Implement a permanent solid wall with a
height of a least six feet, or sufficient to break
the line of site, along the southern project site
boundary capable of reducing traffic noise
from Banyan Street by at least 4.5 dBA.
PD/BO C During Construction A/C 4
9) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed
as early as possible in first phase. PD/BO C During Construction A/C 4
Section 13 – Population and Housing
Page 518
Page 15 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
1) None
Section 14 – Public Services
1) The developer shall pay the current
residential school facility fee plus the
Etiwanda School District special tax.
BO B Review of Plans C 2
Section 15 - Recreation
1) None
Section 16 – Transportation/Traffic
1) None
Section 17 – Tribal Cultural Resources
1) The project Applicant will be required to obtain
the services of a qualified Native American
Monitor(s) during construction-related ground
disturbance activities. Ground disturbance is
defined by the Tribal Representatives from the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh
Nation as activities that include, but are not
limited to, pavement removal, pot-holing or
auguring, grubbing, weed abatement, boring,
grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching,
within the project area. The monitor(s) must be
approved by the Tribal Representatives and
will be present on-site during the construction
phases that involve any ground disturbing
activities. The Native American Monitor(s) will
complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The
logs will provide descriptions of the daily
activities, including construction activities,
locations, soil, and any cultural materials
identified. The monitor(s) shall possess
Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency
Response (HAZWOPER) certification. In
addition, the monitor(s) will be required to
provide insurance certificates, including
liability insurance, for any archaeological
resource(s) encountered during grading and
excavation activities pertinent to the provisions
outlined in the California Environmental
Quality Act, California Public Resources Code
PD B During Grading B 4
Page 519
Page 16 of 17
Mitigation Measures No. /
Implementing Action
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Frequency
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date /Initials
Sanctions for
Non-Compliance
Division 13, Section 21083.2 (a) through (k).
The on-site monitoring shall end when the
project site grading and excavation activities
are completed, or when the Tribal
Representatives and monitor have indicated
that the site has a low potential for
archeological resources.
2) The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) and
shall be contacted, of any pre-contact and/or
post-contact cultural resources discovered
during project implementation, and be
provided information regarding the nature of
the find, so as to provide Tribal input with
regards to significance and treatment. Should
the find be deemed significant, as defined by
CEQA (as amended, 2015), a cultural
resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan
shall be created by the archaeologist, in
coordination with SMBMI, and all subsequent
finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan
shall allow for a monitor to be present that
represents SMBMI for the remainder of the
project, should SMBMI elect to place a
monitor on-site.
PD C During Grading A/D 4
3) Any and all archaeological/cultural documents
created as a part of the project (isolate
records, site records, survey reports, testing
reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant
and Lead Agency for dissemination to
SMBMI. The Lead Agency and/or applicant
shall, in good faith, consult with SMBMI
throughout the life of the project
PD C During Grading A/D 4
Section 18 – Utility and Service Systems
1) None
Section 19 – Mandatory Findings of Significance
1) None
Key to Checklist Abbreviations
Page 520
Page 17 of 17
Responsible Person Monitoring Frequency Method of Verification Sanctions
CDD - Community Development Director or designee A - With Each New Development A - On-site Inspection 1 - Withhold Recordation of Final Map
PD - Planning Director or designee B - Prior To Construction B - Other Agency Permit / Approval 2 - Withhold Grading or Building Permit
CE - City Engineer or designee C - Throughout Construction C - Plan Check 3 - Withhold Certificate of Occupancy
BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order
PO - Police Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds
FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP
7 - Citation
Page 521
Specific Plan Amendment
DRC2016-00730
for
12774 Banyan Street
Location
N
PROJECT
SITE
Looking north from Banyan Street
N
Tentative Subdivision Map
Specific Plan Zoning (current/proposed)
N
VL
VL
ER
SERVL
General Plan Designation (no change)
N
VL
VL
VL VLVL
Environmental
•A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for this project and
circulated for public comment on June 17,2021.
•Correspondence received from Cucamonga Valley Water District
(CVWD)requesting for a minor textual change to Hydrology/Water
Quality Section.
•Mitigation Measures incorporated to project to reduce any
potentially significant impacts to:
•Air quality
•Biological Resources
•Cultural Resources
•Geology and Soils
•Greenhouse Gas Emissions
•Hydrology and Water Quality
•Noise
•Public Services
•Tribal and Cultural Resources
Staff Recommendation
•Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Ordinance No.990,
which:
•Approves Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00730
•Adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the associated Tentative TractMap,Tree Removal Permit,and Specific Plan Amendment.
SUBJECT: Continued Public Hearing for Consideration of General Plan Amendment
DRC2018-00533 and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2018-00534 – Arbor
Express Car Wash – A Request for General Plan and Zoning Map
Amendments to Change the Land Use and Zoning Designation for One
Project-Specific Parcel of Land (APN: 0208-291-03) from Low Medium
(LM) Residential District to General Commercial (GC) District and for Two
Non-Project Specific Adjacent Parcels of Land (0208-291-01 and 0208-
291-02) From Low Medium (LM) Residential District to Medium (M)
Residential District Related to a Proposed Car Wash Located
Approximately 200 Feet East of Archibald Avenue on the North Side of
Arrow Route. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-045) (CITY) (Continued from June
2, 2021 and August 4, 2021 City Council Meeting)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2021-045 denying General Plan
Amendment DRC2018-00533 and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2018-00534.
BACKGROUND:
On March 10, 2021, the Planning Commission voted 4-1 to approve Design Review DRC2018-
00535, Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00536, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2019-00218 for
the site plan, design review, and operation of a 5,078 square foot car wash and 1,296 square foot
detailing center on 1.36 acres of land. The Planning Commission also recommended City Council
approval of the Related General Plan and Zoning Map Amendments that are necessary to permit
the car wash use and to rezone adjacent land to accommodate the loss of residential density on
the parcel where the car wash would be located. The Planning Commission’s approval of the
Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Tree Removal Permit are contingent upon the City
Council approving the proposed General Plan and Zoning Map amendments. One Planning
Commissioner voted in opposition to the project based on his determination that a car wash and
detailing center were not the highest and best use for the project site. A timeline for this project is
attached as Attachment 3. Correspondence received by Applicant supporting their request is
attached as Attachment 5.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
The project site is comprised of two parcels totaling 1.36 acres of land (59,300 square feet)
located on the north side of Arrow Route, approximately 200 feet east of Archibald Avenue. The
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning Director
Page 522
Page 2
1
0
3
2
“L” shaped project site is approximately 266 feet (east to west), and approximately 280 feet and
170 feet (north to south) along the east and west property lines, respectively. The westernmost
parcel of land that makes up the project site is vacant (APN: 0209-291-06) and the easternmost
parcel is developed with a single-family residence (APN: 0208-291-03).
The proposed car wash project would be known as the “Arbors Car Wash.” It would be an
automated express type of car wash. The car wash would comprise two parcels (APN 0209-291-
06 and APN 0208-291-03). One parcel is currently zoned General Commercial (GC) with a
General Plan land use designation of General Commercial (Parcel 1). Parcel 1 is currently vacant.
The other parcel is currently zoned Low Medium (LM) with a General Plan Land Use designation
of Low Medium Residential (Parcel 2). Parcel 2 is currently occupied by a single-family residence.
Parcel 2’s zoning and land use designation do not permit car washes. In order to accommodate
the car wash, the applicant has applied for Zoning Map amendment and General Plan amendment
to change Parcel 2 to General Commercial so that both Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 would have the
same zoning and General Plan land use designation.
The proposed General Plan and Zoning Map amendments would also change the zoning/land
use designation of two separate parcels (APNs 0208-9-01 and -020), one of which is currently
occupied by a single-family residence and the other which is vacant (Parcels 3 and 4,
respectively). These parcels are currently zoned Low Medium with a General Plan land use
designation of Low Medium Residential. Parcels 3 and 4 would not be developed with the
proposed car wash. Instead, Parcels 3 and 4 are proposed to be rezoned to accommodate higher
residential density for purposes of satisfying a State law referred to as “No-Net Loss,” which
effectively precludes the City from reducing the residential density of sites within the City unless
it offsets that loss on other sites. In order to offset the loss of 6.8 potential units on Parcel 2 due
to its change from Low Medium to General Commercial, Parcel 3 and Parcel 4, which total 1.21
acres, must be upzoned to accommodate an equivalent number of units, going from a potential
residential density of 9.68 dwelling units per acre to 16.94 dwelling units per acre, an increase in
density of 7.26 dwelling units per acre.
The existing Land Use, General Plan and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent
properties are as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Vacant General Commercial General Commercial (GC) District
Site Single-Family
Residence Low Medium Residential Low Medium (LM)
Residential District (4-8 du/acre)
North School Low Medium Residential Low Medium (LM)
Residential District (4-8 du/acre)
Commercial Center General Commercial General Commercial (GC) District
South Family Resource
Center
Public Facility/
Civic/Regional
Low (L) Residential District (2-4
du/acre)
East Single-Family
Residence1 Low Medium Residential Low Medium (LM)
Residential District (4-8 du/acre)
West Service Station2 General Commercial General Commercial (GC) District
1 – “Beverly Hills House” (designated a local historic landmark on January 18, 1989) on APN: 0208-291-03;
2 – Non-operational but approved for reactivation August 15, 2018 and undergoing building plans review to reopen
Page 523
Page 3
1
0
3
2
ANALYSIS:
In order for the conditional use permit, design review, and tree removal permit approved by the
Planning Commission for Arbors Car Wash at the subject (project) location to take effect, a
General Plan amendment is required, as well as a corresponding zone map amendment. This is
needed specifically to redesignate the land use on the easternmost parcel (Parcel 2) from Low
Medium to General Commercial. Land use entitlements such as conditional use permits must be
consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Map. Therefore, the entitlements for the Arbors Car
Wash were made contingent upon the City Council’s approval of the proposed General Plan and
Zoning Map amendments.
In addition, the Zoning Map must be consistent with the General Plan, and so the requested
Zoning Map amendment cannot be approved unless the General Plan amendment is concurrently
approved. Therefore, staff’s analysis focuses on the General Plan amendment, although many
of the same issues would apply to the Zoning Map amendment. Staff has identified the following
issues with the proposed General Plan amendment that inform the recommendation to deny these
applications.
Issue 1: Importance of the General Plan Land Use Element and Map to the Planning Process
An amendment to the general plan from one land use type to another is a weighty decision that
should not be taken lightly. Section 17.22.070 E. of the Development Code regarding General
plan amendments. Findings, states: “The city council may approve a General Plan amendment
upon finding that the amendment is in the public interest and that the General Plan as amended
will remain internally consistent. In the event that a General Plan amendment is requested by a
private property owner, the applicant shall demonstrate to the city council that there is a
substantial public benefit to be derived from such amendment and how the proposed
amendment furthers the goals of the General Plan”.
Since our early years, we have been known as “the City with a plan” and that commitment to
being a well-planned city has returned great dividends in the areas of health, prosperity, and
overall quality of life. The 2010 Rancho Cucamonga General Plan is the City’s legislative
document that guides land use and development decisions with such a long-range view in mind.
Many cities call their General Plan the “road map” or the “constitution” for the city. The adoption
and amendment of a General Plan is a legislative action. The City Council has wide latitude in
amending the General Plan, subject only to the limitation that its decision-making not be arbitrary
or capricious. It is the prerogative of the City Council to make the decision whether or not to amend
the General Plan.
A General Plan amendment is appropriate when a project will advance a significant and important
goal of the City that could not be met without the amendment. The City has numerous goals that
might merit a General Plan amendment, such as the provision of new housing, especially
affordable housing, a business that would generate a significant number of high-wage jobs, a
business that would provide critical neighborhood services such as a grocery store, to diversify
the city’s economy, to provide for numerous, high wage jobs, and/or to provide for a substantial
revenue stream that helps the City provide services. In summary, staff believes General Plan
amendments are appropriate for new development or investment that improves neighborhoods
and quality of life in the city.
As an All-America City, Rancho Cucamonga has long been mindful about the type and locations
of businesses in the city. District 2 tends to have more automobile-oriented uses, including a
majority of both the city’s car washes and the city’s gas stations. The City’s recent measures to
Page 524
Page 4
1
0
3
2
further study such auto-related uses, which have historically dominated the economic
development of District 2, indicate the opposite of a justification of a General Plan amendment for
a car wash. It is not that car washes and other automobile-oriented uses are not important and
do not have a role in the city’s business mix; it is that they create impacts such as noise and traffic
that are not compatible with certain uses such as residential uses and schools.
Staff analysis: General plan amendments are only appropriate when an amendment furthers
important goals of the City. The applicant has not made the case for how the establishment of a
new car wash rises to this level as is required by the development code. There is no documented
shortage of car wash facilities in Rancho Cucamonga at this time. Car wash facilities do not
provide numerous jobs, high-wage jobs, bring a needed amenity to the neighborhood, bring a
unique business to the city, provide affordable or attainable housing, or otherwise further the City’s
overarching goals.
Issue 2: PlanRC Comprehensive General Plan Update
The City began a two-year comprehensive General Plan update in January 2020. When adopted,
this new long-range vision for future land use development will close the chapter on the 2010
General Plan and establish a vision for the next ten or more years. As an All-America City, one
of our core community values is listening to the community. Extensive community outreach was
conducted through meetings, discussion groups and surveys to better understand the
community’s land use and development goals. Through this process, the community articulated
three core values to help guide community development: health, equity, and stewardship.
Additionally, community input led to five “Big Ideas” included in Volume 1:
1. Design for people first
2. Provide connectivity and accessibility
3. Create destinations
4. Establish Rancho Cucamonga as the cultural and economic hub of the Inland Empire
5. Address environmental justice
The public review draft of PlanRC reflects the goals articulated by the community. It indicates that
the Archibald and Arrow intersection, including the subject property is intended to be designated
“Traditional Town Center” and part of Focus Area 5 Cucamonga Town Center. This designation
was chosen with care to help address the community’s values and realize the community’s
priorities. This designation discourages auto-dependent land uses in favor of commercial
businesses that serve the local community and can be accessed without requiring an automobile.
Improving walkability helps address health, equity, and stewardship. Furthermore, as stated
above, car washes and many other auto-oriented businesses are predominantly in District 2.
Saturating certain types of businesses in one area of the city is both inequitable and a fragile
approach to economic development that is not in line with the community’s values or the ideal of
an All-America City. There are other locations in the city more appropriately identified as potential
locations for any increased demand in auto-related uses that might result from a growing
residential population. (It should be noted that the Planning Commission will have conducted a
hearing on PlanRC prior to the City Council hearing on this item. Staff will provide a verbal update
on the Commission recommendation.)
Staff analysis: At the time of the Planning Commission’s review of this application, PlanRC was
still being prepared and the community’s vision had not yet been fully translated into a land use
plan or policies. Additionally, staff did not yet have the benefit of hearing from the community to
understand whether the draft PlanRC would be well received by the community. Staff now has
both and can more fully assess the proposed General Plan amendment in the context of the
community’s vision as articulated by PlanRC.
Page 525
Page 5
1
0
3
2
While PlanRC has not yet been adopted by the City Council, the requested General Plan
amendment conflicts with the community’s stated values and priorities. The community’s future
land use vision for Arrow and Archibald neighborhood, as proposed in the draft PlanRC Land Plan
does not include auto-related uses. The General Plan update community engagement effort
indicate the community greatly desires walkable, destination-oriented retail developments. The
subject property will no longer be designated as LM Residential but is not proposed to
accommodate a car wash use in the future designation either. Furthermore, as the comprehensive
General Plan update is in process, staff asserts that this amendment to a single parcel of land is
not timely. A project that is compliant with the current land use and zoning designation could be
considered, but any reconsideration of land use on these parcels should only be considered as
part of the comprehensive update.
Issue 3: Community Outreach
On October 26, 2021, staff presented the proposed zoning and general plan amendment to the
Healthy RC Steering Committee meeting. Generally, multiple members of the Committee
expressed concerns that the proposed project did not meet the intent of the proposed “PlanRC”
general plan, with some committee members specifically citing concerns regarding noise
resulting from the outdoor vacuums on the nearby elementary school to the north, as well as
noise impacts to the residences in the vicinity of the project. Committee members also
expressed concerns over the number of car washes throughout the city, and in particular a
perceived concern of a concentration of similar automobile-oriented uses within Southwest
Cucamonga.
Staff analysis: The City has increasingly looked to the Healthy RC Steering Committee as a
sounding board for community sentiments on land use decisions. Members are regularly
engaged with community members, particularly in the southwest neighborhoods, and they
receive training and education on issues such as local land use decisions. An endorsement
from this group is sought for projects to determine land use compatibility. No such endorsement
was made for this General Plan Amendment.
Issue 4: Legal Limit on the Number of General Plan Amendments
As a way of signifying the importance of the long-range planning process, State law limits the
number of amendments to mandatory elements of the General Plan a City can approve to four a
year. The City has utilized two of the permissible amendments already this year: 1) an amendment
to implement the land use designations required for the housing element update, and 2) a General
Plan Map amendment for the Bridge Point industrial project. The PlanRC comprehensive General
Plan update to be approved in December 2021 will constitute the third allowable amendment. We
have a fifth GPA that has been requested for an industrial project on Napa which has the potential
to bring hundreds of jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars of investment into the city.
Staff analysis: As stated above, staff does not believe a car wash is a land use that warrants the
consideration of one of a limited number of allowable General Plan amendments. It is appropriate
for the City Council to consider the application before it without comparing the relevant merits of
other General Plan amendments. However, should the City Council approve the requested
General Plan amendment, one more of the listed General Plan amendment requests would have
to be delayed until 2022. Delaying the update of the City’s Housing Element and General Plan
until 2022 would impact the City’s ability to regulate new residential development. Delaying the
approval of any of the property owner-requested amendments for the referenced major industrial
projects risks hundreds of millions of dollars of investment and thousands of jobs for the city.
Page 526
Page 6
1
0
3
2
Issue 5: Redesignating Land Use from Residential to Commercial
In 2017 the California Legislature approved California’s 2017 Housing Package, which, among
other housing bills, included Senate Bill No. 166 (SB 166). SB 166 prohibits a City from reducing,
requiring, or permitting a reducing a site’s residential density to a lower residential density that is
below the density on a site that was used by the California Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) in determining compliance with housing element law unless the City makes
written findings supported by substantial evidence that the reduction is consistent with the General
Plan, including the housing element, and that the remaining sites identified in the housing element
are adequate to accommodate the City’s share of the regional housing need.
In addition, the “Housing Crisis Act” adopted pursuant to SB 330, prohibits the City from enacting
a “development policy, standard, or condition” to change the use of property to a “less intensive
use” or reduce the intensity of land use from that allowed by the General Plan or zoning as of
January 1, 2018. Under this law, a “less intensive use” would include changing the land use
designation or zoning of property to prohibit residential development. However, there is an
exception to this prohibition. When the City amends the General Plan and zoning to lower the
intensity of use on one parcel, it must be offset by increases on other parcels “to ensure that there
is no net loss in residential capacity.” This provision applies City-wide and is not listed to sites on
the City’s housing inventory used by HCD.
Taken together, two laws mean that the City may only reduce or eliminate residential density for
a parcel if there is a sufficient replacement of residentially zoned land so that there is “no net loss”
of residential development capacity. When the City prepared the 2013 Housing Element Update
only vacant parcels were analyzed to address the City’s regional housing need (underutilized
parcels and those with active development applications were not included) and the City identified
an adequate number of vacant parcels to meet the regional housing need. The easterly 0.85-
acre parcel of land was identified by the capacity analysis of the Low Medium (LM) Residential
District. To overcome the loss of housing capacity as a result of this project, the applicant is
requesting to amend the General Plan land use and zoning designations for Parcels 3 and 4,
which are non-project related parcels (APNs: 208-29-01 and -02) as described previously.
The subject 0.85-acre project-related parcel of land (Parcel 2) has a maximum potential
residential density of 6.8 units under the current Low Medium (LM) Residential District (4-8
dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. Rezoning Parcels 3 and 4 (a total of 1.21 acres) from
Low Medium (LM) Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Medium (M) Residential
District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) will increase the potential residential density from 9.68
dwelling units per acre to 16.94 dwelling units per acre, an increase in density of 7.26 dwelling
units per acre. This change in the General Plan and zoning designation will overcome the potential
loss of housing opportunities created by the rezoning of the project-specific parcel of land (7.26
vs 6.8 dwelling units per acre) and will, in turn, make the project compliant with the “no net loss”
provision in Senate Bill Nos. 166 and SB 330.
Staff analysis: Although the applicant has been able to identify residential capacity on other sites
in order to avoid a net loss, as discussed above, such a re-designation is not without potential
neighborhood impacts.
Issue 6: Car Wash Use Adjacent to Low or Medium Density Residential Housing
As stated in Issue 4, the General Plan Amendment requested would require a re-designation and
re-zoning of the adjacent property to the east to a higher density residential land use and zone.
If developed to its full potential, these residential properties would be located immediately
adjacent to a car wash use. The noise of equipment, vehicles, and patrons at the site during
Page 527
Page 7
1
0
3
2
operating hours as well as the environmental conditions of water spraying and air blowing, while
not found to have significant environmental impacts under CEQA, with mitigation, are still
conditions that are not ideal in a residential neighborhood or adjacent to a school. For the City
Council to approve this General Plan Amendment, the Council would have to concurrently
increase residential density immediately adjacent to the proposed car wash. Staff does not believe
these are compatible land uses and so the amendment exacerbates a future conflict of land uses
as more residents are allowed to be placed next to the car wash. Furthermore, while CEQA does
not consider how impacts may disproportionally affect disadvantaged communities, introducing
land use conflicts such as new sources of noise adjacent to an existing school and housing sites
can create new environmental justice and equity issues.
Staff analysis: Car wash uses are not compatible with residential neighborhoods. There are many
other locations in the city of Rancho Cucamonga where a car wash could be located at a much
further distance away from neighboring residences and schools.
Summary
In summary, staff cannot recommend the requested General Plan amendment and zoning map
amendment to accommodate the development of a car wash due to the lack of consistency with
the City’s current and future land use goals, the lack of a demonstrated need for the use, and the
lack of a clear community benefit that would be achieved by the project as well as the impact on
other, larger projects currently in process.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Fiscal Impact Analysis (Stanley R. Hoffman Associates) prepared for the project estimates
that the project would provide a net annual recurring impact of $4,862 to the City upon completion
of the project. This figure has not been peer-reviewed or confirmed. New recurring general fund
revenues include property taxes, property tax in-lieu, residential derived sales taxes, commercial
derived sales taxes, business license fees, and franchise fees. Even assuming the $4,862 figure
is accurate, this amount is so minimal that within 2-3 years it will be eclipsed by costs and the
project will go negative. Generally speaking, a commercial use on 1 acre or more should be
contributing at $20,000 per acre or more to be comparable in average revenue to the City’s other
commercial uses, even on the low end of the analysis.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The request to make an amendment for a single property and for this proposed development
project does not meet the Council’s vision or core values. Additionally, this proposal does not
address the community’s core values or priorities as articulated through the PlanRC community
outreach process.
CORRESPONDENCE:
This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular page legal advertisement in the Inland
Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted on April 28, 2021, and notices were
mailed to all property owners (135 addresses) within a 660-foot radius of the project site on April
28, 2021. To date, no comments/correspondence has been received in response to these
notifications.
EXHIBITS:
Attachment 1 - Planning Commission Staff Report Dated March 10, 2021
Attachment 2 - Planning Commission Minutes Dated March 10, 2021
Page 528
Page 8
1
0
3
2
Attachment 3 - Project Timeline
Attachment 4 - Draft Resolution No. 2021-045
Attachment 5 - Correspondence Received Arbor
Page 529
1
7
6
8
Attachment 1 – Planning Commission Staff Report dated March 10, 2021, can be
accessed through the following link:
Arbor Car Wash Planning Commission Staff Report March 10, 2021
or you may Scan QR code for access:
Page 530
ATTACHMENT 2Page531
Page 532
Page 533
Page 534
Page 535
Page 536
Page 537
DRC2018-00535 – Arbor Carwash Timeline
Original Application Submittal – June 18, 2018
Application Resubmittals – October 11, 2018
December 18, 2018
February 26, 2019
Incompleteness Determinations – July 18, 2018
November 08, 2018
January 17, 2019
Completeness Determination – May 8, 2019
Neighborhood Meeting – April 29, 2019
Design Review Committee - December 17, 2019
CEQA Peer Review Consultant Hired – January 2020
CEQA Peer Review Consultant Comments – February 2020
CEQA Peer Review Resubmitted – March 2020
CEQA Peer Review Consultant Comments Round 2 - April 2020
CEQA Peer Review Resubmitted – End of April 2020
CEQA Peer Review Consultant Comments Round 3 – May 2020
CEQA Peer Review Resubmitted – June 2020
CEQA Peer Review Accepted as Complete July 2020
Planning Commission Hearing Continuance August 12, 2020 (Applicant Requested to Change
Project Scope)
September 2020 – Meetings with applicant’s legal representative to discuss GPA
October-November 2020 – (info gathered from email sent by applicant to staff on 11/10/20)
applicant attempting to work with school district to obtain a letter memorializing their support of
the proposed rezone of the property at 9782 Arrow Route to MH)
December 2020 - CEQA Consultant Revises IS/MND to reflect revised GPA
Planning Commission – March 10, 2021
Scheduled for City Council Review – June 2, 2021
ATTACHMENT 3
Page 538
RESOLUTION NO. 21-045
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING GENERAL PLAN MAP
AMENDMENT NO. DRC2018-00533, AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
NO. DRC2018-00534 – A REQUEST TO 1) AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION FOR ONE 0.85 ACRE PARCEL OF
LAND FROM LOW MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL
COMMERCIAL AND FOR TWO PARCELS OF LAND TOTALING 1.21
ACRES OF LAND FROM LOW MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM
RESIDENTIAL AND 2) AMEND THE ZONING MAP LAND USE DISTRICT
FOR ONE PARCEL OF LAND FROM LOW MEDIUM (LM) RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT TO THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GC) DISTRICT AND FOR
TWO PARCELS OF LAND FROM LOW MEDIUM (LM) RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT TO MEDIUM (M) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT FOR A SITE
LOCATED AT THE NORTH SIDE OF ARROW ROUTE AND WEST OF
ARCHIBALD AVENUE; - APNS: 0208-291-01 –02 AND -03.
A.Recitals.
1.An application was filed on behalf of Peter DeJeger for General Plan Amendment No.
DRC2018-00533 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject General Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application."
2.On March 10, 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and recommended City Council
approval of said application on that date.
3.On June 2, 2021, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly
noticed public hearing on the application and continued said meeting to August 4, 2021.
4.On August 4, 2021 the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a
duly noticed public hearing on the application and continued said application on that date.
5.On November 17, 2021, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, conducted
a duly noticed public hearing on the application and denied the request for a General Plan
Amendment.
6.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B.Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1.This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part
A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above
referenced public hearing on November 17, 2021, including written and oral staff reports, together
with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
ATTACHMENT 4Page539
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 21-045
GPA DRC2018-00533 – PETER DEJEGER
November 17, 2021
Page 2
a. The application applies to three parcels consisting of approximately 2.06-acres
of land, located north side of Arrow Route and west of Archibald Avenue. Said parcels of land are
currently designated as Low Medium Residential; and
b. The existing Land Use, General Plan and Zoning Designations for the project
site and adjacent properties are as follows:
c. This amendment will change the land use for three parcels of land. Parcel 0208-
291-01 will be changed from Low Medium Residential to General Commercial and Parcels 0208-
291-01 and -02 will be changed from Low Medium Residential to Medium Residential; and
d. This amendment would amend the Zoning Map (DRC2018-00534) to change the
zoning designation of one project related parcel of land (APN: 0208-291-03) from Low Medium
(LM) Residential District to General Commercial (GC) District and of two adjacent non-project
specific parcels of land (APN: 0208-291-01 and -02) from Low Medium (LM) Residential District
to Medium (M) Residential District.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-
referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2
above, the City Council hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. That establishment of a new car wash does not rise to the level of importance to
grant an amendment to the General Plan. There is no documented shortage of car wash facilities
in Rancho Cucamonga at this time. Car wash facilities do not further the City’s economic
development goals.
b. The applicant for this general plan amendment has understood that the project
approval relies on the legislative action being considered tonight and has been willing to continue
this process in spite of the risk that the general plan amendment might not be approved.
c. Car wash is not a land use that warrants the consideration of one of a limited
number of allowable general plan amendments. The City Council previously implemented a
moratorium on the car wash use to amend the standards for new car wash uses, which are
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site
Vacant General Commercial General Commercial (GC) District Single-Family
Residence Low Medium Residential Low Medium (LM)
Residential District
North School Low Medium Residential Low Medium (LM)
Residential District
South
Commercial Center General Commercial General Commercial (GC) District Family Resource
Center
Public Facility/
Civic/Regional Low (L) Residential District
East Single-Family
Residence1 Low Medium Residential Low Medium (LM)
Residential District
West Service Station2 General Commercial General Commercial (GC) District
1 – “Beverly Hills House” (designated a local historic landmark on January 18, 1989) on APN:
0208-291-03;
2 – Non-operational but approved for reactivation
Page 540
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 21-045
GPA DRC2018-00533 – PETER DEJEGER
November 17, 2021
Page 3
predominantly in District 2, thereby requiring a higher level of scrutiny to approve. Further, the
City Council recently established a moratorium on service station uses, which are also
predominantly in District 2, to establish more regulations and performance standards for this auto-
oriented use. These recent measures to further study and restrict auto-related uses, both of which
have historically dominated the economic development of District 2, indicate the opposite of a
justification of a general plan amendment for a car wash. Further, should the City Council approve
the car wash General Plan, it will be unable to approve a General Plan Amendment for one of the
major industrial projects (all of which are 500,000 SF to $1,500,000 sf unless that project is held
for 3-4 months until 2022.
d. The corner of Arrow and Archibald, including the parcels in question, is part of
the Cucamonga Town Center proposed in the PlanRC Land Plan. Auto uses are discouraged and
would be detrimental to the goals of this community as a walkable neighborhood of local serving
businesses. The subject property will no longer be designated as LM Residential but is not
proposed to accommodate a car wash use in the future designation either. As the comprehensive
General Plan update has been considered and recommended by the Planning Commission for
City Council adoption, staff asserts that this amendment to a single parcel of land is not timely. A
project that is compliant with the current land use and zoning designation could be considered,
but any reconsideration of land use on these parcels should only be considered as part of the
comprehensive update.
e. Car wash uses are not compatible with residential neighborhoods. The General
Plan and Zone map amendment would intensify these two incompatible uses by increasing
density and allowing even more residential dwelling units to be in close proximity to the car wash.
There are other locations in the City of Rancho Cucamonga where a car wash could be located
at a much further distance from neighboring residences and creating none of these
incompatibilities.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above,
this Council hereby denies General Plan Amendment No. DRC2018-00533, and Zoning Map
Amendment DRC20218-00534.
6. The City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is hereby directed to: (a) certify to
the adoption of this Resolution, and (b) forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by
certified mail, return receipt requested to the applicant Peter DeJeger at the address identified in
City records.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021.
________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ATTEST:
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
Page 541
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 21-045
GPA DRC2018-00533 – PETER DEJEGER
November 17, 2021
Page 4
City of Rancho Cucamonga
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________________
James L. Markman, City Attorney
Richards, Watson & Gershon
CERTIFICATION:
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Resolution 2021-045, was a duly adopted by the City.
Page 542
SOUTHWEST
@&i'Qll,, GROUP
JLLC
ARBOR EXPRESS CAR WASH
COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT AND BENEFITS
We are proud to submit our Tuscan-themed, environmentally-clean Express Car wash,
providing a much-needed service and aesthetic improvement to the surrounding area,
complimenting the Vineyard tradition and quality development of Rancho Cucamonga.
As our population increases, no longer will Rancho Cucamonga residents have to leave our
City for quality service.
Arbor Express Car Wash will be the first Express Car wash in the City of Rancho
Cucamonga. After 3 years working with the City, we are happy to present the first of its kind
Express Car Wash in our beautiful City.
Our Project is fully Code-Compliant, including S8330 (Residential Density Offset), with the
help of the Planning Director, which we appreciate. This information is reflected in our
approved CEQA Report which confirms this Project is the appropriate Land Use for our site.
On March 10, 2021, our Project received a majority Planning Commission Approval with
Conditions we have reviewed and accept. Please see the attached Staff
recommendations to the Planning Commission for our Project to be Approved and
forwarded to you, the City Council, for Approval.
Our Master-Planned Project offers environmentally-clean and affordable car wash services to
our community. It will provide additional employment to our neighborhood, as well as ongoing
support for local fundraising groups and organizat ions .
We are grateful and want to thank the City Planning Director and her staff for their help and
support , as well as their recommendation for Approval, and appreciate your consideration for
Approval.
Respectfully,
Pete Dejager
Alan E. Smith ATTACHMENT 512223 HIGHlAND AVE, SUITE# 106-201 • RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91739 • 909.234.9603 Page 543
Page 544
Page 545
Page 546
Page 547
Page 548
Page 549
Page 550
Page 551
1300 Bristol Street North, Suite 100 • Newport Beach, CA 92660
(949) 833-2599 • Fax (949) 833-2998
Tom Sakai, Principal
November 10, 2021
Planning Department
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Re.: GPA DRC2018-00533 and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2018-00534
To Whom it May Concern:
As the owner of a condominium unit near the proposed project I am strongly opposed to
changing the Land Use and Zoning from its present residential LM zone. The proposed
commercial development and carwash would generate noise and traffic which would
adversely affect property values and living conditions in the nearby Cedar Villas
condominium development. I urge the City Council to reject this unneeded development.
In the event that the City Council approves this development, the following conditions of
approval should be imposed:
1.There should be limitations on hours of operation for the carwash, restricting
the hours to 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. so as not to disturb the adjacent residents.
2.There should be a prohibition on the sale of alcohol and cannabis products on
the site. Please note that the site is immediately adjacent to a preschool facility
on the North side.
Thank you for your consideration of my viewpoint. It should be noted that I did not receive
the notice of the hearing until Tuesday November 9 which is not sufficient notice for me to
adequately review the project impacts on my condominium unit.
Very truly yours,
Tom Sakai, Principal
Additional Material Received for Item G2: Regular City Council Meeting 11/17/2021
Page 552
1300 Bristol Street North, Suite 100 • Newport Beach, CA 92660
(949) 833-2599 • Fax (949) 833-2998
Page 553
Additional Material Received for Item G2: Regular City Council Meeting 11/17/2021
Page 554
Page 555
2021-11-17 – Regular City Council Meeting – Item G2 – Additional Material Received
November 17, 2021
Dear Mayor Michael and Members of the Council,
My name is Arturo Garcia and I am writing to express concerns regarding item G2 - Arbor Express Car
Wash. I am a long time Rancho Cucamonga resident and appreciate the City’s approach to creating an
intentional community that cultivates a sense of place, pride, and unity. Unfortunately, the
development of a car wash does not align with the vision of what Rancho Cucamonga means to me and
so many in my community. One of the many concerns of approving the zoning change for the car wash
project to proceed, is the on-site circulation of cars, traffic, and pollution it will bring to the
neighborhood. This idea of an auto-oriented business also moves us away from the walkable,
community-centric place the upcoming General Plan outlines for the City as well as the health goals
outlined by Healthy Rancho Cucamonga. A walkable, green community- and family-centric place is one
of the key reasons I moved to and want to stay in Rancho Cucamonga.
I urge you to vote against the zoning changes and instead bring development to this neighborhood that
promotes a sense of place and community connectedness.
Sincerely,
Arturo Garcia, Jr., MPH
Page 556
City Council
November 17, 2021
Project:A request to change the General Plan land use and zoning designation for
one project specific and two non-project specific parcels of land
Entitlements:General Plan Amendment DRC2018-00533
Zoning Map Amendment DRC2018-00534
Current Zoning Designation:Low Medium (LM)Residential District
Current General Plan Designation:Low Medium
Project Overview
Approved Site Plan
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following action:
•Adopt Resolution No.2021-045 denying General Plan Amendment DRC2018-00533 and
Zoning Map Amendment DRC2018-00534.
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Boards of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director
SUBJECT:Consideration to Receive and File Quarterly Financial Update for the First
Quarter of Fiscal Year 2021/22. (CITY/FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the attached Quarterly Financial Update
for the First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2021/22.
BACKGROUND:
On a quarterly basis, the Finance Director provides the City Council with a brief update on the
budgetary performance of the City’s operating funds which include the City General Fund (Fund
001), the Library Fund (Fund 290), and the Fire District Operating Funds (Funds 281, 282, and
283). As a result of the analysis performed and the consideration of current economic factors,
staff may also request certain appropriation adjustments at the time of the update.
ANALYSIS:
Operating Budget. The Quarterly Financial Report provides budget and year-to-date actuals
(including encumbrances) of both revenues and expenditures for the City’s operating funds.
Overall, the City’s operating budget for expenditures is performing well as of the end of the first
fiscal quarter and is consistent with the prior year.
Generally, revenues are on track or slightly ahead of projections, as a whole, and expenditures
are on track with or slightly below historical norms. Development fee revenues related to the
Building and Safety Department are anticipated to exceed budget by approximately 5%. Sales
tax revenues continue to build upon the positive growth experienced in the latter part of Fiscal
Year 2020/21 and are anticipated to exceed budget by at least 6%. Additionally, Transient
Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenues are recovering nicely from the COVID-19 pandemic and are
anticipated to exceed budget by at least 20%. Based on information provided by the Greater
Ontario Convention and Visitors Bureau (GOCVB), for the first quarter, average occupancy for
the City’s hotels is currently at 79.07% compared to 59.13% for the prior year and 77.63% for
Fiscal Year 2019/20. Similarly, for the first quarter, average daily rates are currently at $151.56
compared to $116.09 for the prior year and $136.56 for Fiscal Year 2019/20.
On the expenditure side, City staff were notified of a rate increase by Southern California Edison
(SCE) in September 2020 which became effective on October 1, 2021. The average increase
ranges from 6% - 8%, with a high of 10% for traffic control. Following is a high-level summary of
the impacts of this rate increase on City operations:
Page 557
Page 2
1
0
3
7
Estimated SCE utility cost increase will be about $69,000 for all City accounts
All streetlights and outdoor lighting costs are going up about $13,000
Traffic control costs are going up $14,000
Remaining City buildings, parks, and operations are going up about $40,000
Additional appropriations are requested for those City funds most materially impacted by the rate
increase. The amounts are noted in the Fiscal Impact section below.
FISCAL IMPACT:
As a result of the analysis conducted with the various departments for the attached report, certain
additional appropriations were identified that require more immediate attention rather than waiting
for the adoption of the Amended Budget in May. Staff respectfully requests that the City Council
authorize the following additional appropriations:
Account N umber Account Description Reason for Revision
Increase/
(Decrease)
1001000-4941 General Fund - Other Revenue-
Active Net
Revenue from contract with SMG
Premier for Cultural Center rental
operations $ 60,000
1001001-5300 General Fund - Contract Services Mi ddle Income Housing Analysis $ 55,500
1001301-5300 General Fund-Econ. and Comm.
Dev. - Contract Services
Fiscal analysis of winery
proposals $ 20,000
1001305-5300 General Fund-Eng. Dev. Mgmt. -
Contract Servi ces
Increase contract plan check
services due to recent staff
vacancies $ 280,000
1023302-5102 SB1186 CASP - Training C ASP training for staff $ 3,350
3281501-5300 Fire Fund - Contract Servi ces Fire Di stri ct share of i nvestment
advisory services contract $ 12,500
1001108-5010 General Fund-Communi ty Affai rs -
Part Time Salaries
Marketing and branding efforts for
the HART Di strict and
C ucamonga Station $ 83,520
1001108-5030 General Fund-Communi ty Affai rs -
Fringe Benefits
Marketing and branding efforts for
the HART Di strict and
C ucamonga Station $ 1,220
1001302-5000 General Fund-Bldg & Safety -
Regular Salari es
Building and Safety Department
personnel restructuring $ 63,210
1001302-5010 General Fund-Bldg & Safety - Part
Time Salaries
Building and Safety Department
personnel restructuring $ (19,070)
1001302-5030 General Fund-Bldg & Safety -
Fringe Benefits
Building and Safety Department
personnel restructuring $ 28,200
1025001-5416 Capi tal Reserve Fund - General
Liabili ty Insurance
Increase in insurance premium
$ 142,270
3281501-5411 Fire Fund - Other Insurance Increase in crime, cyber, and
pollution insurance premiums $ 13,400
3281501-5416 Fire Fund - General Liabi lity
Insurance
Increase in insurance premium
$ 87,190
FY 2021/22 First Quarter Additional Appropriation R equests
Page 558
Page 3
1
0
3
7
Account N umber Account Description Reason for Revision
Increase/
(Decrease)
1001209-5000 General Fund-DoIT - Regular
Salaries
Add Informati on Technology
Analyst II for Cyber Security (50%
funded by Fire Dist) $ 39,390
1001209-5030 General Fund-DoIT - Fringe
Benefits
Add Informati on Technology
Analyst II for Cyber Security (50%
funded by Fire Dist) $ 19,700
1001209-5990 General Fund-DoIT - Cost
Allocation Plan Offset
Add Informati on Technology
Analyst II for Cyber Security (50%
funded by Fire Dist) $ (49,110)
3281501-5501 Fire Fund - Admi n-General
Overhead
Add Informati on Technology
Analyst II for Cyber Security (50%
funded by Fire Dist) $ 49,110
1001205-5403 General Fund-City Faci lities -
Electric Utilities
SCE rate increase effecti ve
10/1/2021 - RC Family Resource
C enter $ 1,640
1001205-5403 General Fund-City Faci lities -
Electric Utilities
SCE rate increase effecti ve
10/1/2021 - Lions East $ 3,760
1001205-5403 General Fund-City Faci lities -
Electric Utilities
SCE rate increase effecti ve
10/1/2021 - Central Park $ 7,640
1001205-5403 General Fund-City Faci lities -
Electric Utilities
SCE rate increase effecti ve
10/1/2021 - Ci ty Yard $ 6,100
1151303-5403 SLD #1 Arterial - Electric Utilities SCE rate increase effecti ve
10/1/2021 - Streetlights SLD1 $ 3,060
1152303-5403 SLD #2 Residential - Electric
Utiliti es
SCE rate increase effecti ve
10/1/2021 - Streetlights SLD2 $ 3,780
1153303-5403 SLD #3 Vi ctoria - Electri c Uti lities SCE rate increase effecti ve
10/1/2021 - Streetlights SLD3 $ 1,380
1157303-5403 SLD #7 North Etiwanda - Electric
Utiliti es
SCE rate increase effecti ve
10/1/2021 - Streetlights SLD7 $ 1,020
1290601-5403 Library Fund - Electric Utilities SCE rate increase effecti ve
10/1/2021 - Archibald Library $ 4,840
1848303-5403 PD 85 - Electric Utiliti es SCE rate increase effecti ve
10/1/2021 - Red Hill Park $ 5,660
Total increase i n revenue accounts 60,000$
Total increase in expenditures accounts 869,260$
FY 2021/22 First Quarter Additional Appropriation R equests (cont'd)
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Providing the City Council with regular financial updates on the City's operating budget supports
the Council's efforts to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all
to thrive, by providing meaningful, timely information upon which they can base their current and
future decisions that impact the City's finances.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Quarterly Financial Update - First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2021/22
Page 559
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Quarterly Financial Update
First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2021/22
P a g e 1 | 7
OVERVIEW
This report summarizes the City’s overall financial position for the current fiscal year through September
30, 2021. The focus of this report is the City’s operating budget, which is comprised of the General Fund,
the Library Fund, and the Fire District Operating Funds. The revenue projections and budgets include
necessary adjustments for encumbrances, carryovers, and any supplemental appropriations made by the
City Council as of September 30, 2021.
GENERAL FUND
General Fund Financial Condition. With 25% of the year complete, General Fund expenditures are at
24% of projections (compared to 23% in the prior year) and revenues are at 9% (compared to 8% in the
prior year). Revenues are typically lower during the first fiscal quarter due to the timing of certain key
revenues such as franchise fees, property tax, and sales tax.
General Fund Budget*Y T D Actual*Percent
Revenues 95,160,410$8,461,312$ 9%
Ex penditures 95,825,897$22,900,801$24%
*Includes carry ov er purchase orders.
The expenditures budget and YTD actual figures above include carryover purchase orders from the prior
fiscal year. Excluding the carryover purchase orders, the City adopted a balanced budget for Fiscal Year
2021/22.
Departmental Expenditures. The YTD actual
figure above for expenditures incorporates all
General Fund divisions, including non-
departmental divisions such as General
Overhead. For purposes of departmental
analysis, these non-departmental divisions have
been excluded from the chart on the right.
Departmental operating expenditures (including
outstanding purchase orders/encumbrances)
are generally consistent with the prior year as a
percent of the budget, and on target as of the end
of the first fiscal quarter. Any significant
differences between the current and prior year
are noted after the chart.
Factors contributing to a slightly higher
percentage expended/encumbered in the
departmental budgets include the following: 1)
some contracts cover the entire fiscal year and must be fully encumbered with a purchase order at the
beginning of the fiscal year; and 2) certain overhead cost allocations are entirely allocated at the beginning
of the fiscal year.
Departments with the more significant variances in the percentage spent – current year (CY) vs. prior year
(PY) – include:
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 560
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Quarterly Financial Update
First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2021/22
P a g e 2 | 7
Community Improvement (CY: 47%; PY: 35%): As of the end of the first quarter, the Community
Improvement Division issued annual purchase orders for contract civil litigation services as well as
for legal services related to the Municipal Code and other civil matters. A similar purchase order
was not entered into for the prior fiscal year resulting in a higher percentage spent at the end of the
first quarter compared to the same time in the prior year.
Planning (CY: 40%; PY: 48%): Year to date expenditures are comparable to the prior year as of
the end of the fourth quarter. While the carryover purchase orders are slightly higher in the current
year, the decrease in the percentage spent as of the first quarter is primarily due to the increased
budget for reimbursable contract services in the current year due to anticipated increases in
development activity. These contract services, which include California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) consulting services as well as design professional services, are reimbursed by developers
through Planning Special Services Fees.
Records Management (CY: 60%; PY: 23%): In the prior year, Records Management budgeted
a line item for the 2020 General Election which was not expended as of the end of the first quarter
resulting in the unusually low percentage spent as of the end of the first quarter. There is no similar
item budgeted in the current year resulting in the higher percentage spent as of the end of the first
quarter.
Utility Cost Increases. City staff were notified of a rate increase by Southern California Edison (SCE) in
September 2020 which became effective on October 1, 2021. The average increase ranges from 6% - 8%,
with a high of 10% for traffic control. Following is a high-level summary of the impacts of this rate increase
on City operations:
Estimated SCE utility cost increase will be about $69,000 across all City accounts
All streetlights and outdoor lighting costs are going up about $13,000
Traffic control costs are going up $14,000
Remaining City buildings, parks, and operations costs are going up about $40,000
Additional appropriations will be requested for those City funds most materially impacted by the rate
increase. This includes an additional appropriation for the General Fund in the amount of $19,140.
Top Seven Revenues. The City’s top seven revenues account for about 87% of total General Fund
revenues (compared to 86% in the prior year). Following is a summary of these revenues as of the end of
the first fiscal quarter:
T op Seven Revenues Budget
Y T D
Actual
%
Receiv ed
Sales Tax 31,967,150 2,511,440 8%
Vehic le lic ens e fees*22,048,730 -0%
Franchise fees 7,572,760 -0%
Property tax 10,270,140 254,786 2%
Developm ent fees 4,982,500 1,629,997 33%
Bus ines s licenses 2,698,710 1,036,353 38%
Trans. occ upanc y taxes 3,420,000 1,181,619 35%
*Includes Property tax in-lieu of VLF
Sales Tax. Revenues, as of the quarter ended September 30, 2021, are at 8% of budget (compared to
10% in the prior year). In the prior year, revenues were temporarily overstated by $496,000 due to the
reversal of a prior year accounting adjustment related to the misallocation of sales tax revenue by the State.
Page 561
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Quarterly Financial Update
First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2021/22
P a g e 3 | 7
Excluding this adjustment, the revenue collection percentage would have been 8%, consistent with the
current year. The percentage is lower than 25% as of the first fiscal quarter’s end due to the timing of our
receipts from the State. As of the end of the first fiscal quarter, we have received one month’s allocation of
sales tax revenues from the State and two months’ allocation of Prop 172 revenues, which is consistent
with the prior year.
Based on discussions with the City’s sales tax consultant regarding 2Q2021 receipts, the City’s local
economy began to emerge from COVID-19 and experienced positive returns from most of general
consumer good businesses including electronic appliances, department and specialty stores, home
furnishings, and family and women’s apparel. Consumers began dining out again, which resulted in a boost
in casual, fast casual, and quick service restaurant activity. State and County pool allocation returns
remained very strong.
Looking ahead, sustained sales tax growth is still anticipated through the end of the 2021 calendar year.
Inflationary effects are showing up in the cost of many taxable products. Pent up demand for travel
experiences, the return of commuters with more costly fuel, and labor shortages having upward pressure
on prices may begin to consume more disposable income and tighten growth by the start of 2022. Taking
all of these factors into consideration, our consultant has indicated that sales tax revenue is anticipated to
be in excess of budget by at least 6% or $2 million for the fiscal year, building on the positive growth
experienced in the latter part of Fiscal Year 2020/21.
Vehicle License Fees (VLF). As of the end of the first fiscal quarter, we have not received a disbursement
of VLF from the State, which is consistent with the prior year. The VLF relates to excess amounts collected
by the State for the prior fiscal year, and it has typically been received during the second quarter of our
fiscal year. We will receive property tax in-lieu of VLF from the County in January and May. No significant
variance from budget is anticipated at this time.
Franchise Fees. We will not receive the most significant components of franchise fee revenues – payments
from Southern California Edison and Southern California Gas Company – until April 2022. Franchise fees
from waste management and cable are remitted approximately 30 days after the end of each quarter. As
such, no revenues have been received as of September 30, 2021, for the current fiscal year, which is
consistent with the prior fiscal year.
Property Tax. The first major apportionment of taxes will occur in December. Included in the property tax
budget is post-RDA property tax revenue of $2,590,090. This portion of the City’s property taxes will be
Page 562
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Quarterly Financial Update
First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2021/22
P a g e 4 | 7
received in January and June as part of the County of San Bernardino’s distribution of the Redevelopment
Property Tax Trust Fund (RPTTF).
Development Fees. Development revenues for plan check fees and planning fees are coming in as
anticipated with collection percentages of 23.58% and 23.72%, respectively. Building permit and
engineering fee revenues are coming in at a faster pace than expected during the first quarter with
collections at 41.83% and 36.36%, respectively. At this time, the Building and Safety Department
anticipates ending the year at 5% above budget, or an increase of $80,000 for building permits and $62,500
for plan check fees. The Engineering Department has indicated that revenues are tracking to be on par
with budget for the fiscal year.
Development activity will continue to be monitored by Community Development staff and any additional
revenue adjustments will be identified as part of the Midyear Budget Analysis.
Business Licenses. Business license revenues are exceeding projections, with a collection percentage of
38%, compared to 29% in the prior year. Based on activity through September 30, 2021, revenues are
anticipated to exceed budget by a minimum of 6%, or $162,000. As the peak of the renewals is not received
until January, any additional revenue adjustments will be identified as part of the Midyear Budget Analysis.
Transient Occupancy Taxes. Based on information provided by the Greater Ontario Convention and
Visitors Bureau (GOCVB), for the first quarter, average occupancy is currently at 79.07% compared to
59.13% for the prior year and 77.63% for Fiscal Year 2019/20. Similarly, for the first quarter, average daily
rates are currently at $151.56 compared to $116.09 for the prior year and $136.56 for Fiscal Year 2019/20.
Page 563
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Quarterly Financial Update
First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2021/22
P a g e 5 | 7
Year-to-date receipts are tracking about 110% more than the prior year due to the impacts of the COVID-
19 pandemic which significantly reduced prior year receipts. In fact, one of the City’s major hotels
temporarily closed in late March 2020 and started accepting guests again in August 2020. Current year
receipts continue to increase each month and include operations for all the City’s hotels. The City is also
starting to see some additional revenue from short term rentals (STRs) due to the City’s partnership with
Harmari. Annualizing YTD revenues indicates that the revenue estimate for FY 2021/22 will be exceeded
by more than 20% as the City continues to outperform the GOCVB projections from earlier this year. Staff
will continue to monitor TOT revenues and provide an update at midyear.
The City approved entitlements for two new hotels. However, only one has actually pulled permits and is
under construction due to construction financing being secured before the pandemic erupted. It is
anticipated that this hotel will open in the first part of next calendar year. If the second entitled hotel is able
to secure construction financing, it is anticipated that the City may receive a half year’s TOT revenue during
Fiscal Year 2022/23 depending on the timing of construction.
Page 564
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Quarterly Financial Update
First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2021/22
P a g e 6 | 7
LIBRARY FUND
Library Fund Financial Condition. As of the end of the first fiscal quarter, Library revenues are at 1% of
projections (compared to 0.2% in the prior year) and expenditures are at 42% (compared to 35% in the
prior year). The Library’s budget includes a budgeted surplus of $377,180 that will be utilized in future
years for operating and capital needs for the Library’s various programs, including the Second Story and
Beyond Project.
Library Fund Budget*Y T D Actual*Percent
Revenues 5,981,960$ 37,713$ 1%
Ex penditures 5,641,433$ 2,382,156$ 42%
*Includes carry ov er purchase orders.
Property tax makes up approximately 86% of the Library Fund’s revenues (compared to 82% in the prior
year). This increase is due to two factors. First, property tax revenues are projected to increase due to
increased assessed values and home sales. Second, revenues from other sources were budgeted at a
reduced level for FY 2021/22 due to in-person services being limited by the COVID-19 pandemic. These
revenues include passport processing fees and passport photo fees as well as donations from the Friends
of the Library.
As noted above, the first major apportionment of taxes will occur in December. The Library’s property tax
revenues, however, also include a statutory pass-through from the former Redevelopment Agency. This
pass-through represents approximately 37.5% of the Library’s property tax revenues and will be received
in January and June as part of the County’s distribution of the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund
(RPTTF). Also included in the property tax budget is post-RDA property tax revenue of $140,340. These
revenues will also be distributed from the RPTTF.
Library expenditures are on target as budgeted. As in the General Fund, expenditures are higher than 25%
at the end of the first quarter due to the fact that some contracts cover the entire fiscal year and must be
fully encumbered with a purchase order at the beginning of the fiscal year, and certain overhead cost
allocations are fully allocated at the beginning of the fiscal year. The increase in the percentage spent in
the current year compared to the prior year is due to the combination of a slightly reduced current year
budget and higher amounts encumbered for various services and supplies.
FIRE DISTRICT
Fire District Financial Condition. With 25% of the year complete, Fire District operating revenues are at
1% of projections (compared to 2% in the prior year) and expenditures are at 21% (compared to 25% in the
prior year).
Fire District Budget*Y T D Actual*Percent
Revenues 47,067,530$687,954$ 1%
Ex penditures 47,856,905$10,236,030$21%
*Includes carry ov er purchase orders.
Property tax comprises approximately 89% of the Fire District’s operating revenues (consistent with the
prior year), which includes the General Fund, CFD 85-1, and CFD 88-1. The first significant apportionment
of taxes will occur in December. Included in the property tax budget is post-RDA property tax revenues of
$13,129,690. This amount represents a statutory pass-through from the former Redevelopment Agency.
The full amount of the pass-through is allocated on a percentage basis between the Fire District’s operating
Page 565
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Quarterly Financial Update
First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2021/22
P a g e 7 | 7
funds and its capital fund based upon the operating budget needs of the Fire District each fiscal year. As
noted above, RPTTF revenues will be received in January and June.
The Fire District’s expenditures are on track as of the end of the first fiscal quarter.
SUMMARY
Overall, the City’s operating budget for expenditures is performing well as of the end of the first fiscal quarter
and is consistent with the prior year. Generally, revenues are on track or slightly ahead of projections, as
a whole, and expenditures are on track with or slightly below historical norms. Both sales tax and TOT
revenues are recovering well from the COVID-19 pandemic and are anticipated to outperform the budget.
Once additional revenues are received during the second and, if necessary, third quarter, the revenue
components of the City’s operating budget can be further analyzed, and any necessary adjustments
performed.
Page 566
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Fiscal Year 2021/22
Operating Budget
First Quarter Financial Update
Presented to the City Council
November 17, 2021
Scope
Operating
Budget
City
General
Fund
Library
Fund
Fire District
Operating
Funds
General Fund Snapshot
General Fund Budget*YTD Actual*Percent
Revenues 95,160,410$ 8,461,312$ 9%
Expenditures 95,825,897$ 22,900,801$ 24%
*Includes carryover purchase orders.
Top Seven Revenues
•87% of revenues for FY
2021/22 vs. 86% in prior
year
•No remittances received
as of first quarter for:
•Vehicle license fees (consistent with prior year)
•Franchise fees (consistent with prior year)
•Property taxes –minimal amount received (consistent
with prior year)
Top Seven Revenues (continued)
•Revenues are at 8% of budget compared to 10% in prior
year
•Excluding prior year accounting adjustment, collection
percentage in line with prior year
Top Seven Revenues (continued)
•Sales tax
•With 2Q21 results, City began to emerge from COVID-19
and experience:
•Positive returns from most of general consumer good businesses
•Consumers dining out again
•State and County pool allocations remained very strong
•Sustained growth is still anticipated through the end of
2021 calendar year
•Growth may tighten by start of 2022 due to upward
pressure on prices
•Revenues are anticipated to be higher than budget by $2
million for the fiscal year
Top Seven Revenues (continued)
•Development fees
•Plan check and planning fees are coming in as
anticipated with collection percentages of 23.58% and
23.72%, respectively
•Building permit and engineering fee revenues are
coming in at a faster pace than expected with collections
at 41.83% and 36.36%, respectively
•5% increase overall for Building and Safety revenues ($142,500)
•No change for Engineering revenues
•Development activity will continue to be monitored by
Community Development staff; any additional revenue
adjustments will be identified at midyear
Top Seven Revenues (continued)
•Business Licenses
•Exceeding projections (38% collected compared to 29%
in the prior year)
•Prior year was exceptionally bad for Business License revenue
due to COVID closures
•Increased collection percentage is somewhat skewed as a
result
•Based on QTD activity, revenues are anticipated to
exceed budget by a minimum of 6% or $162,000
•Peak of renewals is not received until January
•Any additional revenue adjustments will be identified as part of
the Midyear Budget Analysis
Top Seven Revenues (continued)
Top Seven Revenues (continued)
•Transient Occupancy Taxes
•Average occupancy is currently at 79.07%compared to
59.13% for the prior year and 77.63%for Fiscal Year
2019/20
•Average daily rates are currently at $151.56 compared to
$116.09 for the prior year and $136.56 for Fiscal Year
2019/20
Top Seven Revenues (continued)
Top Seven Revenues (continued)
•Transient Occupancy Taxes (continued)
•YTD receipts are tracking about 110% more than prior
year
•Major impacts by COVID-19 in prior year
•One major hotel temporarily closed in late March 2020; started
accepting guests in August 2020
•Starting to see some additional revenue from STRs
•Annualizing YTD revenues indicates revenue estimate for
FY 2021/22 will be exceeded by more than 20%
•City approved entitlements for two new hotels
•Hampton Inn is anticipated to open in the first part of next
calendar year
Departmental Expenditures
Departmental Expenditures
(continued)
•Departmental expenditures are generally consistent
with prior year (% spent) and on target as of the
end of the first quarter
•Factors contributing to slightly higher percentage
expended/encumbered:
•Annual contracts fully encumbered at beginning of year
•Certain overhead cost allocations completely allocated
at beginning of year
Departmental Expenditures
(continued)
•Departments with the more significant variances in
the percentage spent are:
•Community Improvement (CY: 47%; PY: 35%): Variance
is due to timing of annual purchase orders
•Planning (CY: 40%; PY: 48%): Increased budget for
reimbursable contract services not yet spent or
encumbered
•Records Management (CY: 60%; PY: 23%): Prior year
included budget for 2020 General Election which wasn’t
expended as of first quarter
Utility Cost Increases
•Notified of rate increase by Southern California
Edison (SCE)
•Impacts are as follows:
•Estimated SCE utility cost increase will be about $69,000
across all City accounts
•All streetlights and outdoor lighting costs are going up about
$13,000
•Traffic control costs are going up about $14,000
•Remaining City buildings, parks, and operations costs are going
up about $40,000
•Additional appropriations requested in staff report
Library Fund Snapshot
•Revenues
•Collection percentage is consistent with prior year
•On target to meet budget projections
•Expenditures
•Percentage spent (42%) higher than prior year (35%)
•Primarily due to higher amounts encumbered for O&M
•On target as of the end of the first quarter
Library Fund Budget*YTD Actual*Percent
Revenues 5,981,960$ 37,713$ 1%
Expenditures 5,641,433$ 2,382,156$ 42%
*Includes carryover purchase orders.
Fire District Operating Funds
Snapshot
•Includes General Fund, CFD 85-1 and CFD 88-1
Fire District Budget*YTD Actual*Percent
Revenues 47,067,530$ 687,954$ 1%
Expenditures 47,856,905$ 10,236,030$ 21%
*Includes carryover purchase orders.
Fire District Operating Funds
Snapshot (continued)
•Revenues
•Collection percentage is consistent with prior year
•On target to meet budget projections
•Expenditures
•Generally consistent with prior year (% spent)
•On target as of the end of the first quarter
Summary
•City’s operating budget for expenditures is tracking
with projections and is consistent with prior year
•Cost increases noted for electric utilities
•Overall revenues are on track or slightly ahead of
projections, as a whole
•Sales tax and TOT revenues are recovering well from the
COVID-19 pandemic and are anticipated to outperform
the budget
•Revenues will continue to be monitored and analyzed
during the second and third quarters
Any questions?
DATE:November 17, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Justine Garcia, Deputy Director of Engineering Services
SUBJECT:Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Toole Design
Group, LLC for the Completion of the Healthy RC Active Transportation
Infrastructure Assessment and Improvement Plan in the Amount of
$349,882, Plus a 10% Contingency, and Authorization of Appropriations
from the State Grant (Fund 274) and Citywide Capital Infrastructure (Fund
198) Funds. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve and authorize the execution of a Professional Services Agreement with Toole
Design Group, LLC (on fille with the City Clerk) for the completion of the Healthy RC Active
Transportation Infrastructure Assessment and Improvement Plan in the amount of
$349,882;
2. Authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $34,988;
3. Authorize appropriation of Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant revenue in
the amount of $354,116 to the State Grant Fund (Fund 274); and
4. Authorize appropriations of expenditures in the amount of $340,725 from the State Grant
Fund (Fund 274) and $44,145 from the Citywide Infrastructure Improvements Fund (Fund
198).
BACKGROUND:
In October 2019, City staff submitted a competitive grant application, titled Healthy RC Active
Transportation Infrastructure Assessment and Improvement Plan (HRC ATP), for the Fiscal Year
2020/21 Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant program. On June 18, 2020, City staff
received a letter from Caltrans indicating that the City’s grant application was 1 of 77 (out of 178
submitted statewide) to be selected for a grant award.
The HRC ATP will assess current infrastructure, identify improvements and new infrastructure,
and provide a prioritized list of projects covering areas within a two-mile radius of 23 public
elementary schools, 8 public middle schools and 4 public high schools. This plan will result in
specifically identified project tear sheets to identify shovel ready projects for use in applying for
future grant opportunities such as the Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP), and capital
improvement budget planning. This opportunity will provide a comprehensive short and long-term
plan to fill gaps in the City’s sidewalk network and increase and improve bicycle and pedestrian
infrastructure to provide connectivity between neighborhoods, schools, and municipal facilities.
Page 567
Page 2
9
5
4
ANALYSIS:
Engineering Staff has worked with the Procurement Division, providing a detailed scope of
services to develop a form Request for Proposals (RFP) to find a qualified consultant to complete
the HRC ATP. An RFP, #21/22-002 was posted and advertised on the City’s electronic bidding
system, Planet Bids, on April 26, 2021. There were eight hundred sixty-two (862) notified vendors,
forty (40) prospective vendors, and five (5) responses were received. An evaluation panel was
formed, and the proposal responses were reviewed and rated in accordance with the criteria
identified in the RFP. Interviews were conducted with the top two (2) proposing firms on July 22,
2021. The proposal and interview provided by Toole Design Group, LLC was the highest rated,
providing a clear understanding of the City’s scope of services needed to complete the HRC ATP.
All applicable solicitation documentation is on file in Planet Bids.
A Best and Final Offer (BAFO) was submitted by Toole Design Group, LLC with a fee in the
amount of $349,882 for the completion of the HRC ATP. Staff has determined that Toole Design
Group, LLC is able to meet the needs of the City based on their qualifications, experience, scope
and fee schedule. Toole’s scope of work includes engagement of key staff and stakeholders to
identify potential active transportation infrastructure improvements; assessment and prioritization
of new infrastructure or infrastructure improvements; development of project tear sheets; and
preparation of the final plan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The estimated cost for the proposed contract including a 10% contingency is $384,870. The grant
program requires an 11.47% match from local funds, totaling $45,884 including contingency.
Upon completion of the project, the City will be eligible for reimbursement of 88.53% of the
contract costs from the Caltrans Sustainable Communities grant program up to the $354,116
grant award.
Budget for this project has not been included in the FY2021/22 Budget, therefore appropriations
are needed to account for both grant revenue and project expenditures in the following amounts
and accounts:
Revenue:
Account No.Funding Source Description Amount
1274000-4760/2083-0 State Grants (274)Caltrans Grant Revenue -
HRC Active Transportation
Plan
$354,116
Expenditures:
Account No.Funding Source Description Amount
1274208-5300/2083-4215 State Grants (274)Caltrans Grant Revenue -
HRC Active Transportation
Plan
$340,725
1198303-5300/2083-4215 Citywide Infrastructure
Improvements (198)
City Match - HRC Active
Transportation Plan
$44,145
Total $384,870
Page 568
Page 3
9
5
4
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This project meets our City Council core values by promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy
community for all, and by providing for continuous improvement by planning for future construction
of high-quality public improvements.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Page 569
Healthy RC Active Transportation
Infrastructure Assessment and
Improvement Plan (HRC ATP)
•Awarded $354,116 in grant
funding from Caltrans in 2020
(11.47% City Match)
•Planning effort utilizing a 2 mi.
buffer around 35 schools in RC
•Assessment and Prioritized List
of Projects for Future
Background
RFP and Vendor Selection
•RFP Released on April 26, 2021
•Five (5) Responses Received and
Evaluated
•Two (2) Firms Interviewed
•Toole Design Group Determined
to be the Highest Rated
•Katherine Padilla & Associates (KPA)
•Walk ‘n Rollers
•Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP)
•Evaluates Roadway Safety Concerns across 4E’s
•Prioritizes a List of Improvements
•Crossing Guard Warrant Studies
•Safe Routes to School Re-Ignition
•School Year Kick-off Email with Resource Links Sent
•Liaison Meetings Scheduled
•Planning for Educational Opportunities
Other Projects and Programs…
•Staff recommends the City Council Approve and Authorize
the execution of a PSA with Toole Design Group for the
Completion of the Healthy RC ATP.
Recommendation
Questions
?